Austerity Works

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Austerity Works

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 5 of 15 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

-TUX- Alphabettispaghetti 17 Dec 15 8.51pm
Quote elgrande at 17 Dec 2015 8.32pm Quote -TUX- at 17 Dec 2015 7.40pm Rental prices are crippling this, and future generations. It used to be a way of having a home while saving a deposit for your OWN home, but now many are paying the mortgages of others luckily enough to be in a position where they can get credit. Some are good businessmen but the majority, in my experience, are just fortunate as 'the baby boomers' left them a chunk and leaving it in the bank earns diddly, so why not become a landlord. The point made regarding the lack of house building is a valid one but equally rents should be capped on the properties that already exist, imo. If not that, then heavily tax 3rd+ property ownership to the point that makes it a less attractive proposition for many. But neither will ever happen (regardless of which party are in 'power') as higher house prices = higher mortgages = happy bankers. And that's the deal. 'Feudal times' are back in vogue. As someone who is more to the right of things(you would never guess" I tend to agrre with you on this Tux,to a certain extent. maybe on the third propertie and above you pay a higher rate,or have to let said property out at an affordale rate. But as has been said while more and more people come here they need homes,more people means more demand...therefore landlords are laughing. Edited by elgrande (17 Dec 2015 8.33pm) I don't know anyone who voted for this to happen. Those that 'we must obey' voted for it. Edit: Proof again that this is far from a 'democracy'. Edited by -TUX- (17 Dec 2015 9.22pm) Time to move forward together.
Alert a moderator to this post

-TUX-

Alphabettispaghetti 17 Dec 15 8.51pm

Quote elgrande at 17 Dec 2015 8.32pm

Quote -TUX- at 17 Dec 2015 7.40pm

Rental prices are crippling this, and future generations.
It used to be a way of having a home while saving a deposit for your OWN home, but now many are paying the mortgages of others luckily enough to be in a position where they can get credit.
Some are good businessmen but the majority, in my experience, are just fortunate as 'the baby boomers' left them a chunk and leaving it in the bank earns diddly, so why not become a landlord.
The point made regarding the lack of house building is a valid one but equally rents should be capped on the properties that already exist, imo. If not that, then heavily tax 3rd+ property ownership to the point that makes it a less attractive proposition for many.
But neither will ever happen (regardless of which party are in 'power') as higher house prices = higher mortgages = happy bankers.
And that's the deal.

'Feudal times' are back in vogue.

As someone who is more to the right of things(you would never guess" I tend to agrre with you on this Tux,to a certain extent.
maybe on the third propertie and above you pay a higher rate,or have to let said property out at an affordale rate.
But as has been said while more and more people come here they need homes,more people means more demand...therefore landlords are laughing.

Edited by elgrande (17 Dec 2015 8.33pm)

I don't know anyone who voted for this to happen. Those that 'we must obey' voted for it.

Edit: Proof again that this is far from a 'democracy'.

Edited by -TUX- (17 Dec 2015 9.22pm)

Time to move forward together.

Alert a moderator to this post

Bert the Head Epsom 17 Dec 15 10.56pm
Quote Pussay Patrol at 16 Dec 2015 10.19am [Link] Unemployment lowest for 10 years at 5.2% I think you mean counting the unemployed is the lowest for years. Scratch the service and there are self employed people who do not get enough work and rely on tax credits. People working on zero hours contract who do not get a decent weeks work. Its just smoke and mirrors.
Alert a moderator to this post

Bert the Head

Epsom 17 Dec 15 10.56pm

Quote Pussay Patrol at 16 Dec 2015 10.19am

[Link]

Unemployment lowest for 10 years at 5.2%

I think you mean counting the unemployed is the lowest for years. Scratch the service and there are self employed people who do not get enough work and rely on tax credits. People working on zero hours contract who do not get a decent weeks work.

Its just smoke and mirrors.

