Archive for Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Scottish Politics Discussion Forum / Messageboard - Dedicated to online discussion about Scottish Politics and an Independent Scotland, as well as Scottish Society today. We also have a section dedicated to Banter, Sport and Recommended Sites.
|
Stevie
|
Labour spinning into oblivion.Just saw John Holloway MP apologising for their 'c**k up' with respect to funding the army. He was using his hands a great deal to express the conviction of his spoken words.
It's just another familiar Labour apology with inferior spin compared to Tony Blair's spin.
Did Tony ever apologise or did he just spin so fast he didn't fall down?
I've never heard a government make such a steady flow of apologies before.
Well, they're spinning in a downward spiral.
The rotting corpse of Labour is still making groaning noises...
|
Fidget
|
I've noticed that as well over the years. Their "lessons have been learnt" buzz phrase has become more and more nauseating over the years.
|
Alasdair
|
Everyone's at it, it just stings more when those who should be upright and honest and doing the best for those whom they represent are more interested in protecting their party image and party line.
Afterall, how would any of them ever get re-elected if they told us the straightforward truth.
|
Fidget
|
It's been one of Labour's tricks for years - the party line seems to have been "we've made a mistake, we're sorry and lessons have been learnt" as a means of keeping the electorate happy. Scary thing is the length of time that it's worked as well.
|
Alasdair
|
| Fidget wrote: | | It's been one of Labour's tricks for years - the party line seems to have been "we've made a mistake, we're sorry and lessons have been learnt" as a means of keeping the electorate happy. Scary thing is the length of time that it's worked as well. |
I heard some commentator saying just this the other day, the whole 'lessons learnt' mantra really is wearing a bit thin.
|
Fidget
|
I'm surprised it hasn't made the dictionary yet.. I can just see it: "Lessons Learnt: Used in conjuction with other words as a means of getting oneself off the hook". 
|
Stevie
|
Yet another Labour blunder.
John Howell busy justifying firing a government scientist who expounded an opinion the government didn't share that LSD and canabis are less harmful than booze and cigarettes.
Howell looked rosy cheeked and pink faced, rather like an alkie. Maybe he didn't appreciate his habit being picked on.
|
Ultra
|
| Stevie wrote: | Yet another Labour blunder.
John Howell busy justifying firing a government scientist who expounded an opinion the government didn't share that LSD and canabis are less harmful than booze and cigarettes.
Howell looked rosy cheeked and pink faced, rather like an alkie. Maybe he didn't appreciate his habit being picked on. |
This ex-Government Scientist also his kids who take drugs.
Most folk in the drug scene would agree with the Government on this one along with alot of the medical profession who treat drug abuse.
Cigarettes and alcohol are controlled and have quality control on their strengths. They are still harmful.
Most street drugs have no such quality control and the people taking them have no idea whats in them or who strong the drugs are. You also don't need to take that many LSD tabs or E for it to kill you or cause severe mental problems.
|
landg
|
i ask you to take notice of my 'insufflating' post. i have forgotten more than i suspect most here even know on the subject of substance misuse.
this government scientists is a crank and was rightly fired.
illicit drugs are bad.
alcohol is bad.
tobaco is bad.
all 3 kill people.
only 2 are regulated and subject to quality control.
only 1 is cut to f**k with pigeon s**t, bleach,glass, opiates, mdma, cocaine, gbh, amphetamine, illict chemicals and whatever your friendly neighborhood drug dealer chooses to put in it.
only 1 directly funds slavery, female and male sex trade victims, terrorism, gangsterism and mass murder on a worldwide scale.
only 1 will be sold to an unsuspecting 15 year old down the park so that he can 'check it out' cos 'it's safer than horseriding'.
feel free to advise your 15 year old son on which subtance he should moderately use on his first big night out with the boys or down the park.
|
Alasdair
|
The quality control arguement is one for the legalisation and control of illegal drugs. Also the fact that they can then be taxed.
If the drugs aren't in the control of the crooks then they can't be related to all the nasty things listed above.
Certainly there is an arguement to be made over severity of the effects on health caused by certain drugs, but lets face it, you put crap into your body - be it legal, prescribed, or illegal - then ultimately it's going to have an ill effect.
These things are out there though and they are available and labelling them as illegal doesn't stop that, it just increases the dangers amongst the community who take them.
Personally I'm happy for access to be severely restricted, however, for a great many people illegal drugs are effectively freely available.
The arguement that some should be legalised and controlled via licencing is a valid one. However, if we look at the prolification of the availablity of alcohol then we can see that licencing needs to be tightened up and strictly controlled.
|
Braveheart
|
| Alasdair wrote: |
Afterall, how would any of them ever get re-elected if they told us the straightforward truth. |
Alasdair, you do realise that by using that line, you are blaming the electorate...?
| Quote: | | Afterall, how would any of them ever get re-elected if they told us the straightforward truth |
Do you mean the straightforward truth as in: "Vote SNP and Scotland and the Scottish people will, more than likely, be worse off economically"...?
Now who would vote for that...?
Do you think it would better to lie outright, like:"Vote SNP and we'll match Labour's school-building programme brick-for-brick"....?
What do you think?
|
Stevie
|
Ah, Braveheart is a Brit Nat.
Odd choice of name really; I'd have thought Lionheart or something more aligned with his philosophy.
|
Alasdair
|
| Braveheart wrote: | | What do you think? |
I think your examples are speculative and could be applied to any party.
Here's a specific example from the Labour party:
"We'll give you a vote on the Lisbon treaty", the reality obviously being the opposite.
