His critics stated repeatedly that the downturn would be more severe and more extended that it proved to be
C'mon 2008 - 2013 is going a bit ....isn't it? 😯
RIght, so the south-east/London is out of recession? Phew!
His critics stated repeatedly that the downturn would be more severe and more extended that it proved to be
Remind me of his forecast figures and the actual figures would you?
IT WAS.
Well it's a good job that Ed Balls doesnt say that this is pointless since he is arguing much the same as me (edit: with regards to what Keynes actually believed in). And if you want Labour to return to power then you need to hope that he is not alone.
GO missed target and timetables - fact - but less than his critics argued - fact - but the job is only just started - fact - and the UK's economic recovery - fact - is not built on sufficiently strong foundations for anyone to be complacent - fact - and the on-going squeeze in real wages and living standards could itself be the Tories Achilles Hell - fact.
...oh and did anyone mention the "fact" that debt levels remain severely elevated.....and what caused the crisis in the first place?????
So the next election battle lines are drawn. The Tories will win if economic recovery continues and broadens. Labour will win if this does not translate into pounds in pockets across the UK. At the moment, this is finely balanced and neither side can be complacent but the momentum is shifting in one direction.
🙄
You will call me impertinent next wont you as I insert a football playing the man analogy
as we were not interested in this...FACT
Sorry, dont understand a word of that.
Sure
Plenty of jobs and opportunities in engineering right now due to the lack of trained and skilled people caused by the demise of the UK's manufacturing industry over the last 30 years
There is some truth in the lack of training investment in engineering over the years, but that's the past the thing is right now there is a lot of opportunity. The UK still has a decent manufacturing industry, unfortunately it is mostly ignored by the media and politicians who don't understand it.
There is some truth in the lack of training investment in engineering over the years, but that's the past the thing is right now there is a lot of opportunity. The UK still has a decent manufacturing industry
The fact that something has happened automatically puts it into the past, so I'm not sure what the point of that comment is. The changes to our education system are political and deliberate to reflect a change in emphasis in the nations economic activity from manufacturing to other, mainly service orientated jobs. Therefore far fewer people training as engineers or even learning the basic skills like maths etc etc, which is hardly surprising as there are far fewer jobs in that sector. (NB: My school in Ipswich in the the 60's/70's expected about 90% of the school to work in engineering. At that time there were any number of large manufacturing companies in the town, Ransomes and Rapier, (walking dragline), Ransom Sims and Jefferies (Ploughs, lawn mowers etc) Cranes, (pipework fittings), Compair Reavel, (air compressors), Bull Motors (Electric Motors), Rola Celestion (loudspeakers), to name but a few. Only one remains, and that in a much smaller way than it used to be. Most of the site, now being a retail park and Industrial Estate.)
I think if by decent you mean high quality, I'd agree, but if you mean a decent proportion of the workforce are engineers I'd have to say you are living in cloud cuckoo land. Like I say when I was at school 90% of my peers trained to be in or around engineering as a career.......and yes the demise did mostly occur during "her" reign.
Two interesting articles in the New Statesmen today:
In politics, trajectory is everything. The return of growth and falling unemployment means that Miliband now struggles to discomfort the PM.
The opposition should worry less about the growth rate and more about developing its own story about the economy........Today nef is publishing research into how economic debates are framed on both sides of the political spectrum to win support for different policies. Our main finding? The coalition has an economic narrative that is the textbook definition of a powerful political story.They have developed a clear plot, with heroes and villains, and use simple, emotional language to make their point clear.
Repeated with remarkable discipline over several years, their austerity story has gained real traction with the British public. In fact, the polling data we analysed showed that month on month, no matter what people think about the coalition, they continue to believe spending cuts are necessary for the economy.
The story relies on a small set of frames to understand our economy. That austerity is the inevitable price we pay for decades of overspending. That spending cuts are the only medicine for our sick economy. That Britain is broke, hobbled by dangerous debts, and government spending is a bad habit we need to kick. It casts the coalition as its heroes, cleaning up the mess of the last Labour government. George Osborne faithfully retold it on Monday as he reminded us pre-crisis Britain was dependent on state spending and blamed falling living standards on his predecessors.
The government has successfully framed all economic debates on its own terms, but what is most powerful about their narrative is how resilient it is to different circumstances. If the economy is strong the medicine is working, if the economy is weak we need more medicine.
So as LW commentators are suggesting, time for Ed and his team to get their thinking hats on
I've had my biggest pay rise since 97!
(had to move to Germany for it though)
The government has successfully framed all economic debates on its own terms, but what is most powerful about their narrative is how resilient it is to different circumstances. If the economy is strong the medicine is working, if the economy is weak we need more medicine.
