Is the reccession over, for you

^^ the more verbose version 🙂

Right, because it seems more like the point is ‘people pay undue attention to media-friendly quotes and soundbites’

How do you explain this then allthepies? Seeing as the problem was Labour profligacy right?

The Government, having already borrowed £58bn between April and September, is almost certain to miss its £96bn annual target by a mile. It’s now all but certain the UK will post a sixth successive year of triple-digit, billion-pound deficits, five of them under the Tories. Osborne has borrowed more in his half-decade as Chancellor than his predecessor Gordon Brown did during a decade at the Treasury. The Conservatives’ 2010 “emergency Budget” said the books would be balanced by next year. Official projections now suggest that won’t happen until 2018-19.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11187727/Its-time-to-come-clean-about-our-national-debt.html

The Tories said they were going to completely eliminate the deficit, which they haven’t done – instead lying about halving it:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2893824/Is-pedestrian-ad-best-Tory-spin-doctors-Cameron-s-election-poster-blasted-boring-looking-little-French.html

If you’re saddled with a huge budget deficit then the national debt is going to massively increase until such point that the deficit is brought down. That’s my understanding of deficit-> debt anyway.

Regardless, it’s utterly ludicrous for Tory supporters to claim that the financial crisis was all the fault of Labour and nothing to do with global economic conditions

I don’t think it was NOTHING to do with global economic conditions, however Labour had played fast and loose with the economy for years, spending all our money without thought for the future. They fuelled the credit problems by allowing people to put themselves in debt with endless credit cards and easy mortgage and credit facilities. I recall thinking at the time, when hearing about record personal debt levels back in the boom times, how awful it was that no one in Government was doing anything about it. (Restricting Cards for example)

You have to look out for those with little resistance to spending money they don’t have. Its like having kids and saying to them…’sure have as much money as you want to spend and you can pay it back later’. It aint gonna happen because they have no understanding of what they are getting into. That is what Government is for…looking out for these issues and protecting the people from themselves.

Therefore not only did we suddenly lose the ability to earn decent money, but those with such high levels of debt found themselves up sh1t creek without a paddle. We’re still in the sh1t, its just that the depth has changed and despite the pain we have all suffered and still suffering, I see the Torys as the only party with the strength to pull us out completely.

@grum – comparing borrowing under Tories to Labour in the prior 13 is a good comparison. Labour presided over a period of significant economic growth and prosperity when you would expect borrowing to fall substantially. it was profligate of them to keep spending and borrowing in the way they did. If we had not had the Tory policies of the last 5 years our situation today would have been far far worse. Compare the UK to France who took the opposite tack. On things like the AAA rating and debt levels as above it would have been far far worse under Labour, it was about damage limitation.

The financial crises wasn’t all the fault of Labour any more than it was all the fault of the right under George Bush. However Labour where at the controls so they are going to be seen as bearing the most responsibilty. They made many poor decisions in running the economy in the years prior (see above) and some dire decisions in dealing with it (like pushing Lloyds into buying the defunct HBOS and allowing RBS to run amok via acquisitions and in how they managed the bailout of the bank)

@squirrelking – my point about Texas is that there are too many stores, oversupply

So i gave a long list of targets the government has failed on, you tried to pick holes in just one, and failed. Now we’re just back to ‘it’s all Labour’s fault when it goes wrong, and all thanks to the Tories when it goes right’ again.

Great arguing skills. 🙄

I recall thinking at the time, when hearing about record personal debt levels back in the boom times, how awful it was that no one in Government was doing anything about it. (Restricting Cards for example)

You have to look out for those with little resistance to spending money they don’t have. Its like having kids and saying to them…’sure have as much money as you want to spend and you can pay it back later’. It aint gonna happen because they have no understanding of what they are getting into. That is what Government is for…looking out for these issues and protecting the people from themselves.

Sounds very nanny-state. Surely the free market will solve all our problems if allowed to do it’s thing without meddling from the government? What about personal responsibility? Is this not a key principle for Tories. 😕

If we had not had the Tory policies of the last 5 years our situation today would have been far far worse.

Again you make these completely baseless assertions as if they are facts. 🙄

So i gave a long list of targets the government has failed on, you tried to pick holes in just one, and failed. Now we’re just back to ‘it’s all Labour’s fault’ again.

Great arguing skills.