The labour party is actually a prime example given that it's party line of "the people's party" is a blatant misnomer when recent evidence and evidence over the last ten years has shown them to be the party of big business and didgy bankers.
And remember in your response, when you start telling us about the failings of the SNP in power, that the Westminster parliament is run by government with a majority meanwhile if the SNP wants to pass any of it's manifesto committment it requires to negotiate a compromise.
|
Holebender
|
| Alasdair wrote: | | the Westminster parliament is run by government with a majority |
Which was elected by about a third of the people who actually voted. Go figure.
|
Braveheart
|
| Alasdair wrote: | | Braveheart wrote: | | What do you think? |
I think your examples are speculative and could be applied to any party.
Here's a specific example from the Labour party:
"We'll give you a vote on the Lisbon treaty", the reality obviously being the opposite.
The labour party is actually a prime example given that it's party line of "the people's party" is a blatant misnomer when recent evidence and evidence over the last ten years has shown them to be the party of big business and didgy bankers.
And remember in your response, when you start telling us about the failings of the SNP in power, that the Westminster parliament is run by government with a majority meanwhile if the SNP wants to pass any of it's manifesto committment it requires to negotiate a compromise. |
| Quote: | | I think your examples are speculative and could be applied to any party. |
So if, as many contributorshere seem to think, the main parties are a bunch of liars and frauds, it's ok for the SNP to be liars and frauds as well?
Or, even if the main parties aren't a bunch of liars and frauds, it's ok for the SNP to be a bunch of liars and frauds on their own-io....?
ps the Labour Party said that there would be referendum if the European Constitution was resurrected. They argue taht the Lisbon Treaty is not the European Constitution resurrected. You may disagree...
..but that doesn't mean that the SNP has abolished Studend Debt, or built a school or anything at all...s
|
Stevie
|
| landg wrote: | | i ask you to take notice of my 'insufflating' post. i have forgotten more than i suspect most here even know on the subject of substance misuse. |
I think judging by some your other world posting, people here will bow to your superior knowledge.
|
landg
|
| Alasdair wrote: | The quality control arguement is one for the legalisation and control of illegal drugs. Also the fact that they can then be taxed.
If the drugs aren't in the control of the crooks then they can't be related to all the nasty things listed above.
Certainly there is an arguement to be made over severity of the effects on health caused by certain drugs, but lets face it, you put crap into your body - be it legal, prescribed, or illegal - then ultimately it's going to have an ill effect.
These things are out there though and they are available and labelling them as illegal doesn't stop that, it just increases the dangers amongst the community who take them.
Personally I'm happy for access to be severely restricted, however, for a great many people illegal drugs are effectively freely available.
The arguement that some should be legalised and controlled via licencing is a valid one. However, if we look at the prolification of the availablity of alcohol then we can see that licencing needs to be tightened up and strictly controlled. |
2 words that should make any sensible minded person shy away from legalising current illicit substances.
alcohol and tobaco.
we can't even do them right and we should add to the list?
f***ing insane.
|
Stevie
|
Looks like rosy cheeked Home secretary John Howell is about to face a mass resignation at the treatment of Professor Nutt.
Labour just seem to have a knack of turning a drama into a crisis.
It takes a special kind of talent really.
|
Holebender
|
| landg wrote: | | Alasdair wrote: | The quality control arguement is one for the legalisation and control of illegal drugs. Also the fact that they can then be taxed.
If the drugs aren't in the control of the crooks then they can't be related to all the nasty things listed above.
Certainly there is an arguement to be made over severity of the effects on health caused by certain drugs, but lets face it, you put crap into your body - be it legal, prescribed, or illegal - then ultimately it's going to have an ill effect.
These things are out there though and they are available and labelling them as illegal doesn't stop that, it just increases the dangers amongst the community who take them.
Personally I'm happy for access to be severely restricted, however, for a great many people illegal drugs are effectively freely available.
The arguement that some should be legalised and controlled via licencing is a valid one. However, if we look at the prolification of the availablity of alcohol then we can see that licencing needs to be tightened up and strictly controlled. |
2 words that should make any sensible minded person shy away from legalising current illicit substances.
alcohol and tobaco.
we can't even do them right and we should add to the list?
f***ing insane. |
I'll give you one word in response; prohibition. If you want to create a thriving illegal, unregulated, market for something, ban it. The gangsters just love prohibition.
Now, how about you back up your posts in the Iran thread, or continue to stand accused of being a liar?
|
Alasdair
|
| landg wrote: | 2 words that should make any sensible minded person shy away from legalising current illicit substances.
alcohol and tobaco.
we can't even do them right and we should add to the list?
f***ing insane. |
The real problem with alcohol and cigarettes is a failure to appropriately control them, personally I doubt the veracity of the arguement that there would be a large black market for cigarettes in the long term I doubt the same could be said for alcohol.
Ultimately cigarettes probably will be banned on public health grounds. Alcohol is a different matter and attempts are currently being made to reduce availability without moving towards a ban. Alcohol prohibition is a non-starter, but stricter control is entirely plausible without increasing the risk illegal trading.
I can't say I'm in favour of the liberalisation of drug control, although I'm not sure I'm entirely against it either. Earlier in the thread someone highlights the dangers of illegal drugs in regard to what they may be cut or mixed with, at least if certain 'softer' drugs were available via a strictly controlled licencing scheme then the consumer would have some level of certain in regard to purity and we'd also remove a major revenue stream for 'gangsters' who are also involved in much more vile criminal activities.