Easy to control the narrative when you've got almost all of the press parroting the same line though.
THM you dont half write some crap dressed up as facts.
I know AA and what makes it such fun 😉 is that publications as diverse as the FT and the New Statesman do the same! Makes for a good Econ set though and at least they can argue points rather than just being rude!! I am sure you find that too! !
I know AA and what makes it such fun is that publications as diverse as the FT and the New Statesman do the same! Makes for a good Econ set though and at least they can argue points rather than just being rude!! I am sure you find that too! !
All they have pointed out in that is how big the lie is.
Only 0.7% growth this year? Still 3.2% lower than in 2008.
The slowest economic recovery in 100 years, slower than the recovery from the great depression.
A mere 0.1% drop in the unemployment in the last three months.
The number of men working full time fell by 272,000 and those in part time work rose 281,000. Is this the point where right wingers usually say you should be lucky or grateful to have a job?
Unemployment among 16-24 year olds was up 34,000. This means the UK has an unemployment rate of 21% among young people, with 960,000 now jobless.
Wages have fallen for 36 of the 37 months of the shower of sh*t Government. This makes CMD's Government the the worst performing Government in UK history on wages. No former Prime Minister in the history of our parliamentary democracy has seen wages drop for this length of time – not Thatcher, not Harold Wilson, not Ted Heath.
There has also been the rise of Zero Hours contracts, which mean working people are not guaranteed regular hours by their employer, or access to basic employment rights such as sick pay, paid annual leave or a notice period before dismissal.
The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, found more than 1 million UK workers is now on a Zero Hours contract. Such contracts could also be seen as part of the wider underemployment problem that has affected the UK economy in recent times, with large numbers of workers on part-time or casual contracts wanting to work more hours but being unable to do so.
The cost of living is currently rising at four times the rate of wages.
The UK Essentials Index shows that prices of the basic items that the poorest buy have risen 33% since 2007.
Statutory Homelessness (people without a home who are eligible for local authority support) rose 21% in the last year, while Rough Sleepers (those not eligible for support) rose 31% in England and 62% in London. The Bedroom Tax, where people receiving Housing Benefit have had their payments cut for having ‘spare rooms’ (while in most of the country, no appropriately sized housing exists) is also seeing many more lose their homes.
The number of people relying on food aid in order to eat rose by 300% between April 2012 and April 2013. In fact the numbers relying on food aid have shot up 200% in just three months. 150,000 people have joined the queues at food banks, on top of the half million people already there since 2010.
Mark Hoban, a Minister for the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) was asked to explain how an economic recovery could be under way whilst the numbers of those relying on Food Banks to eat was growing. Hoban’s response was “You’ll have to ask the Food Banks.”
The Food Banks were asked. Food Banks themselves (and Oxfam) report that the enormous spike in reliance on Food Banks is directly linked to government cuts.
So while CMD's work experience boy tries claim that a recovery is underway, the question is, a recovery for who?
I know AA and what makes it such fun is that publications as diverse as the FT and the New Statesman do the same! Makes for a good Econ set though and at least they can argue points rather than just being rude!! I am sure you find that too! !
Problem is you fail to separate the politics from the economics. Its lazy analysis and means you end up debating politics rather than the economics.
The Bedroom Tax, where people receiving Housing Benefit have had their payments cut for having ‘spare rooms’ (while in most of the country, no appropriately sized housing exists) is also seeing many more lose their homes.
some great 'facts' quoted in the above piece. the one quoted above especially stands out.. can you quote ONE example where a tenant has been evicted as a result of what you call the bedroom tax.
now i have some limited experience of this policy. my best mate lives in a council house he has two empty bedrooms and is be moaning the fact he has his housing benifit reduced. he refuses to move though as the properties available from the council are not as good as his and the privately available properties are too expensive. he know which side of the bread his jams on even if all his housing costs are no longer covered by the govt.
On the other flipside you move this lad out for an older single mum with three kids by three dads to move in. Manchester has lots of these.
I know AA (again!) but when the title suggests this is a thread debating the political context of current economic trends it's an easy mistake to make! Apologies for the sloppiness. 😉 But debating economics without reference to politics is like recommending a MTB without discussing the style of riding/type of terrain to be ridden. Interesting (perhaps) but ultimately pointless.
The central point is that both economics and politics have entered a new and important phase (brought out in one of the NS articles, the FT and Stephanie Flanders on the BBC two days ago, oh and in the title of this thread!). Economic activity is recovering and broadening BUT as El-bent clearly points out is still at an early stage/sporadic (same point I made). But both the Tories and Labour recognise it and they themselves have shifted the terms of reference. Labour is now focused on "living standards" rather than growth per se (so as I pointed out earlier, they accept the change even if some here do not) but if polls/opinion are to be believed they are slipping. Hence my comments about thinking hats.