Your argument is poor because when these targets are set, they are based on the past performance and present criteria, so they may be realistic targets at that time, but can become unrealistic at future points due to unknown circumstances. I’m not going to reel off where they have exceeded targets such as with jobs, but just say that you have to look at the bigger picture such as how the rest of the EU have fared with their targets.

The narrative I’m talking about goes like this: In the years before the financial crisis, the British government borrowed irresponsibly, so that the country was living far beyond its means. As a result, by 2010 Britain was at imminent risk of a Greek-style crisis; austerity policies, slashing spending in particular, were essential. And this turn to austerity is vindicated by Britain’s low borrowing costs, coupled with the fact that the economy, after several rough years, is now growing quite quickly.

Simon Wren-Lewis of Oxford University has dubbed this narrative “mediamacro.” As his coinage suggests, this is what you hear all the time on TV and read in British newspapers, presented not as the view of one side of the political debate but as simple fact.

Yet none of it is true.

Which brings me to claims that austerity has been vindicated. Yes, British interest rates have stayed low. So have almost everyone else’s. For example, French borrowing costs are at their lowest level in history. Even debt-crisis countries like Italy and Spain can borrow at lower rates than Britain pays.

What about growth? When the current British government came to power in 2010, it imposed harsh austerity — and the British economy, which had been recovering from the 2008 slump, soon began slumping again. In response, Prime Minister David Cameron’s government backed off, putting plans for further austerity on hold (but without admitting that it was doing any such thing). And growth resumed.

If this counts as a policy success, why not try repeatedly hitting yourself in the face for a few minutes? After all, it will feel great when you stop.

But I’m sure you all know better than the Nobel-prize winning economist. I realise this is only one interpretation of events but you lot really need to stop confusing your own political prejudices with established facts – it’s ludicrous.

And regarding unemployment, looks like a good graph to me given the recession.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/10604117

now, now grum, dave is very careful these days (I am watching) to saying halving in relation to GDP!!! 😉

So you have proved that Austerity George is no such thing!!! (or that real austerity is yet to come, but at a better time). Either way econ growth will be well below trend for some time – or may be we have a new trend at a much lower level as we pay back (finally) more than we consume.

The Greens should be in their element 😉

Sounds very nanny-state. Surely the free market will solve all our problems if allowed to do it’s thing without meddling from the government? What about personal responsibility? Is this not a key principle for Tories.

Nanny state indeed, which is why our welfare bill has leapt out of control. Are you saying that its okay to let people get themselves into levels of personal debt that are never going to be repaid, leading to bankruptcy, repossesions, depression, more welfare payments etc etc.

Some people need protecting from themselves.

😛

Care to point out a statement I’ve made that I havent backed up with evidence? Or where I’ve presented my opinions as facts? Thought not.

the clue is in “really”! 😉

After calling Carney, have a word with the French bird at the IMF who keeps changing her mind on the UK. Last version was:

“A few countries, only a few, are driving growth: America and the UK. From a global perspective we see growth that’s too low, too fragile.”

Speaking about prospects for 2015, Lagarde said she expected it to be a good year for the US, which is experiencing strong growth. She offered a strong endorsement for the British chancellor, adding: “And the UK, where clearly growth is improving, the deficit has been reduced, and where the unemployment is going down.

“Certainly from a global perspective this is exactly the sort of result that we would like to see … More growth, less unemployment, a growth that is more inclusive, that is better shared, and a growth that is also sustainable and more balanced.”

Then again what does she know?

IMO the crisis is too deep for any party or political ideology to be able to provide a solution. We’ve overspent, massively and changes in our demography and our relative position in the global economy mean we have a much lower capability to pay off that kind of debt than we used to… it’s a bit like borrowing twice your salary when you’re earning 50k on the basis you’ll be getting a payrise next year so you can pay off the debt, and then being given a massive pay cut instead… you’ve made a wrong calculation and now you’re screwed.

We’ve come to the end of the post-war boom, which was as much as anything a matter of demography… it was always going to come to an end at some point…

I don’t think any political party or central bank in UK, Europe or the States has any idea how to fix this – otherwise they’d have done it by now.

We’ve an ageing population in poor health – we’ve got used to living beyond our means and have largely not set aside enough for our pensions… and the old ways of making ourselves wealthy aren’t going to work in this new world…

As one of my mates who recently moved to Abu Dhabi said – “Interesting times we live in. Come and join the action… It is not in the UK…”

I’m 42 and I don’t expect the ‘recession’ to be over in my lifetime tbh – slow, if any growth, static living standards most likely.