The other advantage would be that the government could slap a massive tax levy on them!
The real problem of legalisation can already be seen in relation to alcohol, as landg alludes to, although this is borne of cultural issues and more specifically a failure to adequately control the availability.
As I say, I'm really on the fence on this one.
|
Ultra
|
| Alasdair wrote: | | landg wrote: | 2 words that should make any sensible minded person shy away from legalising current illicit substances.
alcohol and tobaco.
we can't even do them right and we should add to the list?
f***ing insane. |
The real problem with alcohol and cigarettes is a failure to appropriately control them, personally I doubt the veracity of the arguement that there would be a large black market for cigarettes in the long term I doubt the same could be said for alcohol.
Ultimately cigarettes probably will be banned on public health grounds. Alcohol is a different matter and attempts are currently being made to reduce availability without moving towards a ban. Alcohol prohibition is a non-starter, but stricter control is entirely plausible without increasing the risk illegal trading.
I can't say I'm in favour of the liberalisation of drug control, although I'm not sure I'm entirely against it either. Earlier in the thread someone highlights the dangers of illegal drugs in regard to what they may be cut or mixed with, at least if certain 'softer' drugs were available via a strictly controlled licencing scheme then the consumer would have some level of certain in regard to purity and we'd also remove a major revenue stream for 'gangsters' who are also involved in much more vile criminal activities.
The other advantage would be that the government could slap a massive tax levy on them!
The real problem of legalisation can already be seen in relation to alcohol, as landg alludes to, although this is borne of cultural issues and more specifically a failure to adequately control the availability.
As I say, I'm really on the fence on this one. |
Do you think gangsters who have millions of pounds worth of stock sitting somewhere are just going to disappear?
Or maybe they could just set up legitimate businesses when drugs are legalized?
Alcohol and cigarettes are already taxed. Doesn't stop a black market operating and no tax being paid on them. Doesn't stop whisky lorries being hi-jacked on a weekly basis. Most gangsters prefer these markets than drugs as the penalties if you get cuaght are far less.
|
Alasdair
|
| Ultra wrote: | | Do you think gangsters who have millions of pounds worth of stock sitting somewhere are just going to disappear? |
No, I imagine they would either attempt to leak it into the legitimate business, I would expect safeguards to be put into place to protect against such issues. Safeguards already exist in the phramacutical, drink and food industries to protect against contamination, similar measures might be appropriate in a legalised system.
TBH, though I imagine production in the UK is worked on a JIT basis avoiding the need to store large quanities of stock.
| Ultra wrote: | | Or maybe they could just set up legitimate businesses when drugs are legalized? |
Well, we'd hope that such people where they hav ebeen previously identified would be excluded from being involved in the industry, wouldn't we?
| ultra wrote: | | Alcohol and cigarettes are already taxed. Doesn't stop a black market operating and no tax being paid on them. Doesn't stop whisky lorries being hi-jacked on a weekly basis. Most gangsters prefer these markets than drugs as the penalties if you get cuaght are far less. |
Well that's an enforcement and judicial issue really isn't it.
However, I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that the black market in these goods is far smaller than it would be if these legitimate markets did not exist.
|
Aventinian
|
| Ultra wrote: | | Do you think gangsters who have millions of pounds worth of stock sitting somewhere are just going to disappear? |
Ultimately, yes. The exist to exploit organised crime - simple market forces. If there's no money to be made in that, then they will disappear, just like - for example - clothing repair shops have in so many towns throughout the country.
| Quote: | | Or maybe they could just set up legitimate businesses when drugs are legalized? |
I suppose they could. Good on them.
| Quote: | | Alcohol and cigarettes are already taxed. Doesn't stop a black market operating and no tax being paid on them. Doesn't stop whisky lorries being hi-jacked on a weekly basis. Most gangsters prefer these markets than drugs as the penalties if you get cuaght are far less. |
Indeed, that's because they are taxed to a ridiculous and price-distorting level. I think alcohol and tobacco duty is morally indefensible. I would not seek to have such a distortion for drugs, if they were legalised. However, of course, these things are rather harder to import than cigarettes and illicit booze, reducing the potential profit margins.
|
Shagpile
|
| Aventinian wrote: | | Ultra wrote: | | Do you think gangsters who have millions of pounds worth of stock sitting somewhere are just going to disappear? |
Ultimately, yes. The exist to exploit organised crime - simple market forces. If there's no money to be made in that, then they will disappear, just like - for example - clothing repair shops have in so many towns throughout the country.
| Quote: | | Or maybe they could just set up legitimate businesses when drugs are legalized? |
I suppose they could. Good on them.
| Quote: | | Alcohol and cigarettes are already taxed. Doesn't stop a black market operating and no tax being paid on them. Doesn't stop whisky lorries being hi-jacked on a weekly basis. Most gangsters prefer these markets than drugs as the penalties if you get cuaght are far less. |
Indeed, that's because they are taxed to a ridiculous and price-distorting level. I think alcohol and tobacco duty is morally indefensible. I would not seek to have such a distortion for drugs, if they were legalised. However, of course, these things are rather harder to import than cigarettes and illicit booze, reducing the potential profit margins. |
Good post Aventinian...... spot on!
Gordon Brown created a black market, more profitable to the smugglers than illicit drugs. A lot of honest, law abiding and hard working people have had their private cars ceased by customs because the were 'over the limit' returning from their "booze cruise".
|
Stevie
|
Brown snubbed by everybody in the world that counts.
