UK Election 2015 (part II)

[linnfomaniac83]

It makes me ashamed to be British when I read that article... and my opinion of those who want to see benefits cut is similar to what I feel if I accidentally step in dog muck...

Any and all money that needs to be found should come from those who have more than enough already, both corporations and individuals. If you have £500,000,000 and have half of it taken in tax you are still fabulously wealthy but if you have to live on £70 a week and have that reduced to £50 then you're in it up to the neck! For those who understand that but would like to see the benefit reduced any way I hope there is a special place in hell.

I often end up getting frustrated and annoyed when discussing politics so I tend to keep quiet. However, I back you wholeheartedly on this.

People with a genuine need should absolutely not be made to suffer.

 

[wacko]

It makes me ashamed to be British when I read that article... and my opinion of those who want to see benefits cut is similar to what I feel if I accidentally step in dog muck...
Any and all money that needs to be found should come from those who have more than enough already, both corporations and individuals. If you have £500,000,000 and have half of it taken in tax you are still fabulously wealthy but if you have to live on £70 a week and have that reduced to £50 then you're in it up to the neck! For those who understand that but would like to see the benefit reduced any way I hope there is a special place in hell.

Laudable sentiment. However if you have £500m, or even a tenth of that, you can live anywhere you want. So do you think you will be able to take half their wealth or nothing ? High taxes were tried in the 1960s and 1970s, when people were much less mobile than they are now, and it failed then.
Only a successful economy can achieve what you want to see, even communist China worked that out.

 

[matthewr]

If you put 10 respected economists in the same room and ask them how they would rescue the world, you can expect 10 different answers. Krugman is just one of many.

That's not true. The claims Krugman is making are very standard graduate level economics that have been well understood since 1937. It's more correct to say if you got 10 economists 9 of them would agree with Krugman and the tenth would not.

The people making controversial claims here are the Tories and Lib Dems and the only reason we even debate this is because "everybody knows" the facts match the political and media narrative.

 

[monkfish]

Ajockolypse the noo

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ohnsons-claim-of-snp-jockalypse-10228433.html

 

[Mick P]

That's not true. The claims Krugman is making are very standard graduate level economics that have been well understood since 1937. It's more correct to say if you got 10 economists 9 of them would agree with Krugman and the tenth would not.

The people making controversial claims here are the Tories and Lib Dems and the only reason we even debate this is because "everybody knows" the facts match the political and media narrative.

Matthew

Yes there is no dispute that Krugman is a well respected economist, I do actually read some of his stuff.

However respected Chancellors such as Osborne and Mrs Merkel do not seem to follow his teachings and both of their economies are doing relatively well.

I must confess that I am at a total loss at your almost religious zeal in following him.

Also constantly stating that the austerity measures were a disaster is an exaggeration and has the effect of belittling your case. They are working as our excellent financial performance shows.

Food banks and welfare cuts are only a distraction, Osborne could in all fairness, spend more on welfare but slash other budgets which would make him a lot more popular. I sometimes think the welfare cuts are confused with austerity.

Regards

Mick - suffering from sore feet after delivering yet more leaflets through the doors of Swindon.

 

[Tony L]

Mick, the whole point is Osborne is not doing well, he has failed by any comparison other than to the Euro zone which has failed even more catestrophically (for a whole raft of reasons that thankfully do not apply to the UK). To put it another way growth is currently lower than when he inherited the economy from Gordon Bloody Brown! The national debt is now far, far higher.

 

[cooky1257]

Mick - suffering from sore feet after delivering yet more leaflets through the doors of Swindon.

Try using your hands.

 

[Tony L]

FWIW every single leaflet spammed here goes unread into the recycling. Thankfully no one has been stupid enough to try ringing my doorbell yet (I have a 'No cold callers sign', though it doesn't work with Jehovah's Witnesses).

 

[jackbarron]

Steve Coogan, John Cleese and Irvine Welsh, are backing newspaper adverts which attack the Sun and Mail's fear and smear lies and tactics.

The ads have Cameron in ugly Oz Murcock's top pocket.

I hope a Labour coalition gets in and tears up the Sky and newspaper conglomerate that Murcock has. His journalists are a disgrace to their profession.

"Cleese has said: “The fear and loathing that has come out of the Mail and the Sun this election has been hard to stomach. The threat of Leveson-style independent self-regulation being imposed on many of these media owners means that they are throwing the kitchen sink at keeping the Conservatives in power. The British public are smart enough to know what to listen to and what to ignore, but this is worrying.”

"Avaaz is running the ad in regional newspapers covering marginal seats across Britain, as well as across a range of websites, and will also be promoted by the organisation’s 1.6m British members.

“Rupert Murdoch and the Daily Mail have had British politicians in their top pocket for decades,” said Coogan. “The smear and fear agenda they have peddled over the past few weeks has been pretty shameful. Thankfully we don’t have Fox News on TV, but sadly this election has shown that we do have it in printed form.”

Jack

 

[Mick P]

Mick, the whole point is Osborne is not doing well, he has failed by any comparison other than to the Euro zone which has failed even more catestrophically (for a whole raft of reasons that thankfully do not apply to the UK). To put it another way growth is currently lower than when he inherited the economy from Gordon Bloody Brown!

Tony

Nearly every country has lower growth today that back in 2009/2010.

The Eurozone is composed of major economies and we are well ahead of them.

