[Closed] Economic Growth?*

consider whether what they did helped or hindered.

OK. Labour hindered 🙂

jeez, I keep falling down the two-score whole.

you think that the spending by labour made things worse and the currents cuts are helping?
Do you not think the reduced growth and the constant down grading of this is cause for concern?
Does it worry you that there is no Plan B?
I am not sure any strategy would have given perfect results but it does not seem that this is doing what the government hoped it would tbh.

Today I had the first proper argument with my Dad since I was a teenager over 'the mess that labour left us with'.

FFS stop buying into that tripe, were Labour in charge of Iceland? Greece? Spain? Ireland*? USA?

*Remember Osborne praising the 'Irish Miracle' of cutting taxes and increasing spending while maintaining a 'dynamic economy'?

EDIT - beaten to it by Junkyard while I went and re-read Osborne's 'Celtic Tiger' speech.

it does see that with economics everyone uses a filter based on their political view to give simplistic accounts of complicated issues.

Not the gits in Labour that got us in this fix with their freespending ways from 2001 to 2010.

You think the Tories have a much better record ?

[img] [/img]

And of course it depends what the government is spending money on - whether it's being spent on unemployment, or whether it's being spent on new schools and hospitals.

To be fair there is far less difference between Labour and the Tories than most people imagine - most of the "differences" are manufactured for the sake of the electorate. They particularly struggled at the last general election to present the electorate with clear differences between them.

Sod off, Hackney is great and doing alot better than most of our northern cities that are suffering from the hit to manufacturing etc. New shops, bars and cafes every month, new housing going up all over, private and social. Been here 20 years and its never looked better.

Oh sorry; I forgot that child poverty, unemployment and poor health don't actually matter. New bars and cafes! Woohoo!

As for the new housing; the vast majority of it is for private sale or rent. There is no dedicated social housing being built. Some of the new builds are available to social landlords, but still heavily subsidised by the taxpayer. And the situation is worsening.

Oh look, Tessa Jowell on Newsnight discussing the Legacy Plan. Good luck against Paxo!

Bread and Circuses. Don't worry about things like Housing, Education and Health; we've got a nice shiny stadium and Stoner can keep stocking his wine cellar!

infact good feature on newsnight now about the fact that it costs money to keep maintain a legacy not just the measly 9bn bill

oohh theyre in hackney too

That's my birthplace, that! 🙂

Building I grew up in was just in shot.

So, Stoner; fancy coming for a visit then? Y'know, maybe learn something about what you've bin spouting on about, like...

Governments in 2008/

Iceland? Independence party (centre-right) and Social Democrat Alliance in coalition
Greece? New Democracy (centre-right)
Spain? Spanish Socialist Workers' Party
Ireland*? Fianna Fáil, left of centre.
USA? Bush, rep.

so evens then

If anything it just goes to show, that the markets are more powerful than politics.

As for the new housing; the vast majority of it is for private sale or rent. There is no dedicated social housing being built.

why would you say that other than to be obtuse?

If just told you that over 1000 new resi units are held for social occupancy.

If anything it just goes to show, that the markets are more powerful than politics.

hh45 - Member

Not the gits in Labour that got us in this fix with their freespending ways from 2001 to 2010.

You mean the ones whos policies helped us ride out he global collapse without too much damage - compared to the tories who are destroying public services and the economy for no reward 0.2 % growth great - Manufacturing significantly down.

deficit up and unemployment up under the tories. defit up as tax receipts fall and unemployment rises

Still = plenty of bonuses of taxpayers money for the banks

you for got

UK? Nulabour (centre right)

fred - hand on heart would you genuinely wish the olympics never happened to newham? simple question.

You use arguments in extremis to make some very weak points. the world doesnt live at the extremes. So many people will benefit form the economic activity that the olympics brings, and many, very many of those will be from newham and of course in stratford itself.

BTW, I dont consider New Labour as being genuinely "socialist" or left of centre, just a different kind of centre right, but with a populist, temporary ideology.

they are if we dont regulate them

hey, you catch that slippy soap 😉

Will Self pwning Jowell! 😀

If just told you that over 1000 new resi units are held for social occupancy.