He wanted to put his unworkable tax on financial transactions into the conference in st Andrews and all the financial ministers that count basically said, "silly boy, be quiet".
The Brit Nats score another zero here. Brown thinks of himself as 'SuperBritNat'. The Brit Nats do live in dreamlands of empire's lost.
Oh, and Darling is defining £5 billion in spending cuts in April. Hot on the heels of massive debt levels (the biggest of any developed nation in Europe', huge unemployment, recession entrenched and so on and on.
GB Plc. is in administration it just doesn't want to admit it.
|
Ultra
|
| Stevie wrote: | Brown snubbed by everybody in the world that counts.
He wanted to put his unworkable tax on financial transactions into the conference in st Andrews and all the financial ministers that count basically said, "silly boy, be quiet".
The Brit Nats score another zero here. Brown thinks of himself as 'SuperBritNat'. The Brit Nats do live in dreamlands of empire's lost.
Oh, and Darling is defining £5 billion in spending cuts in April. Hot on the heels of massive debt levels (the biggest of any developed nation in Europe', huge unemployment, recession entrenched and so on and on.
GB Plc. is in administration it just doesn't want to admit it. |
Biggest debt of any developed nation? Prove it Stevie.
Huge unemployment? The US has 10% just now. What's the UK's? Ireland's? Scotland is even higher than that the rest of the UK.
None of the above affects you as you don't live here or contribute taxes. So why comment?
Is the grass not greener in France Stevie?
|
Stevie
|
In Europe.
You know it's the case. Biggest personal debt as well with the lowest level of savings.
Actually, the USA is the only country worse off. You'll get the proof very soon with the Darling spending cuts in April, followed rapidly by D Cam's NHS spending cuts (and many more to follow).
|
Ultra
|
| Stevie wrote: | In Europe.
You know it's the case. Biggest personal debt as well with the lowest level of savings.
Actually, the USA is the only country worse off. You'll get the proof very soon with the Darling spending cuts in April, followed rapidly by D Cam's NHS spending cuts (and many more to follow). |
Prove it. Supply some evidence?
What about the SNP spending cuts already announced Stevie? Would you like to comment on those?
|
Stevie
|
| Quote: | £2trillion - the terrifying total of our national debt... that's £33,000 for every man, woman and child in Britain
Prudent? Gordon Brown
The staggering total of Britain's national debt was laid bare yesterday - at least £2trillion.
That represents £33,000 for every man, woman and child in the country.
Bank bailouts will send debt 'off the Richter scale' at a staggering 147 per cent of national income, the worst figure since 1954 and one of the highest in the developed world.
The figures came from the independent Office of National Statistics, which said it was adding giant liabilities from two part-nationalised banks - estimated at between £1trillion and £1.5trillion - to existing debts.
The decision is a shattering blow to Labour's reputation for economic competence and is likely to anger ministers, who argue taxpayers are never likely to have to pay back such sums.
Official debt figures had already shown public borrowing spiralling to a new record, reaching £67.2billion between last April and January. The deepening recession also led to a £7billion fall in the amount of tax paid by individuals and businesses last month, compared to January 2008, leaving a yawning black hole in Government finances.
The shattering calculations came as the Bank of England's deputy governor said there was a 'serious risk' of a decade-long downward spiral of the kind that crippled Japan in the 1990s.
Sir John Gieve, who leaves the Bank at the end of the month, said the way the authorities handled the collapse of Northern Rock 'may have owed more to John Sergeant than Fred Astaire'.
Gordon Brown, meanwhile, admitted the country had been 'brought low' by an 'economic hurricane' affecting the whole world.
Opposition MPs accused the Prime Minister of driving Britain towards bankruptcy and called for emergency reductions in Government spending.
Britain's leading business organisation, the CBI, launched an extraordinary attack on the Government's recovery plans, saying there was 'little sense of a coherent strategy'.
It said: 'The Government appears to have been fighting a series of forest fires rather than building a platform for economic recovery.'
Enlarge national debt panel
Sir John said that action being taken by the authorities meant a Japan-style downturn was not inevitable, but it was 'a serious risk'.
He also said Mr Brown's decision to order the Bank to use a measure of inflation that excludes housing costs had 'done us no favours' when it came to controlling the house-price bubble.
City experts said bringing the public finances back into order would mean cutting public spending by at least £60billion - around ten per cent - in 2014, and by £100billion by 2020, as well as big tax rises.
The Treasury has injected billions of pounds into the Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds Banking Group to save them from collapse.
The ONS says that because the Government is able to control their corporate policies, they must now be considered public bodies.
That means national debt is officially at it worst levels since 1954, the year rationing finally came to an end. Even excluding the liabilities of the part-nationalised banks, public sector debt is the highest since Britain's last great financial crisis under Labour in 1977/8.
Experts said borrowing would hit £87billion this year, shattering Chancellor Alistair Darling's optimistic forecasts.
Net debt as a proportion of national income, supposed to stay below 40 per cent under the Government's now-abandoned 'golden rules', reached 47.8 per cent last month.
Enlarge Mahood cartoon
The International Monetary Fund put America's net government debt at 46 per cent of GDP in 2008. Germany's was 56 per cent, France's 55 per cent and Canada's 22.5 per cent.
Those figures do not include the impact of their own bank bailouts, however.
Mr Brown admitted: 'Britain, the rest of Europe, America and now the rest of the world have been brought low by an economic hurricane nobody could have predicted.
'Governments are having to take action to stabilise the financial system. National action alone is not going to be enough.'