Alert a moderator to this post

reginald_maudling 17 Dec 15 11.01pm
Quote dannyh at 17 Dec 2015 8.15pm Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm sure all the finance ministers for Jermey Corbyn on here will do ) but if you are spending beyond your means that leads to debt, and more debt. The only way out is to lessen your spending. Choices have to be made as to what your are going to save on. Waitrose to Aldi, going out to staying in, Sky + HD to freeview, driving to public transport.Point is we've all had to make cuts when the times are tough, and this government I'm pleased to say, are making some good approaches to welfare regulation. You know they are on the right track when the great unwashed start marching on Number 10 amid a cloud of Lambert and Butler and weed, indignant to their very core that they may have to get a job if they wish to smoke a bar a week. Someone somewhere is going to have to take a bite of the shyte sandwich, in fact we all are really, look at how many were made redundant in the HM Forces, Jesus the Army is that small now we could all fit in Wembley stadium, without needing the pitch !!! 25 thousand proud men and women made redundant, and yet the scroungers are moaning about a £25000 cap on handouts! excuse me but fcuk the fcuk off. Social housing has always been an issue, always will be it's an expensive problem that has to wait in line just like the battered and nearly broken NHS. The point has been made, and I agree entirely with it, that accepting a mass of immigrants is in no way going to help the problem, unless of course they are all gazzilionaire house builders,surgeons and nurses. Cuts simply have to happen, it's never nice, but essential non the less. Edited by dannyh (17 Dec 2015 8.19pm) hand bag economics the national budget is not the same as a household budget
Alert a moderator to this post

reginald_maudling

17 Dec 15 11.01pm

Send a Private Message to reginald_maudling

Quote dannyh at 17 Dec 2015 8.15pm

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm sure all the finance ministers for Jermey Corbyn on here will do ) but if you are spending beyond your means that leads to debt, and more debt.

The only way out is to lessen your spending. Choices have to be made as to what your are going to save on.

Waitrose to Aldi, going out to staying in, Sky + HD to freeview, driving to public transport.Point is we've all had to make cuts when the times are tough, and this government I'm pleased to say, are making some good approaches to welfare regulation. You know they are on the right track when the great unwashed start marching on Number 10 amid a cloud of Lambert and Butler and weed, indignant to their very core that they may have to get a job if they wish to smoke a bar a week.

Someone somewhere is going to have to take a bite of the shyte sandwich, in fact we all are really, look at how many were made redundant in the HM Forces, Jesus the Army is that small now we could all fit in Wembley stadium, without needing the pitch !!! 25 thousand proud men and women made redundant, and yet the scroungers are moaning about a £25000 cap on handouts! excuse me but fcuk the fcuk off.

Social housing has always been an issue, always will be it's an expensive problem that has to wait in line just like the battered and nearly broken NHS.

The point has been made, and I agree entirely with it, that accepting a mass of immigrants is in no way going to help the problem, unless of course they are all gazzilionaire house builders,surgeons and nurses.

Cuts simply have to happen, it's never nice, but essential non the less.

Edited by dannyh (17 Dec 2015 8.19pm)

hand bag economics

the national budget is not the same as a household budget

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 18 Dec 15 1.57am
Quote reginald_maudling at 17 Dec 2015 11.01pm hand bag economics the national budget is not the same as a household budget Mmmmm...In some ways it is, in some ways it isn't. It's still a budget. Interest on our debt is rising as it would be for anyone in debt who isn't on top of their payments and we have to pay as much on interest repayments as we do on the defence budget. Sure capital can be raised but completely divorcing it from common sense with statements like yours is apart of the problem. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

18 Dec 15 1.57am

Quote reginald_maudling at 17 Dec 2015 11.01pm

hand bag economics

the national budget is not the same as a household budget

Mmmmm...In some ways it is, in some ways it isn't. It's still a budget. Interest on our debt is rising as it would be for anyone in debt who isn't on top of their payments and we have to pay as much on interest repayments as we do on the defence budget.