It might chill us all out a little. Maybe we’ll get a bit less materialistic and go back to thinking about our communities again? personally I think people are craving a little simplicity and getting off the mad treadmill we’ve been on for the last 20 years..

well technically we have been out of a recession for while

LT v low growth (and sub trend) is probably a more apt description

Beware the dreaded headline or at least read the text that accompanies it as they rarely match!!

I don’t know why the obsession with the headlines as I posted a direct link to the whole article/text.

I don’t know anyone who is only interested in headlines but not the accompanying articles …….. do you?

I also posted a direct link to the Centre For Macroeconomics report, the one which says that two thirds of the UK’s leading economists who responded to their survey disagreed with claim that “the austerity policies of the coalition government have had a positive effect on aggregate economic activity (employment and GDP) in the UK”.

I thought some people might find it interesting because it’s not what Tory politicians are claiming. In fact it’s the complete opposite, ie, Tory politicians are claiming that their economic policies have had a positive effect.

Who to believe, the politicians facing reelection or a bunch of academics?

It’s a tricky one.

Then again what does she know?

Well it is surprising to see a right-wing politician supporting a right-wing government, who’d have thought it eh?

Then again what does she know?

Well if Christine Lagarde, or the French bird at the IMF as you like to call her, keeps changing her mind, as you claim, why should anyone listen to what she has to say?

Although I’m not sure she has changed her mind that much. Two years ago she said that the poor performance of the British economy had left her with no alternative but to call on George Osborne to rethink his austerity strategy.

George Osborne told by IMF chief: rethink your austerity plan

Isn’t that exactly what George Osborne did – rethink his austerity plan, as you keep reminding us THM, and indeed do the economists in the Centre For Macroeconomics report?

Perhaps it’s more of a case that George Osborne changed his mind rather than Christine Lagarde ?

I also posted a direct link to the Centre For Macroeconomics report, the one which says that two thirds of the UK’s leading economists who responded to their survey disagreed with claim that “the austerity policies of the coalition government have had a positive effect on aggregate economic activity (employment and GDP) in the UK”.

I thought some people might find it interesting because it’s not what Tory politicians are claiming. In fact it’s the complete opposite, ie, Tory politicians are claiming that their economic policies have had a positive effect.

I may be missing your point here, but what other answer could possibly be given to that question? In other words, how could ‘austerity’ or reduction in government spending have any other effect that to reduce aggregate economic activity (ceteris paribus)? That statement tells me nothing, because the key question is whether the alternatives were any better.

Clearly if the taps had been opened on government spending instead of (slightly) restricted for optical reasons, then we may have been better off – unlikely though given potential debt crisis.

Its about making silly points, but as Ernie says, and I agree, the text is the interesting bit. Makes the headline look silly. Imagine:

“2/3 of economists believe that cutting spending and raising taxes is good for the economic growth”

The IMF did multiple flip flops here which was quite amusing!!! Not forgetting that there error in calculating the fiscal multiplier was one reason why people made policy errors

I may be missing your point here, but what other answer could possibly be given to that question?

My point? MY point??? 😯

I didn’t ask the question! It was the Centre For Macroeconomics who asked the question 🙂

And they put that “one answer” question to 50 leading economists, 33 of which responded.

The result was two thirds disagreed that “the austerity policies of the coalition government have had a positive effect on aggregate economic activity (employment and GDP) in the UK”.

While 15% of the leading economists surveyed AGREED that “the austerity policies of the coalition government have had a positive effect on aggregate economic activity (employment and GDP) in the UK”.

Perhaps you need to point to them the impossibility of such a feat?

A sure fire way of getting UK plc back to growth is to ratchet up manufacture of handbags, set up an online store and put a few ads on STW. There’s definitely a market for them 🙂

Handbags, how disappointing.

Its Maserati’s, luxury watches and private banking don’t you know!

After calling Carney, have a word with the French bird at the IMF who keeps changing her mind on the UK. Last version was:

You mean the genius who masterminded Greece’s escape from economic collapse?

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/jun/05/imf-underestimated-damage-austerity-would-do-to-greece

Indeed doc

Not forgetting that there error in calculating the fiscal multiplier was one reason why people made policy errors

There estimation of the impact of tighter fiscal policy proved to be an incy-wincy bit out!!!

Still nothing compared to locking Greece into a fixed exchange rate combined with artificially low interest rates…..BOOM!