He was speaking in Rome after talks with Italian premier Silvio Berlusconi, who chairs the G8 group of industrialised nations.
The Tories said the figures were 'just the beginning' of the debt crisis.
Shadow business secretary Kenneth Clarke said: 'We are beginning to go off the Richter scale in terms of the British experience.
'We are only beginning to see the full extent of the indebtedness that's going to pile up and have to be dealt with once the recovery gets under way.'
The former Chancellor said Mr Darling should urgently bring forward a planned public spending slowdown.
'He should be slowing down the growth of public spending to the levels he's admitted he's going to have to reduce them to the year after,' he said.
'I'm sure Gordon Brown told him "no, no, no more restraint in public spending on top of what we've already done this side of an election". Gordon wants to buy a few votes.
'But the voters are going to have to pay the interest on all this mounting debt. This is a time for public sector restraint.'
Richard Lambert, director general of the CBI, said: ''There's little sense of a coherent strategy about what's happened to date. It's hard to remember - let alone distinguish between - the welter of initiatives launched in the past couple of months. The big ones that could really make a difference have got lost in a thicket of much less ambitious announcements.
'There's not nearly enough precision about when all this noise is going to get converted into action.'
Treasury minister Angela Eagle insisted that slowing spending would be 'a recipe for complete disaster'. She said: 'We are unashamedly sustaining public expenditure, at a time when there is a global economic downturn, to support the economy'.
● The head of the IMF, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, has warned that the world economy may perform even worse than his forecasters said just three weeks ago.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/a...-child-Britain.html#ixzz0WDoiupLf |
GB Plc is a broken mess. And you know this already I would hope.
|
Ultra
|
| Stevie wrote: | | Quote: | £2trillion - the terrifying total of our national debt... that's £33,000 for every man, woman and child in Britain
Prudent? Gordon Brown
The staggering total of Britain's national debt was laid bare yesterday - at least £2trillion.
That represents £33,000 for every man, woman and child in the country.
Bank bailouts will send debt 'off the Richter scale' at a staggering 147 per cent of national income, the worst figure since 1954 and one of the highest in the developed world.
The figures came from the independent Office of National Statistics, which said it was adding giant liabilities from two part-nationalised banks - estimated at between £1trillion and £1.5trillion - to existing debts.
The decision is a shattering blow to Labour's reputation for economic competence and is likely to anger ministers, who argue taxpayers are never likely to have to pay back such sums.
Official debt figures had already shown public borrowing spiralling to a new record, reaching £67.2billion between last April and January. The deepening recession also led to a £7billion fall in the amount of tax paid by individuals and businesses last month, compared to January 2008, leaving a yawning black hole in Government finances.
The shattering calculations came as the Bank of England's deputy governor said there was a 'serious risk' of a decade-long downward spiral of the kind that crippled Japan in the 1990s.
Sir John Gieve, who leaves the Bank at the end of the month, said the way the authorities handled the collapse of Northern Rock 'may have owed more to John Sergeant than Fred Astaire'.
Gordon Brown, meanwhile, admitted the country had been 'brought low' by an 'economic hurricane' affecting the whole world.
Opposition MPs accused the Prime Minister of driving Britain towards bankruptcy and called for emergency reductions in Government spending.
Britain's leading business organisation, the CBI, launched an extraordinary attack on the Government's recovery plans, saying there was 'little sense of a coherent strategy'.
It said: 'The Government appears to have been fighting a series of forest fires rather than building a platform for economic recovery.'
Enlarge national debt panel
Sir John said that action being taken by the authorities meant a Japan-style downturn was not inevitable, but it was 'a serious risk'.
He also said Mr Brown's decision to order the Bank to use a measure of inflation that excludes housing costs had 'done us no favours' when it came to controlling the house-price bubble.
City experts said bringing the public finances back into order would mean cutting public spending by at least £60billion - around ten per cent - in 2014, and by £100billion by 2020, as well as big tax rises.
The Treasury has injected billions of pounds into the Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds Banking Group to save them from collapse.
The ONS says that because the Government is able to control their corporate policies, they must now be considered public bodies.
That means national debt is officially at it worst levels since 1954, the year rationing finally came to an end. Even excluding the liabilities of the part-nationalised banks, public sector debt is the highest since Britain's last great financial crisis under Labour in 1977/8.
Experts said borrowing would hit £87billion this year, shattering Chancellor Alistair Darling's optimistic forecasts.
Net debt as a proportion of national income, supposed to stay below 40 per cent under the Government's now-abandoned 'golden rules', reached 47.8 per cent last month.
Enlarge Mahood cartoon
The International Monetary Fund put America's net government debt at 46 per cent of GDP in 2008. Germany's was 56 per cent, France's 55 per cent and Canada's 22.5 per cent.
Those figures do not include the impact of their own bank bailouts, however.
Mr Brown admitted: 'Britain, the rest of Europe, America and now the rest of the world have been brought low by an economic hurricane nobody could have predicted.
'Governments are having to take action to stabilise the financial system. National action alone is not going to be enough.'
He was speaking in Rome after talks with Italian premier Silvio Berlusconi, who chairs the G8 group of industrialised nations.
The Tories said the figures were 'just the beginning' of the debt crisis.
Shadow business secretary Kenneth Clarke said: 'We are beginning to go off the Richter scale in terms of the British experience.
'We are only beginning to see the full extent of the indebtedness that's going to pile up and have to be dealt with once the recovery gets under way.'