So you keep saying. But at what cost to the taxpayers? You think the private developers will be giving them away for nowt?

All you've come up with are some flimsy figures and some ambiguous statements, not hard facts.

The ODA has also encouraged its contractors to pay the London Living Wage

So, only 'encouraged', not actually made to. 🙄

I've seen you flounder on here before many a time, but your pond is well and truly drying out.

So, you coming down for a visit then? I'll even dust off the red carpet...

As something of an outsider (I can't vote) I find these Labour/Tory debates a little bemusing. Both parties are now significantly to the right of Edward Heath. Shouldn't the lefties be looking for a party with vaguely left-wing policies to champion?

All us foreigners are interested in is which party is likely to indulge in the most war crimes and sabotage the most positive international initiatives.

Was Will Self on Newsnight?

Stoner - Member

fred - hand on heart would you genuinely wish the olympics never happened to newham?

Yes in this form. its an almighty vanity project that is costing the whole country huge sums of money.

We could have given every resident of the area thousands and still funded grassroots sports the country over and saved money.

25+% cut in grassroots sports funding to pay for it. aparantl;y we get legacy facilities in exchange - thats gonna be very handy up here 🙄

fred - hand on heart would you genuinely wish the olympics never happened to newham? simple question.

Stoner, hand on heart; do you actually give a toss about the people of Newham? Serious question.

Answer that, and I'll answer your question.

So you keep saying. But at what cost to the taxpayers? You think the private developers will be giving them away for nowt?

Ill only say this once.

You're a graphic designer from east london. I wont tell you what colours to pick if you you dont presume to know more about my business that involves the costing, pricing and provision of social housing as part of the site.

When youve quite finished insulting my work with your armchair commentary perhaps you'd accept that someone who's actually directly involved in the delivery of social housing knows how many units, how they're funded, how they will be built, by whom, where and when probably has a better grasp of what is actually going to happen than you.

So stoner - how many actual social housing units will be built and how much taxpayer subsidy? How much has the developer put towards the social housing? How many family homes amongst the social housing?

Governments in 2008/

Iceland? Independence party (centre-right) and Social Democrat Alliance in coalition
Greece? New Democracy (centre-right)
Spain? Spanish Socialist Workers' Party
Ireland*? Fianna Fáil, left of centre.
USA? Bush, rep.

so evens then

That is totally misleading Stoner. Firstly in Iceland the Social Democrat Alliance entered in coalition with the Independence Party (which isn't "centre-right", it's right-wing) in May 2007 after decades of conservative rule, I don't know how you think they might have changed the economy in less than a year. And secondly, Fianna Fáil is as conservative as the Tory Party in the UK is. With the exception of Spain, all those examples you give had conservative governments in the lead up to the global recession.

Stoner, hand on heart; do you actually give a toss about the people of Newham?

Yes.

All of my work involves massive employment. I love the idea that projects Im working on bring prosperity to an area. I can even live with gopping architecture of some of them if I think there's going to be a revival of economic activity in a shithole.

Occasionally I get asked to do stuff in places that politically Im not happy with so turn it down, but otherwise, most of the time my work is directly linked to delivering jobs.

deficit up and unemployment up under the tories

Thats not true is it TJ - Unemployment has fallen!

2.51 million in March 2010 - 2.46 million in May 2011

TandemJeremy - Member

So stoner - how many actual social housing units will be built and how much taxpayer subsidy? How much has the developer put towards the social housing? How many family homes amongst the social housing?

Ha ha! So now you're in charge of allocating social housing in east London? Wow, you truly are a man of many talents...

So, 675 homes allocated for Social Housing. Do you know the numbers of homes demolished to make way for the Olympic site?

I live in the East End Stoner. You don't. In fact I remember you saying you never venture further east than Liverpool Street. You sit in an office in front of a screen and bits of paper with figures on them. I live in the place affected by what's going on. Which makes you an office chair commentator. And I probably have a better grasp of housing conditions etc here than you do.

I'm not just a graphic designer mate; I've worked in Youth Services, Sexual Health and Drug Outreach, and Adult Education. And I've lived here all my life, seen all the changes and transformations. So don't go insulting my knowledge of the reality of what happens here, eh?