Sure capital can be raised but completely divorcing it from common sense with statements like yours is apart of the problem.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Ketteridge Brighton 18 Dec 15 7.01am
Quote Stirlingsays at 18 Dec 2015 1.57am Quote reginald_maudling at 17 Dec 2015 11.01pm hand bag economics the national budget is not the same as a household budget Mmmmm...In some ways it is, in some ways it isn't. It's still a budget. Interest on our debt is rising as it would be for anyone in debt who isn't on top of their payments and we have to pay as much on interest repayments as we do on the defence budget. Sure capital can be raised but completely divorcing it from common sense with statements like yours is apart of the problem. No it's not it is basic keynesian economics. It makes common sense as a narrative and ideal there shuld be no debt or deficit but since we hocked the nation's finance to bail out the banks we have a national debt and the debate needs to be how to deal with it. My household budget is fixed,income and outgoings largely set. If there is too much month at the end of the money,as Mrs Ketteridge likes to say,then we stay in. we don't have access to a money printing machine to create new money. This was the problem for Greece it couldn't print money to help pay off debt as it could effect the euro and the value of Germany exports. Secondly interest rates are at a historic low, it is the perfect time to borrow for sensible long term benefits. to use a household example if I'm stuck working on minimum wage is it more sensible for me to stick at it or borrow a few thousand at low rates do a plumbing course and triple my income,should I borrow to replace the dodgy boiler to half my outgoings? The analogy is the same, investing in infrastructure can reduce costs and increase tax receipts. A social housing building programme will employ skilled workers,bring in rent tax receipts and reduce housing benefit payments. Investing in solar and wind power will keep Britain on the leading edge of technology help exports, create new jobs and apprenticeship and stop us being reliant on foreign oil. The problem is austerity is sensible at an individual level but on national level is dangerous. One supporter of hacking argued that without it "you will do away with the courage and pluck of the game, and I will be bound to bring over a lot of Frenchmen who would beat you with a week's practice -Blackheath secretary at first meeting of the F.A
Alert a moderator to this post

Ketteridge

Brighton 18 Dec 15 7.01am

Quote Stirlingsays at 18 Dec 2015 1.57am

Quote reginald_maudling at 17 Dec 2015 11.01pm

hand bag economics

the national budget is not the same as a household budget

Sure capital can be raised but completely divorcing it from common sense with statements like yours is apart of the problem.

No it's not it is basic keynesian economics. It makes common sense as a narrative and ideal there shuld be no debt or deficit but since we hocked the nation's finance to bail out the banks we have a national debt and the debate needs to be how to deal with it.
My household budget is fixed,income and outgoings largely set. If there is too much month at the end of the money,as Mrs Ketteridge likes to say,then we stay in. we don't have access to a money printing machine to create new money. This was the problem for Greece it couldn't print money to help pay off debt as it could effect the euro and the value of Germany exports.
Secondly interest rates are at a historic low, it is the perfect time to borrow for sensible long term benefits. to use a household example if I'm stuck working on minimum wage is it more sensible for me to stick at it or borrow a few thousand at low rates do a plumbing course and triple my income,should I borrow to replace the dodgy boiler to half my outgoings?
The analogy is the same, investing in infrastructure can reduce costs and increase tax receipts. A social housing building programme will employ skilled workers,bring in rent tax receipts and reduce housing benefit payments. Investing in solar and wind power will keep Britain on the leading edge of technology help exports, create new jobs and apprenticeship and stop us being reliant on foreign oil.
The problem is austerity is sensible at an individual level but on national level is dangerous.

One supporter of hacking argued that without it "you will do away with the courage and pluck of the game, and I will be bound to bring over a lot of Frenchmen who would beat you with a week's practice -Blackheath secretary at first meeting of the F.A