The former Chancellor said Mr Darling should urgently bring forward a planned public spending slowdown.
'He should be slowing down the growth of public spending to the levels he's admitted he's going to have to reduce them to the year after,' he said.
'I'm sure Gordon Brown told him "no, no, no more restraint in public spending on top of what we've already done this side of an election". Gordon wants to buy a few votes.
'But the voters are going to have to pay the interest on all this mounting debt. This is a time for public sector restraint.'
Richard Lambert, director general of the CBI, said: ''There's little sense of a coherent strategy about what's happened to date. It's hard to remember - let alone distinguish between - the welter of initiatives launched in the past couple of months. The big ones that could really make a difference have got lost in a thicket of much less ambitious announcements.
'There's not nearly enough precision about when all this noise is going to get converted into action.'
Treasury minister Angela Eagle insisted that slowing spending would be 'a recipe for complete disaster'. She said: 'We are unashamedly sustaining public expenditure, at a time when there is a global economic downturn, to support the economy'.
● The head of the IMF, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, has warned that the world economy may perform even worse than his forecasters said just three weeks ago.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/a...-child-Britain.html#ixzz0WDoiupLf |
GB Plc is a broken mess. And you know this already I would hope. |
So Stevie infact what you have done here is post evidence that the GDP % of debt for France and Germany is higher than the UK.
This is another topic you know nothing about as France and Germany have more % debt than the UK. So the UK does not have the highest debt in Europe nevermind the developed world as you claim.
Also, the graph in the article shows that Thatcher's Government had the debt under control.
The article also tell you that if the Government do indeed sell off the banks, they will no longer control the banks, the banks will no longer be classed as public organizations, and the % GDP will fall once the bank debt is deducted.
Stevie spinning into oblivion....
|
Stevie
|
France and Germany are not in debt like the Uk, and they certainly don't have the personal debt at such high interest rates and they're not in recession.
Dream on.
|
Ultra
|
| Stevie wrote: | France and Germany are not in debt like the Uk, and they certainly don't have the personal debt at such high interest rates and they're not in recession.
Dream on. |
I don't need to dream on. Why don't you provide evidence to back up your utterings?
Why post an article you haven't read Stevie?
The article states France and Germany have a higher % debt GDP than the UK.
I have explained why taking the Government owned banks into account would inflate the UK GDP % Debt and equally how this % would reduce when the banks are sold off and are public owned again. Another point you seem to have missed is that other European countries bailed out their banks too. So this will affect their GDP % Debt also.
The thing with debt is it only becomes a problem when you don't pay it back or interest rates increase substantially.
With interest rates being down at 0.5% in the UK the interest will be far lower. Economists think the rate will stay like that for a year or so by which point the UK will be out of recession.
Please explain why you think people's personal debt would be at high interest rates when the BOE rate is 0.5%?
Stevie you cannot back up the majority of the opinions you spout. So why even bother?
I don't expect you to know very much about the UK economy because you don't live here or have much experience of UK interest rates.
|
Aventinian
|
| Stevie wrote: | | The Brit Nats score another zero here. Brown thinks of himself as 'SuperBritNat'. The Brit Nats do live in dreamlands of empire's lost. |
As opposed to the JockNats, who live in a dreamland of a country lost?
| Quote: | | GB Plc. is in administration it just doesn't want to admit it. |
This rather reminds me of a Socialist Worker type poster I saw months ago about 'capitalism in crisis' - like hell it is. Recessions occasionally happen, in the grand scheme of things they're not of major significance.
|
Stevie
|
Boasting about a country that tottered on the brink of bankruptcy and a run on the banks and a depression and then saying Scotland can't do better and that Scotland should be grateful for the crumbs at the table is risible.
| Quote: |
Britain Tops European Debt Mountain
11:01am UK, Wednesday September 27, 2006
Overspending Britons are responsible for a third of all unsecured debt in Western Europe, it is claimed. The average person is said to owe just over £3,000 - which is almost twice as much as those on the continent, according to a new report.
180 Generic credit cards and debit cards
'Instatiable appetite' for credit
Figures from analysts at Datamonitor found that the UK consumer credit market hit £214bn last year, making it the most indebted country in Western Europe.
The report's authors put the high figure down to the UK's "insatiable appetite for credit".
Total personal debt in the UK - including mortgage debt - is estimated to be £1.2 trillion.
Major countries on mainland Europe have a stronger culture of savings and frugality.
The French and Germans are particular opposed to debt.
However, that situation could change, with consumer credit growth in Europe outstripping the UK and providing an opportunity for lenders faced with a UK market that is reaching saturation point, the report says.
Paul Marsh, financial services analyst at Datamonitor and author of the report, said: "UK lenders looking for business opportunities should look overseas to realise their expansion plans.
"The UK is an increasingly difficult place to do business, due to the highly indebted nature of the population.
"Yet in other European countries consumers are not as indebted and the markets are not as sophisticated." |
These figures are older, the situation is now worse and spending cuts are on the way along with high unemployment.
Boast away.
There is a league table showing the UK and the US as the two developed countries with the most public and personal debt. I'm sure I'll track it down.
As I said, boast away if you like about how well Scotland does out of the broken UK Plc. ; it shows you are doing personally well but has little to do with the general population.
|
Stevie
|
Just in case you still believe any of your own nonsense.
|
Ultra
|
| Stevie wrote: | Boasting about a country that tottered on the brink of bankruptcy and a run on the banks and a depression and then saying Scotland can't do better and that Scotland should be grateful for the crumbs at the table is risible.
| Quote: |
Britain Tops European Debt Mountain
11:01am UK, Wednesday September 27, 2006
Overspending Britons are responsible for a third of all unsecured debt in Western Europe, it is claimed. The average person is said to owe just over £3,000 - which is almost twice as much as those on the continent, according to a new report.