If you think it is bad over here, try taking a trip to France or Spain and you will then realise how lucky you are to be here and not there.

Yes the Eurozone has failed and that had an impact on us but we have come out of it much better.

I have been delivering leaflets and knocking on doors over the last few weeks and in all honesty the picture has been changing daily. The expected swing to the Tories has not materialised but they do in all honesty seem to be inching ahead but by a gnats breath.

If I have gauged it correctly, both Labour and the Tories are taking votes back from UKIP but how that translates into seats is anyones guess. A lot of people think Labour is better on the NHS but the Tories are streets ahead for managing the economy and austerity seems to be fairly well respected as an evil necessity.

Anyway, we will soon know the results so perhaps it is now best to sit tight and wait.

Mick

 

[jackbarron]

However if you have £500m, or even a tenth of that, you can live anywhere you want. So do you think you will be able to take half their wealth or nothing ?

Let them f*** off then. It's not like we're getting any trickle down money or proper taxes off them. They're just a burden on the health, social and welfare system.

Jack

 

[matthewr]

However respected Chancellors such as Osborne and Mrs Merkel do not seem to follow his teachings and both of those economies are doing relatively well.

But that's what I am saying. It's pretty much impossible to find an academic economist how agrees with Osborne and extremely easy to find ones that don't.

You see the same effect in America where there the political narrative will tell you that Obama's stimulus didn't work but now that the figures are actually in any economist making this point either believes in some radical, non-mainstream view or else is just wrong. Which is why when Chicago Business School -- the very epicentre of right wing, free market macroeconomics -- did their survey of economists on this issue the find a very large majority that agree Obama's stimulus saved millions of jobs and a few points of GDP.

Merkel is different as Germany has a different view of economics to everyone else (essentially they reject neoliberalism) and you need to do quite a lot of reading to have a conversation on this issue. As a Thatcherite I can tell you, you are not going to like it much but start here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordoliberalism

I must confess that I am at a total loss at your almost religious zeal in following him

But again I stress the claims Krugman is making with regard to Osborne are a) *not* controversial b) have already actually happened so we can just look at the numbers to find the answer. Osborne's is essentially saying "With the benefit of hindsight I now fail to realise I was wrong".

Also constantly stating that the austerity measures were a disaster is an exaggeration and has the effect of belittling your case. They are working as our excellent financial performance shows.

Only if you are getting confused between rates of change and absolute levels.

Suppose you earn £40,000 a year in 2010. In 2011 and 2012 I take £4,000 off you and you earn £36,000 and then £32,000. If in 2013 you earn £35,000 and I say "Look! You have the fastest growing wages in your street!" you may be forgiven for calling me an idiot who has inflicted a disaster upon you.

 

[matthewr]

If you think it is bad over here, try taking a trip to France or Spain and you will then realise how lucky you are to be here and not there.

Except that Osborne's performance was so bad he did worse than the French.

 

[Mullardman]

To put it another way growth is currently lower than when he inherited the economy from Gordon Bloody Brown! The national debt is now far, far higher.

[THREE-YORSHIRE-MEN-MODE] Aye... but yoo tell that to the yooth of today and they'll not believe yer. [/THREE-YORSHIRE-MEN-MODE]

This country is now officially a dictatorship with a Govt owned media.

Mull

 

[canonman]

 

[wacko]

Matthew does the graph you post support your argument ?
It shows that the UK had a worse crash than the others. Perhaps because the Finance industry is relatively large in the UK.
But then if you look at the most recent 6 Quarters it shows the UK recovering faster than any country except the USA.

 

[Paul R]

Except that Osborne's performance was so bad he did worse than the French.

Why do you write stuff that isn't supported by the chart you include?

Paul

 

[TPA]

The graphs are entirely irrelevant; the election will be decided on personality and whose ernest unctiousness comes over the best to the flawta's.

Apparently the Scottish jezzy is finding favour with a large number of English female voters; says it all really, and that's what this election is all about. But I do like the graphs, unfortunately those who can interpret them have already made their mind up on who they'll be voting for.

We have reached the stage where one of the parties is going to have to take on Sean Connery as it's leader and do the job of modern politics properly.

 

[matthewr]

Matthew does the graph you post support your argument ?
It shows that the UK had a worse crash than the others. Perhaps because the Finance industry is relatively large in the UK.
But then if you look at the most recent 6 Quarters it shows the UK recovering faster than any country except the USA.

Sorry very busy today and don't have time for a full explanation (although it's been done to death over the last 5 years) and that's not the best graph. Remember the bit where Osborne was making a policy blunder was mid 2010 to mid 2012. Since Osborne has adopted a more sensible policy the UK has outstripped France and meanwhile France has come under more pressure from the EU with regard to fiscal tightening and done worse.

It's easier to see on this graph:

 

[Brian]

Sorry very busy today and don't have time for a full explanation (although it's been done to death over the last 5 years) and that's not the best graph. Remember the bit where Osborne was making a policy blunder was mid 2010 to mid 2012. Since Osborne has adopted a more sensible policy the UK has outstripped France and meanwhile France has come under more pressure from the EU with regard to fiscal tightening and done worse.

It's easier to see on this graph:

Matthew,

You have to explain it because some people ignore the u-turn by Gideon. It also shows up in the chart I posted yesterday but it's invisible to some people, man.