Alert a moderator to this post

becky over the moon 18 Dec 15 8.09am
Quote Ketteridge at 18 Dec 2015 7.01am Quote Stirlingsays at 18 Dec 2015 1.57am Quote reginald_maudling at 17 Dec 2015 11.01pm hand bag economics the national budget is not the same as a household budget Mmmmm...In some ways it is, in some ways it isn't. It's still a budget. Interest on our debt is rising as it would be for anyone in debt who isn't on top of their payments and we have to pay as much on interest repayments as we do on the defence budget. Sure capital can be raised but completely divorcing it from common sense with statements like yours is apart of the problem. No it's not it is basic keynesian economics. It makes common sense as a narrative and ideal there shuld be no debt or deficit but since we hocked the nation's finance to bail out the banks we have a national debt and the debate needs to be how to deal with it. My household budget is fixed,income and outgoings largely set. If there is too much month at the end of the money,as Mrs Ketteridge likes to say,then we stay in. we don't have access to a money printing machine to create new money. This was the problem for Greece it couldn't print money to help pay off debt as it could effect the euro and the value of Germany exports. Secondly interest rates are at a historic low, it is the perfect time to borrow for sensible long term benefits. to use a household example if I'm stuck working on minimum wage is it more sensible for me to stick at it or borrow a few thousand at low rates do a plumbing course and triple my income,should I borrow to replace the dodgy boiler to half my outgoings? The analogy is the same, investing in infrastructure can reduce costs and increase tax receipts. A social housing building programme will employ skilled workers,bring in rent tax receipts and reduce housing benefit payments. Investing in solar and wind power will keep Britain on the leading edge of technology help exports, create new jobs and apprenticeship and stop us being reliant on foreign oil. The problem is austerity is sensible at an individual level but on national level is dangerous. Maybe I'm being dense but...... if the social housing is funded by either National or local government (as it must be to be true social housing), then there will be no rent tax receipts, only income to recover outlay and as for a reduction in housing benefit, I can only ask where will all these people suddenly get income of more than £26,000 p.a. to be able to pay full rent and council tax on these properties and reduce their benefit levels? Unemployed/unemployable in social housing will cost exactly the same as unemployed/unemployable in private rentals unless unreasonably low rent is charged on the social housing, which will leave more debt from the cost of construction to be paid for. A stairway to Heaven and a Highway to Hell give some indication of expected traffic numbers
Alert a moderator to this post \| Board Moderator

becky

over the moon 18 Dec 15 8.09am

Quote Ketteridge at 18 Dec 2015 7.01am

Quote Stirlingsays at 18 Dec 2015 1.57am

Quote reginald_maudling at 17 Dec 2015 11.01pm

hand bag economics

the national budget is not the same as a household budget

Sure capital can be raised but completely divorcing it from common sense with statements like yours is apart of the problem.

No it's not it is basic keynesian economics. It makes common sense as a narrative and ideal there shuld be no debt or deficit but since we hocked the nation's finance to bail out the banks we have a national debt and the debate needs to be how to deal with it.
My household budget is fixed,income and outgoings largely set. If there is too much month at the end of the money,as Mrs Ketteridge likes to say,then we stay in. we don't have access to a money printing machine to create new money. This was the problem for Greece it couldn't print money to help pay off debt as it could effect the euro and the value of Germany exports.
Secondly interest rates are at a historic low, it is the perfect time to borrow for sensible long term benefits. to use a household example if I'm stuck working on minimum wage is it more sensible for me to stick at it or borrow a few thousand at low rates do a plumbing course and triple my income,should I borrow to replace the dodgy boiler to half my outgoings?
The analogy is the same, investing in infrastructure can reduce costs and increase tax receipts. A social housing building programme will employ skilled workers,bring in rent tax receipts and reduce housing benefit payments. Investing in solar and wind power will keep Britain on the leading edge of technology help exports, create new jobs and apprenticeship and stop us being reliant on foreign oil.
The problem is austerity is sensible at an individual level but on national level is dangerous.

Maybe I'm being dense but...... if the social housing is funded by either National or local government (as it must be to be true social housing), then there will be no rent tax receipts, only income to recover outlay and as for a reduction in housing benefit, I can only ask where will all these people suddenly get income of more than £26,000 p.a. to be able to pay full rent and council tax on these properties and reduce their benefit levels?

Unemployed/unemployable in social housing will cost exactly the same as unemployed/unemployable in private rentals unless unreasonably low rent is charged on the social housing, which will leave more debt from the cost of construction to be paid for.