But from a non-political perspective, I expect this to be a weak, shallow and prolonged (in a bad way) recovery. There are strong domestic and international headwinds which GO has not even come close to tackling. So I agree with the FT, the new phase is all about can GO manage economic recovery successfully. Oops, that's poltical again, sorry!
The nice weather will have had something to do with the minor recovery but normal business will resume in winter.The end.
Well I'll join the steadily growing flock in saying I'm all right Jack.One swallow doesn't make a summer
Graduated in Process Enineering back in 2008, done alright for myself in the intervening years.
How is the national debt doing under the Tories?
I wonder where the national debt would be under labours policy?
Broadly the same given the similarities in policy responses?
in saying I'm all right Jack.
I see Thatcher's force is strong in this one....
I wonder where the national debt would be under labours policy?
Not sure that really the point. The point is that they have been busy convincing the great unwashed that they are dealing with it and bringing it down, whilst predictably the policies they have been pursuing has in fact increased it dramatically. If this were done on the High Street the retailer would have trading standards all over them.
Regarding the OP, this in fact would be probably the biggest single reason (of many) why his thread title is utter twaddle
I've not had a pay rise in 5 years. Serves me right for doing something socially useful/positive I suppose.
Fees have gone down in the freelance work I do too.
I see Thatcher's force is strong in this one....
I'd never vote Tory, and I doubt any of their policies have made an iota of difference to my work in the last few years, the only thing that's helped is the £ loseing 25% of it's value under the last few years of Labour making us a bit more competative.
Having said that I can't feel inclined to vote for any of the curent parties, none of them have actualy said or done anything that would actualy significanly impact me since Labour landed me with £18k of student debt before I could vote. The Tories are in it even more for themselves than the other parties, and the Lib Dems have no poilicies they're prepared to stick by.
thisisnotaspoon - thanks very much for your contribution to the debate. I feel all warm inside knowing you're doing so well. A feeling I'm sure everyone else shares, I'm sure.
Promise me you won't be wasting your time, keeping yourself awake at night, worrying about anyone else now, or how they're doing ? 😀
Having said that I can't feel inclined to vote for any of the curent parties, none of them have actualy said or done anything that would actualy significanly impact me
I think the fact that you only consider voting to be about what's in it for you as an individual shows why someone mentioned the 'T' word in relation to you.
The point is that they have been busy convincing the great unwashed that they are dealing with it and bringing it down
I think you are confusing the national debt with the defecit. The defecit is decreasing, but we still need to borrow dollar to cover the defecit, thus the national debt is rising.
+1 for Binners.
I love you Binners
I wonder where the national debt would be under labours policy?Not sure that really the point. The point is that they have been busy convincing the great unwashed that they are dealing with it and bringing it down
I don't particularly like to defend the Govt., but they never said that. They said they'd bring the deficit down and we've done the debt vs deficit thing to death on other threads previously. Both parties were looking at National Debt peaking above £1.6Tn several years hence.
I think the fact that you only consider voting to be about what's in it for you as an individual shows why someone mentioned the 'T' word in relation to you.
She'll be smiling in her grave 😉
I think the fact that you only consider voting to be about what's in it for you as an individual shows why someone mentioned the 'T' word in relation to you.
[devils advocate as clearly my dancing shoes weren't loud enough on her grave]
It's a democracy.
Why should 'the poor' get 2 votes?
[/devils advocate as clearly my dancing shoes weren't loud enough on her grave]
Why should 'the poor' get 2 votes?
The alternate view is to see each vote as one for society rather than one for me or one for them etc....
The obvious answer is for individuals to get more votes dependent on your wealth. So the immediate family of the present cabinet, Lord Ashcroft, and Phillip Green, and the like would get a few hundred votes each, at least (we won't mention the fact you don't [i]actually[/i] pay any tax - sssssssssssssssshhhhh - the plebs will never know).
At the other end of the spectrum; if you lose your job, then you're clearly a scrounger, and a drain on 'hard-working families' and have therefore forfeited your democratic right. No votes for you.
People who work part time, or are on zero hours contract, so cannot guarantee they're making a contribution to the tax base are allowed half a vote each
Actually.... I'd be amazed if a Tory Think Tank hasn't come up with this as a serious policy. I fully expect it to be in place before the next election
The alternate view is to see each vote as one for society rather than one for me or one for them etc....
Indeed, but whether left or right I'd argue that all parties are trying to bring up the average (GDP, or whatever metric you chose), just one philosophy does that by gifting money to the lowest percentiles from the highest to bring up the modeal average, the other encourages more to be made in the higher percentiles with the expectation of a trickle down through the demographics and better off for all through a higher mean average, although some will still be better off than others.