180 Generic credit cards and debit cards
'Instatiable appetite' for credit
Figures from analysts at Datamonitor found that the UK consumer credit market hit £214bn last year, making it the most indebted country in Western Europe.
The report's authors put the high figure down to the UK's "insatiable appetite for credit".
Total personal debt in the UK - including mortgage debt - is estimated to be £1.2 trillion.
Major countries on mainland Europe have a stronger culture of savings and frugality.
The French and Germans are particular opposed to debt.
However, that situation could change, with consumer credit growth in Europe outstripping the UK and providing an opportunity for lenders faced with a UK market that is reaching saturation point, the report says.
Paul Marsh, financial services analyst at Datamonitor and author of the report, said: "UK lenders looking for business opportunities should look overseas to realise their expansion plans.
"The UK is an increasingly difficult place to do business, due to the highly indebted nature of the population.
"Yet in other European countries consumers are not as indebted and the markets are not as sophisticated." |
These figures are older, the situation is now worse and spending cuts are on the way along with high unemployment.
Boast away.
There is a league table showing the UK and the US as the two developed countries with the most public and personal debt. I'm sure I'll track it down.
As I said, boast away if you like about how well Scotland does out of the broken UK Plc. ; it shows you are doing personally well but has little to do with the general population. |
Stevie the point is least we actually live, work, and bring up our families here.
Not sit in France like you do and pour scorn and slag off Scotland from afar as it's not like it affects you in any ways to do so.
So run along you fake plastic Scottish charlatan.
|
Stevie
|
Slagging off Scotland is your job.
Britain is the economic joke you boast of.
Run along now yourself my little Brit Nat weevil.
See now, that's mature.
I suggest we stop the childish nonsense as I said on another thread. People are getting pissed off.
|
Ultra
|
| Stevie wrote: | Slagging off Scotland is your job.
Britain is the economic joke you boast of.
Run along now yourself my little Brit Nat weevil.
See now, that's mature.
I suggest we stop the childish nonsense as I said on another thread. People are getting pissed off. |
Difference is between you and me I am stating facts about you based on what you have written about yourself and Scotland.
You are merely reacting by spouting immature names like Brit Nat and other childish nonsense.
I do not need to lower myself to such behaviour to get my point across. You evidently do.
Bye.
|
Stevie
|
Ask your Brit Nat friend Aventinian to stop calling us Nazis and if he does then I'll happily stop using the term Brit Nat.
|
magister ludi
|
quote="Braveheart"]
..but that doesn't mean that the SNP has abolished Studend Debt, or built a school or anything at all...s[/quote]
who did away with student grants and introduced tuition fees in the first place ?
|
Stevie
|
Speaking of who did away with student grants and introduced tuition fees : Brown is in his usual self induced screw up fest because he sent a mother of a dead soldier (who died in TB's war) a rather crappy looking handwritten note of condolence and managed to get the name of her dead son wrong. He phoned her and she ridiculed him.
He is a one man blunderbus. As I've said many times, bet the Labour party miss Tony now.
|
magister ludi
|
| Braveheart wrote: |
Do you think it would better to lie outright, like:"Vote SNP and we'll match Labour's school-building programme brick-for-brick"....?
What do you think? |
You can't blame the SNP for closing down or planning to close downlocal schools and hospitals. Nor can you blame the SNP for mortgaging the future with a PFI funded re-building programme. Do you seriously claim "brick for brick" under PFI ever made any economic sense .....it was a gravy train for the private sector.
|
Aventinian
|
| Stevie wrote: | Speaking of who did away with student grants and introduced tuition fees : Brown is in his usual self induced screw up fest because he sent a mother of a dead soldier (who died in TB's war) a rather crappy looking handwritten note of condolence and managed to get the name of her dead son wrong. He phoned her and she ridiculed him.
He is a one man blunderbus. As I've said many times, bet the Labour party miss Tony now. |
I think that woman has behaved appallingly. It was very good of the PM to take the time to hand-write a letter to her. She has an unusual name, and the spelling may have been buggered up by one of the PM's staff, or indeed just as a result of the PM's relatively poor eyesight. Either way, it's hardly a great problem. Then, when of course he'd be perfectly willing to apologies, she ran to the Sun to have him mocked.
That's just vile.
|
Stevie
|
I agree she's behaved in a vile manner, I'm just pointing out again how he has a unique talent for jumping into the excrement all of his own making.
He stole Tony's office and he's cursed for the doing of it.
|
Ultra
|
| Aventinian wrote: | | Stevie wrote: | Speaking of who did away with student grants and introduced tuition fees : Brown is in his usual self induced screw up fest because he sent a mother of a dead soldier (who died in TB's war) a rather crappy looking handwritten note of condolence and managed to get the name of her dead son wrong. He phoned her and she ridiculed him.
He is a one man blunderbus. As I've said many times, bet the Labour party miss Tony now. |
I think that woman has behaved appallingly. It was very good of the PM to take the time to hand-write a letter to her. She has an unusual name, and the spelling may have been buggered up by one of the PM's staff, or indeed just as a result of the PM's relatively poor eyesight. Either way, it's hardly a great problem. Then, when of course he'd be perfectly willing to apologies, she ran to the Sun to have him mocked.