A stairway to Heaven and a Highway to Hell give some indication of expected traffic numbers

Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator

Catfish Burgess Hill 18 Dec 15 9.54am
Quote Ketteridge at 18 Dec 2015 7.01am Quote Stirlingsays at 18 Dec 2015 1.57am Quote reginald_maudling at 17 Dec 2015 11.01pm hand bag economics the national budget is not the same as a household budget Mmmmm...In some ways it is, in some ways it isn't. It's still a budget. Interest on our debt is rising as it would be for anyone in debt who isn't on top of their payments and we have to pay as much on interest repayments as we do on the defence budget. Sure capital can be raised but completely divorcing it from common sense with statements like yours is apart of the problem. No it's not it is basic keynesian economics. It makes common sense as a narrative and ideal there shuld be no debt or deficit but since we hocked the nation's finance to bail out the banks we have a national debt and the debate needs to be how to deal with it. My household budget is fixed,income and outgoings largely set. If there is too much month at the end of the money,as Mrs Ketteridge likes to say,then we stay in. we don't have access to a money printing machine to create new money. This was the problem for Greece it couldn't print money to help pay off debt as it could effect the euro and the value of Germany exports. Secondly interest rates are at a historic low, it is the perfect time to borrow for sensible long term benefits. to use a household example if I'm stuck working on minimum wage is it more sensible for me to stick at it or borrow a few thousand at low rates do a plumbing course and triple my income,should I borrow to replace the dodgy boiler to half my outgoings? The analogy is the same, investing in infrastructure can reduce costs and increase tax receipts. A social housing building programme will employ skilled workers,bring in rent tax receipts and reduce housing benefit payments. Investing in solar and wind power will keep Britain on the leading edge of technology help exports, create new jobs and apprenticeship and stop us being reliant on foreign oil. The problem is austerity is sensible at an individual level but on national level is dangerous. The argument breaks down at the point that debt reaches such a level that the international markets lose confidence that you have the means of paying it back. Yes, I am an agent of Satan but my duties are largely ceremonial
Alert a moderator to this post

Catfish

Burgess Hill 18 Dec 15 9.54am

Quote Ketteridge at 18 Dec 2015 7.01am

Quote Stirlingsays at 18 Dec 2015 1.57am

Quote reginald_maudling at 17 Dec 2015 11.01pm

hand bag economics

the national budget is not the same as a household budget

Sure capital can be raised but completely divorcing it from common sense with statements like yours is apart of the problem.

The argument breaks down at the point that debt reaches such a level that the international markets lose confidence that you have the means of paying it back.

Yes, I am an agent of Satan but my duties are largely ceremonial

Alert a moderator to this post

Percy of Peckham Eton Mess 18 Dec 15 10.26am
I've never had it so good! Denial is not just a river in Egypt!
Alert a moderator to this post

Percy of Peckham

Eton Mess 18 Dec 15 10.26am

Send a Private Message to Percy of Peckham

I've never had it so good!

Denial is not just a river in Egypt!

Alert a moderator to this post

silvertop Portishead 18 Dec 15 11.52am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 17 Dec 2015 11.54am Quote silvertop at 17 Dec 2015 11.52am We were unfavourably hit by the 2008 crisis because our economy is so heavily geared towards finance. We have been favourably blessed by the recovery as it was that sector that has made the biggest adjustment. Control over public spending has improved or credit rating and is one of many factors that has led to where we are now. However, the OP stating that the tight budget is the cause of low unemployment does not suggest a very savvy grip on the complexities of economics. Best stick to football. He's probably still more of an economics guru than Brown or Balls though.... LOL Now I am no Labour voter, but arch Tories like you conveniently forget that Labour ran up a huge budget and did a whole lot of other things that were not good. However, did they not also oversee an unprecedented period of prosperity? When Blaire was PM I saw a talk by the former head of economics at one of the big banks and he was completely smitten by Brown as Chancellor. Doing a fine job, apparently. Economics, politics - it's no easy science it is until you introduce dogma. Go on, you're dying to mention the gold sale...
Alert a moderator to this post

silvertop

Portishead 18 Dec 15 11.52am

Quote Hoof Hearted at 17 Dec 2015 11.54am

Quote silvertop at 17 Dec 2015 11.52am

We were unfavourably hit by the 2008 crisis because our economy is so heavily geared towards finance. We have been favourably blessed by the recovery as it was that sector that has made the biggest adjustment.