When you coming then?

675 or 1000? Both figures quoted

Yes.

All of my work involves massive employment. I love the idea that projects Im working on bring prosperity to an area.

Ooh you little Socialist, you! 😀

Pfft. I'm sure the people of Newham will be so thrilled that you're helping to provide them with jobs in a shiny new shopping centre. I'm sure that'll be a great consolation to those recently unemployed with years of service in the public sector helping to deliver badly needed services to many vulnerable and needy people....

Forgive my cynicism. I don't see you as part of any genuine solution for true social progression, sorry.

I don't see you as part of any genuine solution for true social progression, sorry.

Occasionally I get asked to do stuff in places that politically Im not happy with so turn it down

EDIT: hold your horses TJ, you impatient little mite. Your post deserves a proper answer, and that takes time.

TJ, dont mean to be rude, but your question indicates a lack of understanding of how social housing is provided in England.

There's a handful of mechanisms for funding social housing. The gap between the market value and the affordable rate is covered by the local authority in a few different ways.

Shelter covers most of it here:
http://england.shelter.org.uk/campaigns/housing_issues/Improving_social_housing/what_is_social_housing

The "subsidy" is the rent support that fills the commerciallity gap (which exists for social landlord not-for-profit organisations as much as anyone else)

Of the 2,800 homes that will be created from converting the athletes village in 2013, 1,379 will be held by a social housing provider, triathlon homes. They are working with the local authority to put together a number of different ways of making these properties available for discounted rents or prices. It might be as standard social rental, some are going to be based on shared equity and others somewhere in between. There's some info on their site.

There is no "developer" as the development is being made by the Olympic Delivery Authority. The involvement of the private sector is only to take over legacy parts once the games have finished with them. Triathlon is effectively one of them.

Not sure of the break down of family units right now, but the general principal is that for social units its higher numbers family units than 1 or 2 bed flats. Private apartments are more focussed on those 1 and 2 bed units.

I don't see you as part of any genuine solution for true social progression, sorry.

like I thought one post from me would make you change your very cynical, stubborn, and self-absorbed POV?

If it's any consolation, I dont submit most of these posts for your benefit (afterall, why try and turn the sea?), but for those lurkers following the thread who might have otherwise gone away with the impression that just because the subject is a little rarefied, then it automatically means that the worst of things will happen.

675 or 1000? Both figures quoted

675 social rental.

1,379 classed as affordable homes.

See http://www.triathlonhomes.com/new_homes/ownership_and_rental_options.html

That's still just a load of waffle as far as I'm concerned Stoner. I'll believe it when (if) it happens.

As for my cynicism; seen it all before with all the Docklands 'regeneration' over the last 25+ years. In that time, poverty has increased in the area, and the economic disparity has increased. Local education, especially for adults, has been steadily eroded to the extent there is hardly any Adult Education provision in Tower Hamlets. Illiteracy is on the increase, as well as such archaic diseases such as Tuberculosis. A massive decline in Council housing has seen a massive increase in the burden to local finances as billions more are paid out in benefits payments, because private rents have increased exponentially. Promises of increased opportunities for 'local' people have been largely empty; the vast majority of people who work in Canary Wharf live outside the borough.

So, forgive me if I don't trust what I see to be the same old crap spouted once more.

so all the cost is beingborne by the taxpayer none by the profitmaking builders?

usually here anyone wanting to build new housing has to provide some social housing at cost or subsidised.

My understanding is that these "social houses" are actually mainly very small flats - not suitable for families and will be very expensive to the taxpayer compared to usual ways of building.

That's still just a load of waffle as far as I'm concerned Stoner. I'll believe it when (if) it happens.

So damned without evidence? That's the weakest comeback you've ever managed to muster.

Fianna Fáil, left of centre.

My hairy arse they're left of centre. But anyway...

Maybe I'm just feeling a bit frustrated about the impact of cuts on community sports, recreation and physical activity... What 'legacy' was it we were talking about?

Pretty much spot on, TJ, if any simliar projects round here any anything to go by....

I dont submit most of these posts for your benefit

I'm sure you wouldn't want to lower yourself, for sure.

