1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

General Election - will you be voting?

Discussion in 'Personal' started by install, Sep 15, 2019.

  1. irs1054

    irs1054 Star commenter

    On the contrary you have not read anything I have said:

    There is no link between the events you have described and the austerity program introduced by the Cameron Government. It was completely unnecessary. It was simply an excuse to follow a hard right wing agenda and put the blame on someone else to deflect criticism and you fell for it.
  2. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Lead commenter

    To be fair, their generalised documents . I don't think there's much argumement altough this is a revelaing paragraph:

    "• A vast range of regulations on the financial services industry should either be abolished or watered down, including money-laundering restrictions affecting banks and building societies. Mr Redwood's group also sees "no need to continue" to regulate mortgage provision, saying it is the lender, not the client, who takes the risk."​

    I wonder how moot it is, as it was Labour's wish to find a way to provide "free" housing to poor people. First way economics was you sort your own hous and you have to have cast iron work to back up your mortgage.
    Second way was the state builds the houses.
    Third way: banks loan to anyone and everyone and the state makes a commitment to back up the banks if things go wrong. (Which they did) (My mate bought a flat on a 100% mortgage using cashback for the deposit, in the 90s)
    install and nomad like this.
  3. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Lead commenter

    The 2008 crash happened. It was the result of the subprime mortgage bubble.
    install likes this.
  4. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Lead commenter

    Additionally, it is the EU that directs economic policy.
    In2013, Ed milliband anounved that Labour would have to make cuts to public services. Labour and the LibDems vote against universal credit.

    This is what the EU has told the UK to do under EU Deficit Policy since 2010, a power it was given by Labour in the Lisbon Treaty. I quote directly from EU CSRs freely available on the EU website:

    2011 - Implement the planned fiscal consolidation aiming at a deficit of 6.2% of GDP in 2012-13, ensuring no slippage from the ambitious spending reduction targets, thereby strengthening long-term sustainability.

    2012 - Fully implement the budgetary strategy for the financial year 2012/13 and reinforce the budgetary strategy for the financial year 2013/14 and beyond, supported by sufficiently specified measures, to ensure a timely correction of the excessive deficit in a sustainable manner.

    2013 - Implement a reinforced budgetary strategy, supported by sufficiently specified measures, for the year 2013-14 and beyond. Ensure the correction of the excessive deficit in a sustainable manner by 2014/15, and the achievement of the fiscal effort specified in the Council recommendations under the EDP and set the high public debt ratio on a sustained downward path.

    2014 - Reinforce the budgetary strategy, endeavouring to correct the excessive deficit in a sustainable manner in line with the Council recommendation under the Excessive Deficit Procedure.

    2015 - Ensure effective action under the excessive deficit procedure and endeavour to correct the excessive deficit in a durable manner by 2016-17, in particular by prioritising capital expenditure.

    2016 - Endeavour to correct the excessive deficit in a durable manner by 2016-17. Following the correction of the excessive deficit, achieve a fiscal adjustment of 0,6 % of GDP in 2017-18 towards the minimum medium-term budgetary objective.

    2017 - Pursue its fiscal policy in line with the requirements of the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact, which translates into a substantial fiscal effort for 2018. When taking policy action, consideration should be given to achieving a fiscal stance that contributes to both strengthening the ongoing recovery and ensuring the sustainability of United Kingdom’s public finances.

    2018 - Ensure that the nominal growth rate of net primary government expenditure does not exceed 1.6 % in 2019-2020, corresponding to an annual structural adjustment of 0.6 % of GDP.

    2019 - Ensure that the nominal growth rate of net primary government expenditure does not exceed 1.9% in 2020-2021, corresponding to an annual structural adjustment of 0.6% of GDP.​
    install likes this.
  5. Scintillant

    Scintillant Star commenter

    The global financial crisis was caused by events in America.

    I am amazed people are arguing otherwise.

    Some countries were impacted more than others, but all major economies suffered.

    Deregulation of the financial markets in the UK was started by Thatcher and continued by other governments. David Cameron was pressing for even more deregulation than Labour provided.
    vannie likes this.
  6. Scintillant

    Scintillant Star commenter

    Well done. You're a quick learner.
  7. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Lead commenter

    The events that led to this explosion of Debt are both EU-related. John Major caused a recession in the 90s with his ERM fiasco, taking National Debt from 150 to 320 BN, and New Labour bubbled us to a Financial Crash because Blair wanted a feel-good boom to get the country to join the Euro. Gordon Brown locked us into the Deficit machinery of Brussels to save the City, which lends half of the capital to Euroland.
  8. nomad

    nomad Star commenter


    So it was all about dodgy American mortgages?