I'd argue that all parties are trying to bring up the average
I honestly don't believe the Tories care about anyone other than themselves and their extremely wealthy friends. In fact, they seem to despise the poor and handicapped with a venom I can't fathom.
I think one nation Tories actually care but there are very few of them
The rest have no idea what its like to be poor and really could not GAS about them - hence why they can say things like unemployment is a price worth paying
I dont actually believe they think trickle down works but they realise they cannot say they are not trying to help the needy
[img] http://ct.politicomments.com/ol/pc/sw/i49/5/6/12/f_3d6bbb5caf.jp g" target="_blank">
http://ct.politicomments.com/ol/pc/sw/i49/5/6/12/f_3d6bbb5caf.jp g"/> #and%20we%20told%20them%20that%20it%20would%20trickle%20down%20770x976[/img]
I think you are confusing the national debt with the defecit. The defecit is decreasing, but we still need to borrow dollar to cover the defecit, thus the national debt is rising.
I don't particularly like to defend the Govt., but they never said that.
Could I suggest that reading a post is sensible before commenting on it? What I said was that the Tories have done a number on convincing people that THE DEBT is coming down, while in fact it is going up. I never mentioned either their stated policies or the National Deficit. So would either of you care to re read what was written and explain rush to "correct" it in light of what you have written in your respective posts?
[still devils advocate, otheriwise this threads degenerating into the Monty Python, three Yorkshiremen sketch]
I honestly don't believe the Tories care about anyone other than themselves and their extremely wealthy friends. In fact, they seem to despise the poor and handicapped with a venom I can't fathom.
Turkeys don't vote for christmas, yet "the poor and handicapped" voted* for the Tories. So it's either a variation on Stockholm Syndrome, Masochism, or there's something in the idea that creating wealth is better than redistributing it.
*at the behest of Newscorp via the Sun.
The rest have no idea what its like to be poor and really could not GAS about them
I'd say it's much worse than that. They really seem to enjoy hurting and demonising the poor in a very vindictive way.
[b]Footflaps, Binners and the Communist Workers Party[/b] really seem to enjoy hurting and demonising the [b]rich[/b] in a very vindictive way.
FTFY
Personaly I said at the start, I don't subscribe to either policy and believe Democracy keeps us happily bumping allong in the middle.
I think many of them oblivious to the fact they were borne into a life of privileged and private schools, arrogantly [ naively if i was feeling kind] think they worked to get where they got. therefore anyone who has not risen like they have [ for they did it by damn hard work and not family wealth, th eold school tie and connections] is just not as talented as them or lazy so deserve what they get
Turkeys don't vote for christmas
Clearly they do - tbh the floating voters who decide elections just seem to vote for change every decade or so. It has , IMHO, F all to do with policies. i dont really see how anyone can float from Tory to Labour tbh [ though I accept the difference is not what it used to be
Footflaps, Binners and the Communist Workers Party really seem to enjoy hurting and demonising the rich in a very vindictive way.
If you can point out to me one single, solitary example of how the rich in this country have been 'hurt' in any way, shape or form, then fair enough. Because I can't think of any.
Oh yeah... Fred Goodwin had to give his Knighthood back, didn't? I'm sure he wept into his absolutely *ing massive pension-pot about that
Demonised maybe. And rightfully bloody so! We're all paying for their * ups and subsidising their vast fortunes. At the end of the day, we've seen 20/30 odd years of the rich getting richer and richer and richer, accumulating vast wealth at an obscene rate, while everyone else's share stagnates or diminishes. The tax burden on this wealth has been steadily reduced, but still they dodge it, and make zero contribution to society.
And the bankers who caused the huge crash have all walked away scott free and laughing, huge bonuses still firmly trousered, while leaving the poor to be blamed, and to foot the bill. And now its business as usual, no more regulated than it was, and the snouts are well and truly back in the trough
So.... 'hurt' how?
Not sure how much credit Gideon deserves for the recovery.
These things a cyclical so regression to mean is inevitable at some point. The recovery is still very slow and there is a genuine risk of another property bubble - which Gideon could claim the credit for.
The Bedroom Tax though is an absolute disgrace. Its - at best - badly though out and unworkable, but at worst its just another cruel attack on the poor.
What's more its deeply calculating and cynical. Poor people don't vote Tory so nothing is lost in continually kicking them and their "base" are happy that the people responsible for the crisis are punished.
Because we all know the recent financial crisis was due to under-occupancy of council houses so its only fair they suffer a bit.
After all we are all in this together.