Control over public spending has improved or credit rating and is one of many factors that has led to where we are now.

However, the OP stating that the tight budget is the cause of low unemployment does not suggest a very savvy grip on the complexities of economics.

Best stick to football.

He's probably still more of an economics guru than Brown or Balls though.... LOL

Now I am no Labour voter, but arch Tories like you conveniently forget that Labour ran up a huge budget and did a whole lot of other things that were not good. However, did they not also oversee an unprecedented period of prosperity? When Blaire was PM I saw a talk by the former head of economics at one of the big banks and he was completely smitten by Brown as Chancellor. Doing a fine job, apparently.

Economics, politics - it's no easy science it is until you introduce dogma. Go on, you're dying to mention the gold sale...

Alert a moderator to this post

Hoof Hearted 18 Dec 15 12.41pm
Quote silvertop at 18 Dec 2015 11.52am Quote Hoof Hearted at 17 Dec 2015 11.54am Quote silvertop at 17 Dec 2015 11.52am We were unfavourably hit by the 2008 crisis because our economy is so heavily geared towards finance. We have been favourably blessed by the recovery as it was that sector that has made the biggest adjustment. Control over public spending has improved or credit rating and is one of many factors that has led to where we are now. However, the OP stating that the tight budget is the cause of low unemployment does not suggest a very savvy grip on the complexities of economics. Best stick to football. He's probably still more of an economics guru than Brown or Balls though.... LOL Now I am no Labour voter, but arch Tories like you conveniently forget that Labour ran up a huge budget and did a whole lot of other things that were not good. However, did they not also oversee an unprecedented period of prosperity? When Blaire was PM I saw a talk by the former head of economics at one of the big banks and he was completely smitten by Brown as Chancellor. Doing a fine job, apparently. Economics, politics - it's no easy science it is until you introduce dogma. Go on, you're dying to mention the gold sale... No I prefer Brown's claim to have put and end to boom and bust.......... he certainly put an end to boom!
Alert a moderator to this post

Hoof Hearted 18 Dec 15 12.41pm

Quote silvertop at 18 Dec 2015 11.52am

Quote Hoof Hearted at 17 Dec 2015 11.54am

Quote silvertop at 17 Dec 2015 11.52am

Control over public spending has improved or credit rating and is one of many factors that has led to where we are now.

However, the OP stating that the tight budget is the cause of low unemployment does not suggest a very savvy grip on the complexities of economics.

Best stick to football.

He's probably still more of an economics guru than Brown or Balls though.... LOL

Economics, politics - it's no easy science it is until you introduce dogma. Go on, you're dying to mention the gold sale...

No I prefer Brown's claim to have put and end to boom and bust.......... he certainly put an end to boom!