I am however offering to give you a guided tour for your benefit. Your reticence to take me up on such an offer speaks volumes.

Anyways up; enough already. Such debate is interesting, but we're getting close to a point of conflict and mutual disrespect. As do so many discussions between ourselves.Such a waste of energy.

Might be a good time to admit to the reality we aren't going to get along, Stoner. Shame, but that seems to be how it is. I think it's best to be honest, however. Saves an awful lot of hassle.

My understanding is that these "social houses" are actually mainly very small flats

Good, good. Im sure your "understanding" is bang up to date TJ.

225 one-bed homes, 710 two-bed homes, 284 three-bed homes, and 160 four-bed homes,

If you're going to use your own pre-conceptions in evidence, at least try and site some hypothetical source. Like you Mum or something.

so all the cost is beingborne by the taxpayer none by the profitmaking builders?

The olympics is a national governmental project, not a private sector one. Who do you think should bear the risk? Your pension or your state?

As it happens there's lots of risk being passed on to the private sector, but building the original olympic site isnt going to be one of them for blindingly obvious reasons.

at least try and site some hypothetical source. Like you Mum or something.

TBh it's threads like this which breed so much contempt and resentment on here. And life's too short to waste it on such negative energies.

Im feeling quite positive really. I think the olympics, the developments that come out of them and the enthusiasm for them is great.

Your posts show you as the little angry man that you are.

Night night.

As it happens there's lots of risk being passed on to the private sector

really? - that would be a first. where is the private sector taking any risk?

The olympics is a national governmental project, not a private sector one. Who do you think should bear the risk? Your pension or your state?

And life's too short to waste it on such negative energies.

You mean life's too short to waste it all enjoying yourself.....get stuck in mate.

Stoner - Member

Im feeling quite positive really. I think the olympics, the developments that come out of them and the enthusiasm for them is great.

so long term damage done to the funding of sport at grassrrots UK wide is positive? 25% cut infunding to pay for this.

enthusiasm? None evident here. its worse than an irrelevance here - its seen as a tax on Scotland for the benefit of London - again. More Scots money being poured into London

it stinks

Your posts show you as the little angry man that you are.

At least I can admit to my anger, rather than let it bubble up inside me and fester away, rotting my soul...

Stoner; I'd rather be upfront and honest with you. I don't like your online persona; I find you hypocritical, rude, supercilious, condescending, selfish and ignorant of certain issues. I'm sure you love me equally.

But in the spirit of trying to have at least the modicum of respect for you, I'd rather be honest and speak my mind than act in an insincere manner.

I've offered you the opportunity to come and see the reality for yourself, in the hope that you could go away with a somewhat more enlightened viewpoint. You've declined through your lack of response to this invitation. Ah well. One can but try.

I really dont get that post Fred - you cannot insult someone like that then claim anything you do towards them comes from respect. It is also better to not have hate than have a to deal with it by venting it i
Stoner seems to be perfectly reasonable in his views in general , even if i disagree with him and his analysis. He is not some loon whose views have no basis in reality who deserves a good flaming for his stupidity/ridiculousness [ the left have those as well]. You may not agree with his perception, as is your right, but I am less sure as to what he has done to deserve such scorn. I dont really see how comments like yours help encourage folk to join in debates tbh and I dont really understand why you are surprised he has declined your "hospitality".

Oh whell. 😐

[url= http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/economic-growth/page/3#post-2800208 ]

as in "me" and 30,000+ other people. [b]*[/b].

I'm assuming the '*' wasn't a compliment....

More [s]Scots[/s] money from elsewhere in the UK being poured into London

FIFY

You've actually made some decent arguments on here for a change TJ, don't go and ruin it now....

oh look another thread thats turned into just a couple of people arguing and starting to get personal... and OH WHAT A SURPRISE!!!!! the two most predictable people are right in there!

i would have walked away from the thread ages ago stoner and just gone out for a ride instead of responding to people trying to poke and prod you into a fight so they can then claim you've been nasty and refuse to post anymore knowing they dont have the information and first hand knowledge of the job you do.

junkyard +1 btw.

glad I went to bed after newsnight

was funny to see will self and paxo teaming up against tessa jowell to be fair she didn't stand a chance, stoner would have argued her case instead !