That's just vile. |
Just heard the telephone call on Sky.
I have to agree. Appallingly stuff.
Decent of Brown to call up and apologize. The woman should have had more dignity and respect than recording the conversation to appear in the Sun.
|
Stevie
|
Just saw Brown at his monthly conference waffling on about the young man's never to be forgotten sacrifice to protect the streets of Britain.
That is rubbish however and rich when one considers he was chancellor when he ratified the military spending cuts.
The mother's point is her son died because of a lack of necessary equipment and from that perspective she's right.
I however, would do everything in my power to stop my son joining the army where an occupational hazard is being killed.
|
magister ludi
|
It's vile indeed, but I can't bring myself to criticise a mother who has lost her son in this way. I understand too that her grief reaction, as for most people, will have a "blame phase". The Sun know this too and in my opinion they have exploited her and her grief. That they (the Sun) have used her and her son's death in this way to sell copy is contemptable. That they use it in this way to to further a politically motivated attack on Gordon Brown displays nothing but their own hypocracy.
|
Fidget
|
Did she get money out of The Sun for her story?
|
Stevie
|
| magister ludi wrote: | | The Sun know this too and in my opinion they have exploited her and her grief. |
The Sun of a b***h.
|
Stevie
|
I suspect that Brown was never made of the stuff of prime ministers and it shows on a daily basis, moreover, he was not elected by the voters as prime minister.
He's cursed because he's a fraud.
|
Alasdair
|
As a rule we don't elect prime ministers, we elect parties. Semantics perhaps, but that's just the way it is.
As to the whole letter writing thing, I'm rather ambivilent to be honest. I think The Sun is abusing the story for political ends, remind me who they support this weather, and i think the mother is allowing herself to be used.
Brown probably hand-wrote the letter because he thought in some small way it would 'look better' than a typed note, but who really knows. Personally I'd have had my secretary draft something and have checked and signed it.
He's certainly not a popular prime minister and this sort of story doesn't help, is he a fraud? No, I don't think so, he's simply the best that the ruling party had to offer at the time, something in itself that is a damning indictment of the state of the Labour party.
|
Aventinian
|
| Alasdair wrote: | | As a rule we don't elect prime ministers, we elect parties. Semantics perhaps, but that's just the way it is. |
Not even that, just an individual member for your constituency really. Other than a name and a symbol on the ballot paper, there's nothing really formalised about the party structure - it just happens.
|
Reluctant Hero
|
| Alasdair wrote: |
He's certainly not a popular prime minister and this sort of story doesn't help, is he a fraud? |
I think this story is helping him, because just about everybody is taking his side on this issue.
|
Stevie
|
It's more pity I suspect than sympathy.
|
landg
|
| magister ludi wrote: | | It's vile indeed, but I can't bring myself to criticise a mother who has lost her son in this way. I understand too that her grief reaction, as for most people, will have a "blame phase". The Sun know this too and in my opinion they have exploited her and her grief. That they (the Sun) have used her and her son's death in this way to sell copy is contemptable. That they use it in this way to to further a politically motivated attack on Gordon Brown displays nothing but their own hypocracy. |
indeed, it put me in mind of how the ssp (or solidarity cannae mind which one) hijacked rose gentles grief and exploited her.
the pm takes the time to handwrite a letter and makes a spelling mistake in it, not much of a story.
|
Stevie
|
Hot on the heels of GB's phone call comes the fact that 50000 Whitehall bureaucrats getting bonuses of an average of £1000. Families of soldiers being killed in the Middle East are fuming that their sons are dying due to lack of equipment.
Being this dumb is an art.
|
landg
|
| Stevie wrote: | Hot on the heels of GB's phone call comes the fact that 50000 Whitehall bureaucrats getting bonuses of an average of £1000. Families of soldiers being killed in the Middle East are fuming that their sons are dying due to lack of equipment.
Being this dumb is an art. |
can i suggest you look into this a little further.
|
Stevie
|
It might be 5000 Whitehall bloodsuckers I suppose.
|
landg
|
| Stevie wrote: | | It might be 5000 Whitehall bloodsuckers I suppose. |
well done. in the name of getting the facts you come up with that pretty shitey oneliner.pffffffffffffffft.
|
Stevie
|
It seems the banks are now being bailed out to the tun e of £200 billion (GB Plc is broke). Adam Boulton asked some Labour guy (Myer) about this, then proceeded to ask if Brown had lost the plot or was still managing to hold it together.
It's quite funny really that news commentators openly ask questions like that.
The UK is hardly the cradle/life support system the unionists here would like to believe. And 71% of people polled believe Afghanistan is the wrong place to be.
UK is in need of splitting.
|
Ultra
|
| Stevie wrote: | It seems the banks are now being bailed out to the tun e of £200 billion (GB Plc is broke). Adam Boulton asked some Labour guy (Myer) about this, then proceeded to ask if Brown had lost the plot or was still managing to hold it together.
It's quite funny really that news commentators openly ask questions like that.
The UK is hardly the cradle/life support system the unionists here would like to believe. And 71% of people polled believe Afghanistan is the wrong place to be.
UK is in need of splitting. |
The banks were always being bailed out to the tune of £100's bn in the form of capital and debt guarantees.
So if the UK goes bankrupt, what makes you think that Scotland, being part of the union, would not suffer the same outcome?
Just more negativity and bitterness from Stevie.
I see Afghanistan being wheeled out again too. Desperate times for the SNP need desperate measures.
|
|
|
|