Alert a moderator to this post

Ketteridge Brighton 18 Dec 15 3.38pm
Quote Catfish at 18 Dec 2015 9.54am Quote Ketteridge at 18 Dec 2015 7.01am Quote Stirlingsays at 18 Dec 2015 1.57am Quote reginald_maudling at 17 Dec 2015 11.01pm hand bag economics the national budget is not the same as a household budget Mmmmm...In some ways it is, in some ways it isn't. It's still a budget. Interest on our debt is rising as it would be for anyone in debt who isn't on top of their payments and we have to pay as much on interest repayments as we do on the defence budget. Sure capital can be raised but completely divorcing it from common sense with statements like yours is apart of the problem. No it's not it is basic keynesian economics. It makes common sense as a narrative and ideal there shuld be no debt or deficit but since we hocked the nation's finance to bail out the banks we have a national debt and the debate needs to be how to deal with it. My household budget is fixed,income and outgoings largely set. If there is too much month at the end of the money,as Mrs Ketteridge likes to say,then we stay in. we don't have access to a money printing machine to create new money. This was the problem for Greece it couldn't print money to help pay off debt as it could effect the euro and the value of Germany exports. Secondly interest rates are at a historic low, it is the perfect time to borrow for sensible long term benefits. to use a household example if I'm stuck working on minimum wage is it more sensible for me to stick at it or borrow a few thousand at low rates do a plumbing course and triple my income,should I borrow to replace the dodgy boiler to half my outgoings? The analogy is the same, investing in infrastructure can reduce costs and increase tax receipts. A social housing building programme will employ skilled workers,bring in rent tax receipts and reduce housing benefit payments. Investing in solar and wind power will keep Britain on the leading edge of technology help exports, create new jobs and apprenticeship and stop us being reliant on foreign oil. The problem is austerity is sensible at an individual level but on national level is dangerous. The argument breaks down at the point that debt reaches such a level that the international markets lose confidence that you have the means of paying it back. well yeah but only to the same extent that austerity relies on you ability to keep your income up and continue to repay the debt. Britain lost the triple A rating in 2013 when gdp start to stall because of austerity not in 2008 when debt was taken out to re-start the economy. I'm not talking about an irresponsible splurge and towing Britain to the Caribbean for some winter sun but sensible investment in infrastructure. To go back to the earlier analogy who would you lend money to the person in insecure job on minimum wage who lives or the person who wants to borrow money to do the plumbing course and triple wage. Assuming both are responsible of course One supporter of hacking argued that without it "you will do away with the courage and pluck of the game, and I will be bound to bring over a lot of Frenchmen who would beat you with a week's practice -Blackheath secretary at first meeting of the F.A
Alert a moderator to this post

Ketteridge

Brighton 18 Dec 15 3.38pm

Quote Catfish at 18 Dec 2015 9.54am

Quote Ketteridge at 18 Dec 2015 7.01am

Quote Stirlingsays at 18 Dec 2015 1.57am

Quote reginald_maudling at 17 Dec 2015 11.01pm

hand bag economics

the national budget is not the same as a household budget

Sure capital can be raised but completely divorcing it from common sense with statements like yours is apart of the problem.

The argument breaks down at the point that debt reaches such a level that the international markets lose confidence that you have the means of paying it back.

well yeah but only to the same extent that austerity relies on you ability to keep your income up and continue to repay the debt. Britain lost the triple A rating in 2013 when gdp start to stall because of austerity not in 2008 when debt was taken out to re-start the economy.
I'm not talking about an irresponsible splurge and towing Britain to the Caribbean for some winter sun but sensible investment in infrastructure.
To go back to the earlier analogy who would you lend money to the person in insecure job on minimum wage who lives or the person who wants to borrow money to do the plumbing course and triple wage. Assuming both are responsible of course