Stoner; I'd rather be upfront and honest with you. I don't like your online persona; I find you hypocritical, rude, supercilious, condescending, selfish and ignorant of certain issues. I'm sure you love me equally.

But all Stoner did was out argue you with facts? Your argument seemed based on the fact that you live in East London and you don't believe the facts as quoted by the people doing the development?

oh look another thread thats turned into just a couple of people arguing and starting to get personal... and OH WHAT A SURPRISE!!!!! the two most predictable people are right in there!

Fred and Stoner?

JY and TJ?

Whom? Whom?!?

jamie, we live in the fine country of ENGERLAHND! its "who, who?!" .... 'whom', lol that's not even a real word!

well in this case its elfin who's getting personal with insults aimed directly at stoner, not nice to read and in my opinion a definite case of negative use of the forum. i think stoner's done very well to keep to the facts and take the time to present information in a way that is readable to anyone entering the thread, as i said... i would've given up and gone for a ride instead of bothering replying to elfins posts, it would be a good time for stoner to roll out the hamlet towers defence and say "well now you've got personal so i'm not replying on this thread anymore".

I don't like your online persona; I find you hypocritical, rude, supercilious, condescending, selfish and ignorant of certain issues.

Priceless.

Still going eh?

Rant, rant ,rant, rant.......

This is my first post on this thread, mainly because I don't know anything about economics so I havent actually got anything relavent to say. Let that be a lesson to you all..

i would have walked away from the thread ages ago stoner

I was pleased of the opportunity to explain some bits of what I do. I love my work and proud of the positive impact of most of it. Im not ashamed of my work and dont need to justify any of it. Like most economic threads in here, ignorance is usually at the root of any insults directed at bankers, interest rates, financial derivatives, property development etc. When people dont understand things they fear and attack them. When the opportunity is there I usually like to give a little detail of what actually happens in real life. Although I do it less and less in here these days as there's those who wont be moved from their points of ignorance and its hard to be heard above the shouting.

Thanks for the nice posts that I missed after going beddy-bys.

Toys - don't let that stop you. 🙂

Public sector borrowing has increased over the year. This month more money was borrowed that the same month last year - this is the cost of the austerity package. Its what every person with any sense knew would happen. Cuts at this point of the economic cycle mean increased government spending as tax receipts fall and unemployment rises.

These cuts are nothing to do with cutting the deficit - they are about politically motivated desire to reduce the public sector.

Do you never get bored of it all, TJ?

If not, do you think you could for a while?

[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/qatars-incredible-stadium-plans-for-2022-world-cup-2149447.html?action=Gallery ]On a related-ish note, this looks quite tidy (or completely mental)...[/url]

And I doubt there's even a nod in the direction of legacy issues, grassroots funding or social housing. FWIW, I think that the London Olympics does have a good shot at getting a lot of things right. It seems that a lot of the issues and mistakes from other comparable projects have been taken on board. And I hope it works out. Although the regional money for a London event is hard to swallow.

Stoner - the problem is you only see one very small part.

How many houses were demolished to provide this new housing? How many businesses?

Even by your own figures the number of affordable rented family houses is pitiful.

teh costs are enormous and far greater that building houses by the usual methods and the houses provided do not match the need.

And Elf is right - you are patronising and sneering

When people dont understand things they fear and attack them.

ignorance is usually at the root of any insults directed at bankers

If you're going to use your own pre-conceptions in evidence, at least try and site some hypothetical source. Like you Mum or something.

And Elf is right - you are patronising and sneering

That's three in a week. Once again, chapeau!

I've offered you the opportunity to come and see the reality for yourself

Elf - what will he see if he come down to visit you? Deprivation? Poverty? I'm sure he knows these things are a problem.

I'm sure you will admit that the current political climate (as in, the one the electorate have voted for these last ooh, 30 years) is not particularly receptive to spending billions on social housing - which is a terrible shame imo but there you go. The lack of social housing provision and its associated issues goes way beyond the Olympics.

I don't know their plans for 'regeneration' in detail, but I'm not going to assume they'll fail because other plans in the past have. I'm not so pessimistic as to let it over-ride logic.