    No. Subprime itself was not the root cause of the crisis. At its peak in 2007 the size of the market was around $1.3 trillion. That’s in the context of total assets at that time of around $242 trillion. The subprime farrago merely revealed the underlying fragility of the system.

    Bank executives had been juicing their profits (and personal bonuses) by running down their protective capital cushions to thin slithers – funding their fast-expanding balance sheets with huge amounts of debt rather than shareholders’ funds. Their reserves of readily-sellable assets were also dangerously low.

    The entire Western banking system was catastrophically undercapitalised and illiquid. And this was true not just in the US and the UK but across Europe too. If they had had more robust balance sheets there would still have been a crisis as the bad lending bubble burst, but it would not have become the near total meltdown we saw in September 2008.

    According to the International Monetary Fund there had been more than 120 banking crises, involving bad lending, between 1970 and 2007. This was an order of magnitude worse than any of those. The reason was not the scale of the bad lending, but the staggering vulnerability of the global system.
  9. Kandahar

    Kandahar Lead commenter

    Perhaps it was down to a banker's dodgy keyboard!
    nomad likes this.
  10. irs1054

    irs1054 Star commenter

    But nothing to do with the austerity introduced by the Tories.

    No it doesn't, it offers advice not that you understand that concept.

    Labour wasn't in power and didn't get in power so this is irrelevant. (Cuts in public spending wasn't necessary) Voting against UC is a plus.

    No they didn't, they advised. There is nothing EU law that compels the Government to act on that advice. They may try to take note and at least be guided by it but that is their choice.
  11. NoseyMatronType

    NoseyMatronType Star commenter

    ‘Over the last three decades, economists played an important role in creating the conditions of the 2008 crisis (and dozens of smaller financial crises that came before it since the early 1980’s, such as the 1982 Third World debt crisis, the 1995 Mexican peso crisis, the 1997 Asian crisis and the 1998 Russian crisis) by providing theoretical justifications for financial deregulation and the unrestrained pursuit of short term profits. More broadly, they advanced theories that justified the policies that have led to slower economic growth, higher inequality, heightened job insecurity and more frequent financial crises that have dogged the world in the last three decades. On top of that, they pushed for policies that weakened the prospects for long term development in developing countries.
    In the rich countries, these economists encouraged people to overestimate the power of new technologies, made people’s lives more and more unstable, made them ignore the loss of national control over the economy and rendered them complacent about de-industrialisation.
    Moreover, they supplied arguments that insist that all those economic outcomes that many find objectionable in this world - such as rising inequality, sky-high executive salaries or extreme poverty in poor countries- are really inevitable, given (selfish and rational) human nature and the need to reward people according to their productive contributions.
    In other words, economics has been worse than irrelevant. Economics, as it has been practised in the last three decades, has been positively harmful for most people.’
    - Ha Joon Chang from his book ‘23 Things They Don’t Tell You About Capitalism’

    Just thought this wider context might be needed given the ongoing discussion of 2008.
    MAGAorMIGA and Scintillant like this.
  12. Scintillant

    Scintillant Star commenter

  13. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    How should it have been financed?
    Kandahar likes this.
  14. florian gassmann

    florian gassmann Star commenter

    And yet, after all that, we are expected to believe economists when they say that leaving the EU will be bad for the UK economy? :eek:
    install, alex_teccy and Kandahar like this.
  15. Kandahar

    Kandahar Lead commenter

    Absolutely spot on - and an excellent argument against the EU - and a return to the Green Party green economics pre-2006.
  16. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Lead commenter

    No, it's not their choice. That's why the UK has been driving down the deficit. It's currently at 85% the target is 60%.

    It's not optional not is it advisory. Memer states that cannot mee their targets are subject to EU procedure e.g. Excessive Defict Proceedures, as happend to Gordon Brown.
    install and Kandahar like this.
  17. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Lead commenter

    Look at the facts. Major’s ERM experiment turned the 90s into a decade of recession, called ‘the Negative Equity Nineties’, followed by 18 years in the political wilderness. In a second push to secure a hostile public to favour the Euro and Constitutional Treay in the Millennium, New Labour copied sub prime banking from the US to end negative equity misery in the UK and cheer people up with a boom based on easy credit. This credit bubble led us, and others, to the Financial Crash in 2008, and all the consequences flowing from that, including our vote in 2016 to leave the EU.
    install likes this.
  18. Scintillant

    Scintillant Star commenter

    You make more sense when you keep it simple:

  19. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Lead commenter

    I'll try to use less big words for you in future.
    install likes this.
  20. Scintillant

    Scintillant Star commenter

    Try using fewer.
    Duke of York likes this.

Share This Page