David said: "Calling people mad simply because they disagree with you suggests that you are a lot dumber than you seem to be to me."
I'll take the preferred, not so dumb as you seem to think I am option please, unless of course you can copy and paste my opinion that you are mad!
I have to say that checking a few threads, there are those who have said that, whereas, I have not.
My apologies if what I thought was a bit of humour regarding the brainwashing has been misconstrued, I even took the precaution of saying I reckoned your brain waves would be around 8Hz, comparable with those of a "clairvoyant" which was intended as a compliment!
There was recently a large gathering of left-wing activists at a "Netroots" meeting to figure out how a concerted effort of left-wing posting and blogging could counter the runaway success of "right of centre" blogging. Observers already successful in this arena concluded that the major problem for the left-wing is that they are totally devoid of any sense of humour.
On to the gritty bits!
I only mentioned the bit you left out when referring to Richard Lambert because it was an important bit, ie supporting the cuts. I am more than happy to go along with the fact that Osborne is not perfect and some measures such as the vat increase may be wrong. I do think it needs a bit more time to tell rather than a witch hunt due to the January figures.
On that note, I do see that the "snow option" has been used before though:
Now, I am no economics expert as I am sure neither you nor Gordon Brown are, I seem to recall from somewhere that History is his subject, even taking time out from a busy schedule in 2007 to write several history articles for the Daily Telegraph.
So rather than wade through all the links and figures posted, I will refer to someone who has already done that and who is quite an expert on the economy. He is a leading figure in the city, not born with a "silver spoon" in his mouth, but a totally self made multi-millionaire. He has been critical of the banks to the extent where he lost employment because of the critisism. I would rather listen to what he has to say than anyone from the extreme left or extreme right.
His name is Terry Smith, his non extreme blog is called "Straight Talking" and here is a link to what he said at a recent Financial Times economic intelligence debate:
If you scroll down to the heading "Grasping Reality" you will see the relevant figures along with his comments. Further down if you want to listen there is a link to the podcast from that debate.
If you can find any non extreme left wing article which says that Gordon Brown was an economic genius, please post it and I will be happy to reconsider my opinion.
Balls!
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: David
Hi,
The overall emphasis of Lambert's speech was very much hammering the government's growth policy e.g.
The government has "taken a series of policy initiatives for political reasons, apparently careless of the damage they might do to business and to job creation"
"Public spending cuts and private sector growth are two sides of the same coin."
Hence, without initiatives supporting private sector growth, the spending cuts would not only be futile; they would be actively detrimental, he reasoned. "It's not enough just to slam on the spending brakes," he said.
"Measures that cut spending but killed demand would actually make matters worse."
He also said that a ?hard look? needed to be taken at the Department for Business and its role in promoting growth. It should be ?less of a talking shop, more of an action-oriented growth champion?, Sir Richard said.
He went on to highlight several policies ? including the immigration cap and the decision to axe rules allowing bosses to retire staff on their 65th birthday ? as just some of many bad examples of ?politics appearing to have trumped economics?. The Government is ?so excited about announcing new policies that it ignores valuable schemes which already exist?, he added.
Pretty damning stuff from the head of the CBI to a Tory led government wouldnt you say?
Secondly you say "Now, I am no economics expert as I am sure neither you nor Gordon Brown are,"
Well he was Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer for 5 years and Chancellor of the Exchequer for 10 years and praised by Nobel prize winning economists for his handling of the banking collapse, so I think that would suggest he knows more about economics than Fraser Nelson who you rely so much on. Obviously...
And whatever is said about the weather, the bottom line is that there were three quarters of growth in the economy coming out of recession under Labour and now a slump in growth and confidence as a result of the current government's actions which are terrifying much of the population.
I read the Terry Smith link and it is very unconvincing. The bottom line is that before the global recession hit, the deficit was the second lowest in the G7 and was no higher than it had been under Thatcher in the early 90's. Now you could argue that there was a boom in financial services under Brown and that maybe that should have allowed the govt to stockpile cash more. You can argue exactly the same about Thatcher's deficit. The 80's saw an unprecedented boom arising from the IT revolution, in addition to a boom in financial services.
Did Brown make mistakes? Clearly. In a way similar mistakes to the Tories i.e. over-reliance on financial services, not enough care taken with regard to our manufacturing base, lack of regulation of financial services etc etc.
But was the recession all Labour's fault which is what theTories rabbit on about endlessly? No it wasn't. It was the global recession that hammered the UK.
I will leave you with a quote from George Soros, the very same George Soros who wrecked the reputation for financial completence of the last Conservative administration on Black Wednesday when one, David Cameron was an advisor to Norman Lamont the Chancellor.
"I dont think the austerity programme can possibly be implemented without pushing the economy into recession".
Sounds like Ed Balls huh?
CHeers
D
The overall emphasis of Lambert's speech was very much hammering the government's growth policy e.g.
The government has "taken a series of policy initiatives for political reasons, apparently careless of the damage they might do to business and to job creation"
"Public spending cuts and private sector growth are two sides of the same coin."
Hence, without initiatives supporting private sector growth, the spending cuts would not only be futile; they would be actively detrimental, he reasoned. "It's not enough just to slam on the spending brakes," he said.
"Measures that cut spending but killed demand would actually make matters worse."
He also said that a ?hard look? needed to be taken at the Department for Business and its role in promoting growth. It should be ?less of a talking shop, more of an action-oriented growth champion?, Sir Richard said.
He went on to highlight several policies ? including the immigration cap and the decision to axe rules allowing bosses to retire staff on their 65th birthday ? as just some of many bad examples of ?politics appearing to have trumped economics?. The Government is ?so excited about announcing new policies that it ignores valuable schemes which already exist?, he added.
Pretty damning stuff from the head of the CBI to a Tory led government wouldnt you say?
Secondly you say "Now, I am no economics expert as I am sure neither you nor Gordon Brown are,"
Well he was Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer for 5 years and Chancellor of the Exchequer for 10 years and praised by Nobel prize winning economists for his handling of the banking collapse, so I think that would suggest he knows more about economics than Fraser Nelson who you rely so much on. Obviously...
And whatever is said about the weather, the bottom line is that there were three quarters of growth in the economy coming out of recession under Labour and now a slump in growth and confidence as a result of the current government's actions which are terrifying much of the population.
I read the Terry Smith link and it is very unconvincing. The bottom line is that before the global recession hit, the deficit was the second lowest in the G7 and was no higher than it had been under Thatcher in the early 90's. Now you could argue that there was a boom in financial services under Brown and that maybe that should have allowed the govt to stockpile cash more. You can argue exactly the same about Thatcher's deficit. The 80's saw an unprecedented boom arising from the IT revolution, in addition to a boom in financial services.
Did Brown make mistakes? Clearly. In a way similar mistakes to the Tories i.e. over-reliance on financial services, not enough care taken with regard to our manufacturing base, lack of regulation of financial services etc etc.
But was the recession all Labour's fault which is what theTories rabbit on about endlessly? No it wasn't. It was the global recession that hammered the UK.
I will leave you with a quote from George Soros, the very same George Soros who wrecked the reputation for financial completence of the last Conservative administration on Black Wednesday when one, David Cameron was an advisor to Norman Lamont the Chancellor.
"I dont think the austerity programme can possibly be implemented without pushing the economy into recession".
Sounds like Ed Balls huh?
CHeers
D
Re: Balls!
I aint a political activist but I do like slagging off useless fucking arseholes. Fortunately, or unfortunately, Parliament is awash with the bastards so there are more than enough to aim at.
RoddersUK