And Elf is right - you are patronising and sneering

I think he's been reasonable, but perhaps not quite reasonable enough - neither has Elf tbh, but I do not blame him for being passionate, in fact I admire him for it.

This has been an excellent thread for the neutral spectator.

I was pleased of the opportunity to explain some bits of what I do.

Funny you should say that really, because when I read it last night I thought "ah, so that's what he does". Up until then I thought you just spent all day pimping your barn and shooting stuff 😉

Always nice to read a thread where someone has some knowledge of the subject.

Tht truth hurt Flash? The evidence is there for all to see - the austerity package is making things worse. Growth down, deficit up, unemployment up. manufacturing down, exports down.

And Elf is right - you are patronising and sneering

TJ, is what you meant to say: "[b]In my opinion[/b] you are patronising and sneering" as opposed to stating it as some kinda fact?

When people dont understand things they fear and attack them.

this does happen, some over the top examples for you... racism, religion and homosexuality.

EDIT - your post above this comes across as patronising in my opinion TJ.

Up until then I thought you just spent all day pimping your barn and shooting stuff

Applauds 😆

Elfinsafety - Member
yap yap yap yap yap yap.....but I'm not holding my breath......yap yap yap

If only you would.

No, tJ, not my point. My point was that you're like a broken record. Go and ride your bike instead.

Here is one of the alternative takes on the olympics legacy

http://www.clubplan.org/cms/page.asp?org=2673&name=Olympics1

My point was that you're like a broken record.

Haven't you got a few thousand boxes of plastic-coated paperclips to move on? Staggering to hear you of all people accuse someone of sounding like a broken record.

Darcy, note how little, if at all, I get involved in this sort of thread these days. I was boring myself, let alone everyone else!

Need any more post-its? 🙂

Need any more post-its?

Only if you've got the new extra sticky ones 😉

CaptainFlashheart - Member

No, tJ, not my point. My point was that you're like a broken record. Go and ride your bike instead.

CaptainFlashheart - Member

Darcy, note how little, if at all, I get involved in this sort of thread these days. I was boring myself, let alone everyone else!

this is a good point which I accept

TandemJeremy - Member

Public sector borrowing has increased over the year. This month more money was borrowed that the same month last year - this is the cost of the austerity package. Its what every person with any sense knew would happen. Cuts at this point of the economic cycle mean increased government spending as tax receipts fall and unemployment rises.

These cuts are nothing to do with cutting the deficit - they are about politically motivated desire to reduce the public sector.

CaptainFlashheart - Member

Do you never get bored of it all, TJ?

If not, do you think you could for a while?

Yes TJ, don't you ever get bored with undermining the Tory Party's carefully crafted myth's, with your irritating and awkward facts ?

Tories like Flashheart find it most annoying and would much rather you stopped doing it. Specially when they themselves are completely incapable of providing any sort of argument to counter your claims, and rely so heavily on people being ignorant and misinformed.

And just for Zulu-Eleven, the archetype misinformer, from the newspaper for which his political guru Dan Hannan writes :

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/8634126/UK-unemployment-What-the-experts-say.html ]UK unemployment: What the experts say[/url]

Quote :

[i]"The jobs figures are getting "weaker" and pay growth remains muted, meaning unemployment is headed upwards, experts say."[/i]

If you are worried about [url= http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ViewArticle.aspx?ArticleId=19830 ]tuburculosis[/url] you need to look at prison conditions, the health of sex workere, testing of immigrants, the health of drug users and then possibly, housing. You need to look at the way people live rather than the places they live in.

Yes Britain needs social housing, it also needs greenbelt land freeing off and the breaking of the house builders' cartel that controls existing building land. "Quand le batiment va bien, tout va bien" (when building industry is doing well the economy does well). At present the sector is being strangled by a lack of reasdonably priced land due to greenbelt policy and the pattern of ownership (cartel).

Imposing environmental standards on property at sale would also bring down house prices, create jobs in renovation and reduce emissions. No doubt the renovation of some preoperty would not be viable and demolition and sale of the land would be the only option - renewal of the housing stock so desperately needed.