Alert a moderator to this post

Ketteridge Brighton 18 Dec 15 3.55pm
Quote becky at 18 Dec 2015 8.09am Quote Ketteridge at 18 Dec 2015 7.01am Quote Stirlingsays at 18 Dec 2015 1.57am Quote reginald_maudling at 17 Dec 2015 11.01pm hand bag economics the national budget is not the same as a household budget Mmmmm...In some ways it is, in some ways it isn't. It's still a budget. Interest on our debt is rising as it would be for anyone in debt who isn't on top of their payments and we have to pay as much on interest repayments as we do on the defence budget. Sure capital can be raised but completely divorcing it from common sense with statements like yours is apart of the problem. No it's not it is basic keynesian economics. It makes common sense as a narrative and ideal there shuld be no debt or deficit but since we hocked the nation's finance to bail out the banks we have a national debt and the debate needs to be how to deal with it. My household budget is fixed,income and outgoings largely set. If there is too much month at the end of the money,as Mrs Ketteridge likes to say,then we stay in. we don't have access to a money printing machine to create new money. This was the problem for Greece it couldn't print money to help pay off debt as it could effect the euro and the value of Germany exports. Secondly interest rates are at a historic low, it is the perfect time to borrow for sensible long term benefits. to use a household example if I'm stuck working on minimum wage is it more sensible for me to stick at it or borrow a few thousand at low rates do a plumbing course and triple my income,should I borrow to replace the dodgy boiler to half my outgoings? The analogy is the same, investing in infrastructure can reduce costs and increase tax receipts. A social housing building programme will employ skilled workers,bring in rent tax receipts and reduce housing benefit payments. Investing in solar and wind power will keep Britain on the leading edge of technology help exports, create new jobs and apprenticeship and stop us being reliant on foreign oil. The problem is austerity is sensible at an individual level but on national level is dangerous. Maybe I'm being dense but...... if the social housing is funded by either National or local government (as it must be to be true social housing), then there will be no rent tax receipts, only income to recover outlay and as for a reduction in housing benefit, I can only ask where will all these people suddenly get income of more than £26,000 p.a. to be able to pay full rent and council tax on these properties and reduce their benefit levels? Unemployed/unemployable in social housing will cost exactly the same as unemployed/unemployable in private rentals unless unreasonably low rent is charged on the social housing, which will leave more debt from the cost of construction to be paid for. You are not being dense,I was trying to be too smart writing on the train at 6:40 before my first coffee kicked in.I forgot the comma should read rent,tax receipts. The tax receipts coming from income tax and corporation tax of those building the houses. The reduction in housing benefit comes from firstly not having to charge a market rate but as you say a rate that covers cost. Secondly we pay out roughly £30billion a year in housing benefits much of this to private landlords. any sensible landlord would reinvest this into property. this increases demand and inflates the housing market further meaning more people have to rent for longer pushing up prices further. which of course means more spent on housing benefit and more profit for landlords. Social housing doesn't need and shouldn't be just for unemployed or unemployable but for a range of people. Sorry if there are any typos still on my phone One supporter of hacking argued that without it "you will do away with the courage and pluck of the game, and I will be bound to bring over a lot of Frenchmen who would beat you with a week's practice -Blackheath secretary at first meeting of the F.A
Alert a moderator to this post

Ketteridge

Brighton 18 Dec 15 3.55pm

Quote becky at 18 Dec 2015 8.09am

Quote Ketteridge at 18 Dec 2015 7.01am

Quote Stirlingsays at 18 Dec 2015 1.57am

Quote reginald_maudling at 17 Dec 2015 11.01pm

hand bag economics

the national budget is not the same as a household budget

Sure capital can be raised but completely divorcing it from common sense with statements like yours is apart of the problem.

No it's not it is basic keynesian economics. It makes common sense as a narrative and ideal there shuld be no debt or deficit but since we hocked the nation's finance to bail out the banks we have a national debt and the debate needs to be how to deal with it.
My household budget is fixed,income and outgoings largely set. If there is too much month at the end of the money,as Mrs Ketteridge likes to say,then we stay in. we don't have access to a money printing machine to create new money. This was the problem for Greece it couldn't print money to help pay off debt as it could effect the euro and the value of Germany exports.
Secondly interest rates are at a historic low, it is the perfect time to borrow for sensible long term benefits. to use a household example if I'm stuck working on minimum wage is it more sensible for me to stick at it or borrow a few thousand at low rates do a plumbing course and triple my income,should I borrow to replace the dodgy boiler to half my outgoings?
The analogy is the same, investing in infrastructure can reduce costs and increase tax receipts. A social housing building programme will employ skilled workers,bring in rent tax receipts and reduce housing benefit payments. Investing in solar and wind power will keep Britain on the leading edge of technology help exports, create new jobs and apprenticeship and stop us being reliant on foreign oil.
The problem is austerity is sensible at an individual level but on national level is dangerous.

You are not being dense,I was trying to be too smart writing on the train at 6:40 before my first coffee kicked in.I forgot the comma should read rent,tax receipts.
The tax receipts coming from income tax and corporation tax of those building the houses.
The reduction in housing benefit comes from firstly not having to charge a market rate but as you say a rate that covers cost.
Secondly we pay out roughly £30billion a year in housing benefits much of this to private landlords. any sensible landlord would reinvest this into property. this increases demand and inflates the housing market further meaning more people have to rent for longer pushing up prices further. which of course means more spent on housing benefit and more profit for landlords.
Social housing doesn't need and shouldn't be just for unemployed or unemployable but for a range of people.
Sorry if there are any typos still on my phone

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 5 of 15 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Austerity Works

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors