Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Biden’s VP choice: Klobuchar, 2nd favourite in the betting les

SystemSystem Posts: 8,258
edited June 19 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Biden’s VP choice: Klobuchar, 2nd favourite in the betting less than a month go, has withdrawn from being considered

The big political betting news is a piece in the New York Times reporting that Senator Amy Klobuchar has written to Joe Biden saying she doesn’t want to be considered for the Democratic VP nomination. As the Betdata.io chart of the Betfair exchange shows Klobuchar was 24% second favourite less than a month ago.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 2,633
    First?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 59,930
    Senator Warren is a person of colour.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,757
    Pulpstar said:

    Senator Warren is a person of colour.

    Trump certainly seems to think she is.....
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 33,816
    edited June 19
    To be honest I cannot understand why the US has nobody worthy of the office of President

    In other news

    Drakeford has bowed to pressure and from the 6th July is abandoning the 5 mile driving restriction and opening the holiday and leisure industry

    Best news of the day for us in North Wales

    Rochdale Pioneer can come here to Wales for his holidays and he will be very welcome
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,178
    FPT
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 4,892

    Pulpstar said:

    Senator Warren is a person of colour.

    Trump certainly seems to think she is.....
    On a slightly more serious note - the car crash of the DNA test* Warren did, combined with the BLM** issue, makes her a much worse choice in this environment.

    * Quite a lot of Native Americans are rather sensitive about claims to be NA - https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-02-26/elizabeth-warren-again-is-pressed-on-past-claims-of-native-american-heritage
    ** The initial issue of Black Live has also spread to the issue of Native American lives. Serious deprivation, massive excess numbers of police actions etc.
  • ChelyabinskChelyabinsk Posts: 229
    Pulpstar said:

    Senator Warren is a person of colour.

    Not any more, unfortunately.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,178
    Pulpstar said:

    Senator Warren is a person of colour.

    Is she the one nicknamed Pocahontas?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 4,289

    To be honest I cannot understand why the US has nobody worthy of the office of President

    In other news

    Drakeford has bowed to pressure and from the 6th July is abandoning the 5 mile driving restriction and opening the holiday and leisure industry

    Best news of the day for us in North Wales

    Rochdale Pioneer can come here to Wales for his holidays and he will be very welcome

    Only if he stays within 5 miles of Offa's Dyke!
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 33,816

    To be honest I cannot understand why the US has nobody worthy of the office of President

    In other news

    Drakeford has bowed to pressure and from the 6th July is abandoning the 5 mile driving restriction and opening the holiday and leisure industry

    Best news of the day for us in North Wales

    Rochdale Pioneer can come here to Wales for his holidays and he will be very welcome

    Only if he stays within 5 miles of Offa's Dyke!
    5 mile rule goes and not before time, so you can travel throughout Wales
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 4,892

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    In a recession all progressives become Keynesians.
    During periods of growth, they stop being Keynesians.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 14,083
    edited June 19
    Baemy got in a nice stapler shot to Warren's head on the way out, I don't think Biden will go with a white person.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 33,816
    Breaking news

    CMO's from all four countries now say we are in level 3
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 10,624

    Pulpstar said:

    Senator Warren is a person of colour.

    Is she the one nicknamed Pocahontas?
    Yes, after she claimed to be NA and it turned out she is 1/100 to 1/10000 so.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 20,580

    To be honest I cannot understand why the US has nobody worthy of the office of President

    In other news

    Drakeford has bowed to pressure and from the 6th July is abandoning the 5 mile driving restriction and opening the holiday and leisure industry

    Best news of the day for us in North Wales

    Rochdale Pioneer can come here to Wales for his holidays and he will be very welcome

    Only if he stays within 5 miles of Offa's Dyke!
    5 mile rule goes and not before time, so you can travel throughout Wales
    According to the BBC it's 'could be lifted in two weeks'.
  • KathyKathy Posts: 1
    Sorry to rain on your parade. Elizabeth Warren is not going to be Biden's VP. That Cosmetic letter ruined her chances. Also Warren is NOT a Woman of Colour. Warren also lied that she had Native American lineage to get into Harvard. Reason why Trump nicknamed her Pocahorto (sp).
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 73,094
    With Klobuchar out, Harris and Warren are Democrats preferred picks to be Biden's VP candidate



  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 73,094

    To be honest I cannot understand why the US has nobody worthy of the office of President

    In other news

    Drakeford has bowed to pressure and from the 6th July is abandoning the 5 mile driving restriction and opening the holiday and leisure industry

    Best news of the day for us in North Wales

    Rochdale Pioneer can come here to Wales for his holidays and he will be very welcome

    It is US voters who decide who is 'worthy' to be their President
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 20,580
    Kathy said:

    Sorry to rain on your parade. Elizabeth Warren is not going to be Biden's VP. That Cosmetic letter ruined her chances. Also Warren is NOT a Woman of Colour. Warren also lied that she had Native American lineage to get into Harvard. Reason why Trump nicknamed her Pocahorto (sp).

    Lol!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 73,094
    Kathy said:

    Sorry to rain on your parade. Elizabeth Warren is not going to be Biden's VP. That Cosmetic letter ruined her chances. Also Warren is NOT a Woman of Colour. Warren also lied that she had Native American lineage to get into Harvard. Reason why Trump nicknamed her Pocahorto (sp).

    Warren taught at Harvard, she never studied there
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 59,930
    HYUFD said:

    With Klobuchar out, Harris and Warren are Democrats preferred picks to be Biden's VP candidate



    Not sure how useful polls like that are. It's Biden's teams' decision and the poll is overwhemingly name recognition.
    I think Harris would be a good choice.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 10,566
    The Joint Biosecurity Centre has recommended the Covid-19 alert level be reduced from four to three, meaning the epidemic is in general circulation but transmission is no longer “high or rising exponentially”, the UK's chief medical officers have said

    Press Association.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 4,289

    Breaking news

    CMO's from all four countries now say we are in level 3

    True for Scotland, NI, Wales and London. Pockets of England should still be a four imho, by the way I am not an epidemiologist.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 5,457

    To be honest I cannot understand why the US has nobody worthy of the office of President

    In other news

    Drakeford has bowed to pressure and from the 6th July is abandoning the 5 mile driving restriction and opening the holiday and leisure industry

    Best news of the day for us in North Wales

    Rochdale Pioneer can come here to Wales for his holidays and he will be very welcome

    I am sure the US has plenty of people worthy of being President, just the same as we probably have plenty of people worthy of being PM. The problem is that events have thrown up two inappropriate buffoons who are quite similar to each other in so many ways.

    My own view is that they have both been (together with Corbyn) a product of normal people becoming less engaged with politics than they once were. Middle aged and older folk say "I don't do politics" as though it were a badge of honour, and the younger are more interested in the opinions of Kim Kardasian or Pewdie Pie (not sure I have spelt either properly!). Maybe one upside of the pandemic is that all people might realise it is worth taking an interest a little more. After all our leaders take decisions that really do affect us in life or death ways.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,178

    Breaking news

    CMO's from all four countries now say we are in level 3

    True for Scotland, NI, Wales and London. Pockets of England should still be a four imho, by the way I am not an epidemiologist.
    In what pockets do you think it is "high" or "growing exponentially"?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 11,764

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    Here's the new kid on the block -

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Monetary_Theory

    Predict politicians of all stripes (except in Germany) could soon be seizing on this as intellectual cover for "magicking" away budgetary and debt problems.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 5,457

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    In a recession all progressives become Keynesians.
    During periods of growth, they stop being Keynesians.
    I am not sure I would describe Philip as a progressive lol. Reactionary contrarian perhaps.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 4,289
    HYUFD said:

    With Klobuchar out, Harris and Warren are Democrats preferred picks to be Biden's VP candidate



    Why is Warren above Harris on Spencer Gray? It doesn't make sense.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 33,816
    edited June 19

    To be honest I cannot understand why the US has nobody worthy of the office of President

    In other news

    Drakeford has bowed to pressure and from the 6th July is abandoning the 5 mile driving restriction and opening the holiday and leisure industry

    Best news of the day for us in North Wales

    Rochdale Pioneer can come here to Wales for his holidays and he will be very welcome

    Only if he stays within 5 miles of Offa's Dyke!
    5 mile rule goes and not before time, so you can travel throughout Wales
    According to the BBC it's 'could be lifted in two weeks'.
    Drakeford has had no choice but to lift it and to open the holiday industry in Wales from mid july. The anger and dismay from organisations and individuals reported daily across the Welsh media came to a head yesteday with a meeting with him, hence today's announcement

    Also all the UK has now moved from 4 to 3 so no excuse, and no doubt Nicola will follow if only to give Scotland a chance to mitigate the damage to their industry and economy over the essential summer holiday season
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,178

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    In a recession all progressives become Keynesians.
    During periods of growth, they stop being Keynesians.
    I am not sure I would describe Philip as a progressive lol. Reactionary contrarian perhaps.
    I'm not a progressive, I'm a libertarian.

    I'm not who Malmesbury was referring to though, [I think] he was agreeing with me.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 2,633

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    And yet Labour "destroyed the public finances" by doing exactly what you are describing. Let's look at the OBR data.
    Global financial crisis:
    Borrowing before crisis (2007, % GDP): 2.9%
    Cyclically adjusted terms: 2.0%
    Debt before crisis (2007, % GDP): 34.2%
    Change in debt to GDP ratio 1997-2007: -1.5pp
    Borrowing at peak (2009): 10.2%.
    Coronavirus crisis:
    Borrowing before crisis (2019): 2.8%
    Cyclically adjusted terms: 1.6%
    Debt before crisis (2019, % GDP): 79.7%
    Change in debt to GDP ratio 2009-2019: +16.8pp
    Borrowing at peak (2020, OBR forecast): 15.2%.
    So prior to the global financial crisis, Labour had brought down the debt to GDP ratio over the previous ten years and was running a deficit to GDP ratio of about the same size as the one the current government was running going into the current crisis (having presided over a 17pp increase in the debt to GDP ratio over the previous ten years).
    I am not going to criticise the government for borrowing more, they are doing exactly the right thing. I merely note that Labour did the same thing in 08-09 and were crucified for it by Tories ever since. The level of intellectual dishonesty is astounding.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 14,933
    Kathy said:

    Sorry to rain on your parade. Elizabeth Warren is not going to be Biden's VP. That Cosmetic letter ruined her chances. Also Warren is NOT a Woman of Colour. Warren also lied that she had Native American lineage to get into Harvard. Reason why Trump nicknamed her Pocahorto (sp).

    Do you have evidence she lied on her Harvard application?
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 7,673
    fpt: @Sandpit

    Yes, but he's [Matt] not really a political cartoonist. Of those that are I rate Martin Rowson very highly. Bell's ability and power cannot be questioned but personally I find himtoo acerbic, brutal and at times unpleasant.

    Generally the standard is not high, I'm afraid.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 4,289

    Breaking news

    CMO's from all four countries now say we are in level 3

    True for Scotland, NI, Wales and London. Pockets of England should still be a four imho, by the way I am not an epidemiologist.
    In what pockets do you think it is "high" or "growing exponentially"?
    Leicester and Cleckheaton for starters.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 33,816
    edited June 19

    Breaking news

    CMO's from all four countries now say we are in level 3

    True for Scotland, NI, Wales and London. Pockets of England should still be a four imho, by the way I am not an epidemiologist.
    No.

    CMO's from all countries including England have made a joint public announcement

    With respect I doubt you have greater expertise in this field
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,178
    kinabalu said:

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    Here's the new kid on the block -

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Monetary_Theory

    Predict politicians of all stripes (except in Germany) could soon be seizing on this as intellectual cover for "magicking" away budgetary and debt problems.
    Its a terrible idea and an excuse to run a budget deficit and not make hard choices.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 20,580

    To be honest I cannot understand why the US has nobody worthy of the office of President

    In other news

    Drakeford has bowed to pressure and from the 6th July is abandoning the 5 mile driving restriction and opening the holiday and leisure industry

    Best news of the day for us in North Wales

    Rochdale Pioneer can come here to Wales for his holidays and he will be very welcome

    Only if he stays within 5 miles of Offa's Dyke!
    5 mile rule goes and not before time, so you can travel throughout Wales
    According to the BBC it's 'could be lifted in two weeks'.
    Drakeford has had no choice but to lift it and to open the holiday industry in Wales from mid july. The anger and dismay from organisations and individuals reported daily across the Welsh media came to a head yesteday with a meeting with him, hence today's announcement

    Also all the UK has now moved from 4 to 3 so no excuse, and no doubt Nicola will follow if only to give Scotland a chance to mitigate the damage to their industry and economy over the essential summer holiday season
    '5 mile rule goes and not before time, so you can travel throughout Wales' = travel restrictions could be lifted in two weeks?

    I hope social media spreads this about so when hapless grockles are stopped by the cops they can say Big G told them it was ok.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 5,457

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    In a recession all progressives become Keynesians.
    During periods of growth, they stop being Keynesians.
    I am not sure I would describe Philip as a progressive lol. Reactionary contrarian perhaps.
    I'm not a progressive, I'm a libertarian.

    I'm not who Malmesbury was referring to though, [I think] he was agreeing with me.
    You proved yesterday you are not a libertarian or a liberal (small l). You said you are against countrysports (bloodsports as you call them). To be a true liberal, or even more so, a libertarian you need to oppose laws that restrict the rights of individuals even if you morally disapprove. To be a libertarian you would also need to be in favour of a massive relaxation of gun laws back to pre-1914 levels. So, sorry to disappoint you, you are neither. Reactionary contrarian fits you. Wear it with pride!
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 693

    Breaking news

    CMO's from all four countries now say we are in level 3

    True for Scotland, NI, Wales and London. Pockets of England should still be a four imho, by the way I am not an epidemiologist.
    I would say we are down to 2 in Hampshire. Many LAs are reporting no cases and the hospitals are empty..
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 1,589
    HYUFD said:
    Do you think the right is about to split again? At a zenith in its power?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 33,816

    To be honest I cannot understand why the US has nobody worthy of the office of President

    In other news

    Drakeford has bowed to pressure and from the 6th July is abandoning the 5 mile driving restriction and opening the holiday and leisure industry

    Best news of the day for us in North Wales

    Rochdale Pioneer can come here to Wales for his holidays and he will be very welcome

    I am sure the US has plenty of people worthy of being President, just the same as we probably have plenty of people worthy of being PM. The problem is that events have thrown up two inappropriate buffoons who are quite similar to each other in so many ways.

    My own view is that they have both been (together with Corbyn) a product of normal people becoming less engaged with politics than they once were. Middle aged and older folk say "I don't do politics" as though it were a badge of honour, and the younger are more interested in the opinions of Kim Kardasian or Pewdie Pie (not sure I have spelt either properly!). Maybe one upside of the pandemic is that all people might realise it is worth taking an interest a little more. After all our leaders take decisions that really do affect us in life or death ways.
    You may be right but not sure it will have a substantial effect on the general public's interest or otherwise in politics
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,178

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    And yet Labour "destroyed the public finances" by doing exactly what you are describing. Let's look at the OBR data.
    Global financial crisis:
    Borrowing before crisis (2007, % GDP): 2.9%
    Cyclically adjusted terms: 2.0%
    Debt before crisis (2007, % GDP): 34.2%
    Change in debt to GDP ratio 1997-2007: -1.5pp
    Borrowing at peak (2009): 10.2%.
    Coronavirus crisis:
    Borrowing before crisis (2019): 2.8%
    Cyclically adjusted terms: 1.6%
    Debt before crisis (2019, % GDP): 79.7%
    Change in debt to GDP ratio 2009-2019: +16.8pp
    Borrowing at peak (2020, OBR forecast): 15.2%.
    So prior to the global financial crisis, Labour had brought down the debt to GDP ratio over the previous ten years and was running a deficit to GDP ratio of about the same size as the one the current government was running going into the current crisis (having presided over a 17pp increase in the debt to GDP ratio over the previous ten years).
    I am not going to criticise the government for borrowing more, they are doing exactly the right thing. I merely note that Labour did the same thing in 08-09 and were crucified for it by Tories ever since. The level of intellectual dishonesty is astounding.
    You're talking absolute nonsense!

    Labour had inherited a balanced budget with the deficit coming down to surplus and then chose, for no good reason, to blow the budget out to a budget deficit during growth times. Labour created the deficit from 2002 onwards, that is what caused the problem.

    The Tories inherited Labour's economic catastrophe and brought the deficit down.

    To claim the Tories had increased the debt to GDP is absolute garbage and shows you to be totally ignorant. The Tories reduced the deficit every year, they didn't create it as Labour had previously. There was no alternative to debt going up unless the Tories had been far more austere ending the deficit overnight.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 2,971
    HYUFD said:

    To be honest I cannot understand why the US has nobody worthy of the office of President

    In other news

    Drakeford has bowed to pressure and from the 6th July is abandoning the 5 mile driving restriction and opening the holiday and leisure industry

    Best news of the day for us in North Wales

    Rochdale Pioneer can come here to Wales for his holidays and he will be very welcome

    It is US voters who decide who is 'worthy' to be their President
    The voters only have a limited choice. The chose the most "worthy" from those on the ballot list.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 10,951
    dr_spyn said:
    Well, that's good. The English government has been acting as if it was Level 3 for weeks.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 23,686

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    blah blah blah.

    You said an "economic crisis" justifies unprecedented spending. I am just pointing out to you that once you say a crisis of one sort or another justifies unprecedented spending then you can't complain if the crisis that is picked is not one you would spend an extra fiver on.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 1,696

    fpt: @Sandpit

    Yes, but he's [Matt] not really a political cartoonist. Of those that are I rate Martin Rowson very highly. Bell's ability and power cannot be questioned but personally I find himtoo acerbic, brutal and at times unpleasant.

    Generally the standard is not high, I'm afraid.

    Perhaps Matt is a political cartoonist but in the same way that Matthew Parris is party political. Subtle, funny, realistic, pragmatic and not entirely predictable.

    There is more to politics than hatred and over simplification.
  • SurreySurrey Posts: 190
    edited June 19
    Trump is on the wrong side of Twitter again, this time for posting a fake CNN video and then denouncing fake news. The way he uses the word "fake" suggests more than a personality disorder.

    Imagine what he might say if his Tulsa rally spreads SARS-Cov2 and kills people. "Fakes!" "Crisis actors!" Perhaps he'll say they were all ill from something else anyway.

    That said, there has got to be some kind of method in posting the red triangle at Facebook and then the "racist baby" fake at Twitter. I'm waiting with bated breath for whether he's going to make it a triple.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,178
    edited June 19

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    In a recession all progressives become Keynesians.
    During periods of growth, they stop being Keynesians.
    I am not sure I would describe Philip as a progressive lol. Reactionary contrarian perhaps.
    I'm not a progressive, I'm a libertarian.

    I'm not who Malmesbury was referring to though, [I think] he was agreeing with me.
    You proved yesterday you are not a libertarian or a liberal (small l). You said you are against countrysports (bloodsports as you call them). To be a true liberal, or even more so, a libertarian you need to oppose laws that restrict the rights of individuals even if you morally disapprove. To be a libertarian you would also need to be in favour of a massive relaxation of gun laws back to pre-1914 levels. So, sorry to disappoint you, you are neither. Reactionary contrarian fits you. Wear it with pride!
    I'm a libertarian not an anarchist. I don't believe in no laws.

    The law should be there primarily to prevent harm to others. Blood sports fall under that definition, so long as you accept animals as others.

    I have no problems with "country sports": Polo, croquet etc may be country sports - my concern was with ones that involve blood not the country.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 11,764

    kinabalu said:

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    Here's the new kid on the block -

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Monetary_Theory

    Predict politicians of all stripes (except in Germany) could soon be seizing on this as intellectual cover for "magicking" away budgetary and debt problems.
    Its a terrible idea and an excuse to run a budget deficit and not make hard choices.
    Potentially more fundamental than that - it would be the end of government debt. A completely new way of looking at how to manage the economy.

    My sense is, essentially bollox but with some useful insights. Like so many things, if you think about it. Brexit, for example. You, even.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,178
    TOPPING said:

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    blah blah blah.

    You said an "economic crisis" justifies unprecedented spending. I am just pointing out to you that once you say a crisis of one sort or another justifies unprecedented spending then you can't complain if the crisis that is picked is not one you would spend an extra fiver on.
    I was talking about countercyclical spending during a recession. If you were too incapable of reading comprehension to understand that I was talking about a recession then I apologise that my point wasn't explained in simple enough words for you to understand.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 33,816

    To be honest I cannot understand why the US has nobody worthy of the office of President

    In other news

    Drakeford has bowed to pressure and from the 6th July is abandoning the 5 mile driving restriction and opening the holiday and leisure industry

    Best news of the day for us in North Wales

    Rochdale Pioneer can come here to Wales for his holidays and he will be very welcome

    Only if he stays within 5 miles of Offa's Dyke!
    5 mile rule goes and not before time, so you can travel throughout Wales
    According to the BBC it's 'could be lifted in two weeks'.
    Drakeford has had no choice but to lift it and to open the holiday industry in Wales from mid july. The anger and dismay from organisations and individuals reported daily across the Welsh media came to a head yesteday with a meeting with him, hence today's announcement

    Also all the UK has now moved from 4 to 3 so no excuse, and no doubt Nicola will follow if only to give Scotland a chance to mitigate the damage to their industry and economy over the essential summer holiday season
    '5 mile rule goes and not before time, so you can travel throughout Wales' = travel restrictions could be lifted in two weeks?

    I hope social media spreads this about so when hapless grockles are stopped by the cops they can say Big G told them it was ok.
    What on earth are you talking about

    Drakeford has been live on tv confirming these changes from the 6th July and seeking holiday bookings across Wales from the 13th July

    What is it with so many who seem to want to continue to support the armageddon to our economy for political gain
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 59,930
    edited June 19
    Surrey said:

    Trump is on the wrong side of Twitter again, this time for posting a fake CNN video and then denouncing fake news. The way he uses the word "fake" suggests more than a personality disorder.

    Imagine what he might say if his Tulsa rally spreads SARS-Cov2 and kills people. "Fakes!" "Crisis actors!"

    We seem to be eliminating various methods of (usual) spread.

    Fleeting passing outdoors - Not particularly likely
    Sitting with your mates outdoors - Seems to be mainly OK
    Moving around indoors (Shopping) whilst trying to maintain a 2 metre distance - You'd be unlucky
    Mass gathering outdoors - Doesn't look to have taken R over 1.

    Which really only leaves larger gatherings indoors. By elimination they pretty much MUST be superspreader events !
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 5,457

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    In a recession all progressives become Keynesians.
    During periods of growth, they stop being Keynesians.
    I am not sure I would describe Philip as a progressive lol. Reactionary contrarian perhaps.
    I'm not a progressive, I'm a libertarian.

    I'm not who Malmesbury was referring to though, [I think] he was agreeing with me.
    You proved yesterday you are not a libertarian or a liberal (small l). You said you are against countrysports (bloodsports as you call them). To be a true liberal, or even more so, a libertarian you need to oppose laws that restrict the rights of individuals even if you morally disapprove. To be a libertarian you would also need to be in favour of a massive relaxation of gun laws back to pre-1914 levels. So, sorry to disappoint you, you are neither. Reactionary contrarian fits you. Wear it with pride!
    I'm a libertarian not an anarchist. I don't believe in no laws.

    The law should be there primarily to prevent harm to others. Blood sports fall under that definition, so long as you accept animals as others.

    I have no problems with "country sports": Polo, croquet etc may be country sports - my concern was with ones that involve blood not the country.
    Your level of ignorance really does crack me up .I gave you the benefit of the doubt and I thought your juvenile perspective might just be limited to your simplistic knowledge of politics. I suppose if you tried to only comment on things you actually have some knowledge of you wouldn't be on here for more than a few seconds a day. Perhaps if you spent less time on here you could broaden your knowledge a bit, and stop talking crap about things you have zero knowledge or understanding of. You say this is your hobby, please try something else to broaden your mind.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 2,782
    Pulpstar said:

    Surrey said:

    Trump is on the wrong side of Twitter again, this time for posting a fake CNN video and then denouncing fake news. The way he uses the word "fake" suggests more than a personality disorder.

    Imagine what he might say if his Tulsa rally spreads SARS-Cov2 and kills people. "Fakes!" "Crisis actors!"

    We seem to be eliminating various methods of (usual) spread.

    Fleeting passing outdoors - Not particularly likely
    Sitting with your mates outdoors - Seems to be mainly OK
    Moving around indoors (Shopping) whilst trying to maintain a 2 metre distance - You'd be unlucky
    Mass gathering outdoors - Doesn't look to have taken R over 1.

    Which really only leaves larger gatherings indoors. By elimination they pretty much MUST be superspreader events !
    Hospitals no.1, I`d suggest
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 23,686
    edited June 19

    TOPPING said:

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    blah blah blah.

    You said an "economic crisis" justifies unprecedented spending. I am just pointing out to you that once you say a crisis of one sort or another justifies unprecedented spending then you can't complain if the crisis that is picked is not one you would spend an extra fiver on.
    I was talking about countercyclical spending during a recession. If you were too incapable of reading comprehension to understand that I was talking about a recession then I apologise that my point wasn't explained in simple enough words for you to understand.
    You decided to talk about countercyclical spending during a recession.

    You started off by saying:

    "There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis..."

    To which I responded that if you are picking and choosing crises that it is ok to borrow for then you can't criticise other governments or views that agree with that principle (albeit you might not agree that their crisis needs money spending on it in the same way as "your" crisis does).
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,178

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    In a recession all progressives become Keynesians.
    During periods of growth, they stop being Keynesians.
    I am not sure I would describe Philip as a progressive lol. Reactionary contrarian perhaps.
    I'm not a progressive, I'm a libertarian.

    I'm not who Malmesbury was referring to though, [I think] he was agreeing with me.
    You proved yesterday you are not a libertarian or a liberal (small l). You said you are against countrysports (bloodsports as you call them). To be a true liberal, or even more so, a libertarian you need to oppose laws that restrict the rights of individuals even if you morally disapprove. To be a libertarian you would also need to be in favour of a massive relaxation of gun laws back to pre-1914 levels. So, sorry to disappoint you, you are neither. Reactionary contrarian fits you. Wear it with pride!
    I'm a libertarian not an anarchist. I don't believe in no laws.

    The law should be there primarily to prevent harm to others. Blood sports fall under that definition, so long as you accept animals as others.

    I have no problems with "country sports": Polo, croquet etc may be country sports - my concern was with ones that involve blood not the country.
    Your level of ignorance really does crack me up .I gave you the benefit of the doubt and I thought your juvenile perspective might just be limited to your simplistic knowledge of politics. I suppose if you tried to only comment on things you actually have some knowledge of you wouldn't be on here for more than a few seconds a day. Perhaps if you spent less time on here you could broaden your knowledge a bit, and stop talking crap about things you have zero knowledge or understanding of. You say this is your hobby, please try something else to broaden your mind.
    If what you want me to try is inflicting cruelty to animals then I'm just not interested. Thanks but no thanks.

    The world has moved on from cock fighting and fox hunting. So should you.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 73,094
    eristdoof said:

    HYUFD said:

    To be honest I cannot understand why the US has nobody worthy of the office of President

    In other news

    Drakeford has bowed to pressure and from the 6th July is abandoning the 5 mile driving restriction and opening the holiday and leisure industry

    Best news of the day for us in North Wales

    Rochdale Pioneer can come here to Wales for his holidays and he will be very welcome

    It is US voters who decide who is 'worthy' to be their President
    The voters only have a limited choice. The chose the most "worthy" from those on the ballot list.
    The voters also select the candidates in the primaries
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,757
    HYUFD said:
    Walter Bagehot once remarked that the great qualities that are needed in these moments of crisis — a rapid energy, eager nature and imperious will — usually become impediments once normal times resume. With Johnson it is the other way around; his great qualities in normal times appear to have become impediments during a crisis.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 7,673
    edited June 19
    algarkirk said:

    fpt: @Sandpit

    Yes, but he's [Matt] not really a political cartoonist. Of those that are I rate Martin Rowson very highly. Bell's ability and power cannot be questioned but personally I find himtoo acerbic, brutal and at times unpleasant.

    Generally the standard is not high, I'm afraid.

    Perhaps Matt is a political cartoonist but in the same way that Matthew Parris is party political. Subtle, funny, realistic, pragmatic and not entirely predictable.

    There is more to politics than hatred and over simplification.
    I draw a clear distinction between 'gag' and political cartoonists. The former are always trying to be funny whereas the latter are not.

    There's clearly overlap but it's a question of where the priority lies. If a Matt isn't funny, he's failed. If a Rowson carton doesn't score a political point, he's failed. Matt doesn't have to be political, but sometimes is; likewise Rowson doesn't have to be funny, though he sometimes is.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 20,580
    edited June 19

    To be honest I cannot understand why the US has nobody worthy of the office of President

    In other news

    Drakeford has bowed to pressure and from the 6th July is abandoning the 5 mile driving restriction and opening the holiday and leisure industry

    Best news of the day for us in North Wales

    Rochdale Pioneer can come here to Wales for his holidays and he will be very welcome

    Only if he stays within 5 miles of Offa's Dyke!
    5 mile rule goes and not before time, so you can travel throughout Wales
    According to the BBC it's 'could be lifted in two weeks'.
    Drakeford has had no choice but to lift it and to open the holiday industry in Wales from mid july. The anger and dismay from organisations and individuals reported daily across the Welsh media came to a head yesteday with a meeting with him, hence today's announcement

    Also all the UK has now moved from 4 to 3 so no excuse, and no doubt Nicola will follow if only to give Scotland a chance to mitigate the damage to their industry and economy over the essential summer holiday season
    '5 mile rule goes and not before time, so you can travel throughout Wales' = travel restrictions could be lifted in two weeks?

    I hope social media spreads this about so when hapless grockles are stopped by the cops they can say Big G told them it was ok.
    What on earth are you talking about

    Drakeford has been live on tv confirming these changes from the 6th July and seeking holiday bookings across Wales from the 13th July

    What is it with so many who seem to want to continue to support the armageddon to our economy for political gain
    'You can travel throughout Wales' is the present tense, not 2 or 3 weeks time.

    Your 100% accurate, deeply insightful observations on Scottish politics have been predicting doom for Sturgeon and the SNP because of lockdown. How does that square with 'support the armageddon to our economy for political gain'?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,178
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    blah blah blah.

    You said an "economic crisis" justifies unprecedented spending. I am just pointing out to you that once you say a crisis of one sort or another justifies unprecedented spending then you can't complain if the crisis that is picked is not one you would spend an extra fiver on.
    I was talking about countercyclical spending during a recession. If you were too incapable of reading comprehension to understand that I was talking about a recession then I apologise that my point wasn't explained in simple enough words for you to understand.
    You decided to talk about countercyclical spending during a recession.

    You started off by saying:

    "There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis..."

    To which I responded that if you are picking and choosing crises that it is ok to borrow for then you can't criticise other governments or views that agree with that principle (albeit you might not agree that their crisis needs money spending on it in the same way as "your" crisis does).
    That in italics is not the sentence I wrote.

    When someone uses the word "between" there's normally two or more options for it to be between so please quote the full sentence to see what 'economic crisis' was contrasted with. Feel free to snip the rest of the post but if you're going to quote a sentence including the word "difference between" then please include the full sentence to show what it is meant to be between.

    If you do that it might aid your reading comprehension.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 20,580

    algarkirk said:

    fpt: @Sandpit

    Yes, but he's [Matt] not really a political cartoonist. Of those that are I rate Martin Rowson very highly. Bell's ability and power cannot be questioned but personally I find himtoo acerbic, brutal and at times unpleasant.

    Generally the standard is not high, I'm afraid.

    Perhaps Matt is a political cartoonist but in the same way that Matthew Parris is party political. Subtle, funny, realistic, pragmatic and not entirely predictable.

    There is more to politics than hatred and over simplification.
    I draw a clear distinction between 'gag' and political cartoonists. The former are always trying to be funny whereas the latter are not.

    There's clearly overlap but it's a question of where the priority lies. For example, if a Matt isn't funny, he's failed. If a Rowson carton doesn't score a political point, he's failed. Matt doesn't have to be political, but sometimes is; likewise Rowson doesn't doesn't have to be funny, though he sometimes is.
    What do you think of Coldwar Steve? Obviously he's removed the drawing factor, (but not composition of course).
  • StockyStocky Posts: 2,782

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    In a recession all progressives become Keynesians.
    During periods of growth, they stop being Keynesians.
    I am not sure I would describe Philip as a progressive lol. Reactionary contrarian perhaps.
    I'm not a progressive, I'm a libertarian.

    I'm not who Malmesbury was referring to though, [I think] he was agreeing with me.
    You proved yesterday you are not a libertarian or a liberal (small l). You said you are against countrysports (bloodsports as you call them). To be a true liberal, or even more so, a libertarian you need to oppose laws that restrict the rights of individuals even if you morally disapprove. To be a libertarian you would also need to be in favour of a massive relaxation of gun laws back to pre-1914 levels. So, sorry to disappoint you, you are neither. Reactionary contrarian fits you. Wear it with pride!
    I think Nigel has skewered you on this one Philip TBF. I too would have expected you to be opposed to the state banning of country sports on libertarian grounds.
  • Rexel56Rexel56 Posts: 754
    There used to be a contributor on PB called BenM who was a dogged opponent of so-called austerity under Osborne. He called for stimulus spending under all circumstances such that a law of Benenomics was coined:

    When growth is below trend, spending should grow because it must.
    When growth is above trend, spending should grow because it can.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 5,802

    algarkirk said:

    fpt: @Sandpit

    Yes, but he's [Matt] not really a political cartoonist. Of those that are I rate Martin Rowson very highly. Bell's ability and power cannot be questioned but personally I find himtoo acerbic, brutal and at times unpleasant.

    Generally the standard is not high, I'm afraid.

    Perhaps Matt is a political cartoonist but in the same way that Matthew Parris is party political. Subtle, funny, realistic, pragmatic and not entirely predictable.

    There is more to politics than hatred and over simplification.
    I draw a clear distinction between 'gag' and political cartoonists. The former are always trying to be funny whereas the latter are not.

    There's clearly overlap but it's a question of where the priority lies. For example, if a Matt isn't funny, he's failed. If a Rowson carton doesn't score a political point, he's failed. Matt doesn't have to be political, but sometimes is; likewise Rowson doesn't have to be funny, though he sometimes is.
    I'd say there are two types of good political cartoonists: the ones who make you think about an issue by amusing you; the ones who make you think about an issue by making you feel uncomfortable.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 59,930
    Stocky said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Surrey said:

    Trump is on the wrong side of Twitter again, this time for posting a fake CNN video and then denouncing fake news. The way he uses the word "fake" suggests more than a personality disorder.

    Imagine what he might say if his Tulsa rally spreads SARS-Cov2 and kills people. "Fakes!" "Crisis actors!"

    We seem to be eliminating various methods of (usual) spread.

    Fleeting passing outdoors - Not particularly likely
    Sitting with your mates outdoors - Seems to be mainly OK
    Moving around indoors (Shopping) whilst trying to maintain a 2 metre distance - You'd be unlucky
    Mass gathering outdoors - Doesn't look to have taken R over 1.

    Which really only leaves larger gatherings indoors. By elimination they pretty much MUST be superspreader events !
    Hospitals no.1, I`d suggest
    Difficult to eliminate hospitals though.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 59,930

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    In a recession all progressives become Keynesians.
    During periods of growth, they stop being Keynesians.
    I am not sure I would describe Philip as a progressive lol. Reactionary contrarian perhaps.
    I'm not a progressive, I'm a libertarian.

    I'm not who Malmesbury was referring to though, [I think] he was agreeing with me.
    You proved yesterday you are not a libertarian or a liberal (small l). You said you are against countrysports (bloodsports as you call them). To be a true liberal, or even more so, a libertarian you need to oppose laws that restrict the rights of individuals even if you morally disapprove. To be a libertarian you would also need to be in favour of a massive relaxation of gun laws back to pre-1914 levels. So, sorry to disappoint you, you are neither. Reactionary contrarian fits you. Wear it with pride!
    I'm a libertarian not an anarchist. I don't believe in no laws.

    The law should be there primarily to prevent harm to others. Blood sports fall under that definition, so long as you accept animals as others.

    I have no problems with "country sports": Polo, croquet etc may be country sports - my concern was with ones that involve blood not the country.
    Your level of ignorance really does crack me up .I gave you the benefit of the doubt and I thought your juvenile perspective might just be limited to your simplistic knowledge of politics. I suppose if you tried to only comment on things you actually have some knowledge of you wouldn't be on here for more than a few seconds a day. Perhaps if you spent less time on here you could broaden your knowledge a bit, and stop talking crap about things you have zero knowledge or understanding of. You say this is your hobby, please try something else to broaden your mind.
    If what you want me to try is inflicting cruelty to animals then I'm just not interested. Thanks but no thanks.

    The world has moved on from cock fighting and fox hunting. So should you.
    Are you vegetarian or vegan ?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,757

    To be honest I cannot understand why the US has nobody worthy of the office of President

    In other news

    Drakeford has bowed to pressure and from the 6th July is abandoning the 5 mile driving restriction and opening the holiday and leisure industry

    Best news of the day for us in North Wales

    Rochdale Pioneer can come here to Wales for his holidays and he will be very welcome

    Only if he stays within 5 miles of Offa's Dyke!
    5 mile rule goes and not before time, so you can travel throughout Wales
    According to the BBC it's 'could be lifted in two weeks'.
    Drakeford has had no choice but to lift it and to open the holiday industry in Wales from mid july. The anger and dismay from organisations and individuals reported daily across the Welsh media came to a head yesteday with a meeting with him, hence today's announcement

    Also all the UK has now moved from 4 to 3 so no excuse, and no doubt Nicola will follow if only to give Scotland a chance to mitigate the damage to their industry and economy over the essential summer holiday season
    '5 mile rule goes and not before time, so you can travel throughout Wales' = travel restrictions could be lifted in two weeks?

    I hope social media spreads this about so when hapless grockles are stopped by the cops they can say Big G told them it was ok.
    What is it with so many who seem to want to continue to support the armageddon to our economy for political gain
    Because they expect someone else to bear the economic cost....
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 73,094

    HYUFD said:
    Do you think the right is about to split again? At a zenith in its power?
    His argument is the Tory vote is mainly made up of social conservatives now who could drift back to Farage if Boris does not reduce immigration, stand up to Wokeism etc. Whereas Cameron also had social liberals who no longer vote Tory
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 23,686

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    In a recession all progressives become Keynesians.
    During periods of growth, they stop being Keynesians.
    I am not sure I would describe Philip as a progressive lol. Reactionary contrarian perhaps.
    I'm not a progressive, I'm a libertarian.

    I'm not who Malmesbury was referring to though, [I think] he was agreeing with me.
    You proved yesterday you are not a libertarian or a liberal (small l). You said you are against countrysports (bloodsports as you call them). To be a true liberal, or even more so, a libertarian you need to oppose laws that restrict the rights of individuals even if you morally disapprove. To be a libertarian you would also need to be in favour of a massive relaxation of gun laws back to pre-1914 levels. So, sorry to disappoint you, you are neither. Reactionary contrarian fits you. Wear it with pride!
    I'm a libertarian not an anarchist. I don't believe in no laws.

    The law should be there primarily to prevent harm to others. Blood sports fall under that definition, so long as you accept animals as others.

    I have no problems with "country sports": Polo, croquet etc may be country sports - my concern was with ones that involve blood not the country.
    Your level of ignorance really does crack me up .I gave you the benefit of the doubt and I thought your juvenile perspective might just be limited to your simplistic knowledge of politics. I suppose if you tried to only comment on things you actually have some knowledge of you wouldn't be on here for more than a few seconds a day. Perhaps if you spent less time on here you could broaden your knowledge a bit, and stop talking crap about things you have zero knowledge or understanding of. You say this is your hobby, please try something else to broaden your mind.
    If what you want me to try is inflicting cruelty to animals then I'm just not interested. Thanks but no thanks.

    The world has moved on from cock fighting and fox hunting. So should you.
    Fox hunting is not cruel. So what's your problem?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 20,580
    More evidence of why Scotland 'won' in 2014.

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,178
    Stocky said:

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    In a recession all progressives become Keynesians.
    During periods of growth, they stop being Keynesians.
    I am not sure I would describe Philip as a progressive lol. Reactionary contrarian perhaps.
    I'm not a progressive, I'm a libertarian.

    I'm not who Malmesbury was referring to though, [I think] he was agreeing with me.
    You proved yesterday you are not a libertarian or a liberal (small l). You said you are against countrysports (bloodsports as you call them). To be a true liberal, or even more so, a libertarian you need to oppose laws that restrict the rights of individuals even if you morally disapprove. To be a libertarian you would also need to be in favour of a massive relaxation of gun laws back to pre-1914 levels. So, sorry to disappoint you, you are neither. Reactionary contrarian fits you. Wear it with pride!
    I think Nigel has skewered you on this one Philip TBF. I too would have expected you to be opposed to the state banning of country sports on libertarian grounds.
    Sports that don't involve animal cruelty absolutely I'm opposed to banning. If you want to go hurling, or play polo or croquet or roll cheese down hills or whatever other country pursuits you may find interesting then I couldn't care less.

    I do not approve of lifting bans on animal cruelty. If I saw someone torturing a cat or dog I don't think that needs to be legal in order to be libertarian.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 23,686

    Stocky said:

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    In a recession all progressives become Keynesians.
    During periods of growth, they stop being Keynesians.
    I am not sure I would describe Philip as a progressive lol. Reactionary contrarian perhaps.
    I'm not a progressive, I'm a libertarian.

    I'm not who Malmesbury was referring to though, [I think] he was agreeing with me.
    You proved yesterday you are not a libertarian or a liberal (small l). You said you are against countrysports (bloodsports as you call them). To be a true liberal, or even more so, a libertarian you need to oppose laws that restrict the rights of individuals even if you morally disapprove. To be a libertarian you would also need to be in favour of a massive relaxation of gun laws back to pre-1914 levels. So, sorry to disappoint you, you are neither. Reactionary contrarian fits you. Wear it with pride!
    I think Nigel has skewered you on this one Philip TBF. I too would have expected you to be opposed to the state banning of country sports on libertarian grounds.
    Sports that don't involve animal cruelty absolutely I'm opposed to banning. If you want to go hurling, or play polo or croquet or roll cheese down hills or whatever other country pursuits you may find interesting then I couldn't care less.

    I do not approve of lifting bans on animal cruelty. If I saw someone torturing a cat or dog I don't think that needs to be legal in order to be libertarian.
    As I said, fox hunting is not cruel.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 4,289
    edited June 19

    Breaking news

    CMO's from all four countries now say we are in level 3

    True for Scotland, NI, Wales and London. Pockets of England should still be a four imho, by the way I am not an epidemiologist.
    No.

    CMO's from all countries including England have made a joint public announcement

    With respect I doubt you have greater expertise in this field

    Breaking news

    CMO's from all four countries now say we are in level 3

    True for Scotland, NI, Wales and London. Pockets of England should still be a four imho, by the way I am not an epidemiologist.
    No.

    CMO's from all countries including England have made a joint public announcement

    With respect I doubt you have greater expertise in this field
    I have the expertise as a PB poster. Is there a more appropriate qualification?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 2,633

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    And yet Labour "destroyed the public finances" by doing exactly what you are describing. Let's look at the OBR data.
    Global financial crisis:
    Borrowing before crisis (2007, % GDP): 2.9%
    Cyclically adjusted terms: 2.0%
    Debt before crisis (2007, % GDP): 34.2%
    Change in debt to GDP ratio 1997-2007: -1.5pp
    Borrowing at peak (2009): 10.2%.
    Coronavirus crisis:
    Borrowing before crisis (2019): 2.8%
    Cyclically adjusted terms: 1.6%
    Debt before crisis (2019, % GDP): 79.7%
    Change in debt to GDP ratio 2009-2019: +16.8pp
    Borrowing at peak (2020, OBR forecast): 15.2%.
    So prior to the global financial crisis, Labour had brought down the debt to GDP ratio over the previous ten years and was running a deficit to GDP ratio of about the same size as the one the current government was running going into the current crisis (having presided over a 17pp increase in the debt to GDP ratio over the previous ten years).
    I am not going to criticise the government for borrowing more, they are doing exactly the right thing. I merely note that Labour did the same thing in 08-09 and were crucified for it by Tories ever since. The level of intellectual dishonesty is astounding.
    You're talking absolute nonsense!

    Labour had inherited a balanced budget with the deficit coming down to surplus and then chose, for no good reason, to blow the budget out to a budget deficit during growth times. Labour created the deficit from 2002 onwards, that is what caused the problem.

    The Tories inherited Labour's economic catastrophe and brought the deficit down.

    To claim the Tories had increased the debt to GDP is absolute garbage and shows you to be totally ignorant. The Tories reduced the deficit every year, they didn't create it as Labour had previously. There was no alternative to debt going up unless the Tories had been far more austere ending the deficit overnight.
    You keep calling it Labour's economic catastrophe, you're high on your own supply. There was a global financial crisis (the clue is in the word "global"). Could we have been keeping a closer eye on the banks? Sure, but I don't remember the Tories calling for tougher regulation at the time. And again, this was a global problem since banking rules are largely determined at the international level.
    Yes the deficit was coming down when Labour came in. Why? Because the Tories had mismanaged the economy in the late 1980s, created an unsustainable boom and the resulting recession had crashed the public finances. They were in the process of restoring some semblance of sanity after debt had risen to 37% of GDP by 1996. Labour continued that process so that by 2000 it was running a 1.4% of GDP surplus and debt had fallen to just 27% of GDP (creating concerns that there wouldn't be enough debt to satisfy demands by the financial system). With debt under control and with a dire need for investment in public services, Labour increased borrowing to 2.9% of GDP, which was the average level for the 1979-1996 period so was hardly profligate or dangerous unless you want to accuse Thatcher and Major of that too.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,178
    Pulpstar said:

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    In a recession all progressives become Keynesians.
    During periods of growth, they stop being Keynesians.
    I am not sure I would describe Philip as a progressive lol. Reactionary contrarian perhaps.
    I'm not a progressive, I'm a libertarian.

    I'm not who Malmesbury was referring to though, [I think] he was agreeing with me.
    You proved yesterday you are not a libertarian or a liberal (small l). You said you are against countrysports (bloodsports as you call them). To be a true liberal, or even more so, a libertarian you need to oppose laws that restrict the rights of individuals even if you morally disapprove. To be a libertarian you would also need to be in favour of a massive relaxation of gun laws back to pre-1914 levels. So, sorry to disappoint you, you are neither. Reactionary contrarian fits you. Wear it with pride!
    I'm a libertarian not an anarchist. I don't believe in no laws.

    The law should be there primarily to prevent harm to others. Blood sports fall under that definition, so long as you accept animals as others.

    I have no problems with "country sports": Polo, croquet etc may be country sports - my concern was with ones that involve blood not the country.
    Your level of ignorance really does crack me up .I gave you the benefit of the doubt and I thought your juvenile perspective might just be limited to your simplistic knowledge of politics. I suppose if you tried to only comment on things you actually have some knowledge of you wouldn't be on here for more than a few seconds a day. Perhaps if you spent less time on here you could broaden your knowledge a bit, and stop talking crap about things you have zero knowledge or understanding of. You say this is your hobby, please try something else to broaden your mind.
    If what you want me to try is inflicting cruelty to animals then I'm just not interested. Thanks but no thanks.

    The world has moved on from cock fighting and fox hunting. So should you.
    Are you vegetarian or vegan ?
    No.

    Call me a hypocrite if you like. I think killing animals for their meat or leather is fine as its done for a necessary reason so long as you don't do it cruelly or treat the animals cruelly while they're farmed.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 2,538

    Stocky said:

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    In a recession all progressives become Keynesians.
    During periods of growth, they stop being Keynesians.
    I am not sure I would describe Philip as a progressive lol. Reactionary contrarian perhaps.
    I'm not a progressive, I'm a libertarian.

    I'm not who Malmesbury was referring to though, [I think] he was agreeing with me.
    You proved yesterday you are not a libertarian or a liberal (small l). You said you are against countrysports (bloodsports as you call them). To be a true liberal, or even more so, a libertarian you need to oppose laws that restrict the rights of individuals even if you morally disapprove. To be a libertarian you would also need to be in favour of a massive relaxation of gun laws back to pre-1914 levels. So, sorry to disappoint you, you are neither. Reactionary contrarian fits you. Wear it with pride!
    I think Nigel has skewered you on this one Philip TBF. I too would have expected you to be opposed to the state banning of country sports on libertarian grounds.
    Sports that don't involve animal cruelty absolutely I'm opposed to banning. If you want to go hurling, or play polo or croquet or roll cheese down hills or whatever other country pursuits you may find interesting then I couldn't care less.

    I do not approve of lifting bans on animal cruelty. If I saw someone torturing a cat or dog I don't think that needs to be legal in order to be libertarian.
    Try hunting, and then come and tell us what's cruel about it.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 23,686
    edited June 19

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    blah blah blah.

    You said an "economic crisis" justifies unprecedented spending. I am just pointing out to you that once you say a crisis of one sort or another justifies unprecedented spending then you can't complain if the crisis that is picked is not one you would spend an extra fiver on.
    I was talking about countercyclical spending during a recession. If you were too incapable of reading comprehension to understand that I was talking about a recession then I apologise that my point wasn't explained in simple enough words for you to understand.
    You decided to talk about countercyclical spending during a recession.

    You started off by saying:

    "There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis..."

    To which I responded that if you are picking and choosing crises that it is ok to borrow for then you can't criticise other governments or views that agree with that principle (albeit you might not agree that their crisis needs money spending on it in the same way as "your" crisis does).
    That in italics is not the sentence I wrote.

    When someone uses the word "between" there's normally two or more options for it to be between so please quote the full sentence to see what 'economic crisis' was contrasted with. Feel free to snip the rest of the post but if you're going to quote a sentence including the word "difference between" then please include the full sentence to show what it is meant to be between.

    If you do that it might aid your reading comprehension.
    "There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. "

    Is wot u wrote.

    Actually it is an illogical statement. You have identified a crisis that is worth excess borrowing. You have therefore accepted that for certain crises (presumably the ones you think justify it) excess borrowing is ok. Whereas there are plenty of crises that are worth excess borrowing.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 20,580
    Not enough sick bags in the world.

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 20,580
    TOPPING said:


    As I said, fox hunting is not cruel.

    IshmaelZ said:


    Try hunting, and then come and tell us what's cruel about it.

    Oh God, they've been activated.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,178

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    And yet Labour "destroyed the public finances" by doing exactly what you are describing. Let's look at the OBR data.
    Global financial crisis:
    Borrowing before crisis (2007, % GDP): 2.9%
    Cyclically adjusted terms: 2.0%
    Debt before crisis (2007, % GDP): 34.2%
    Change in debt to GDP ratio 1997-2007: -1.5pp
    Borrowing at peak (2009): 10.2%.
    Coronavirus crisis:
    Borrowing before crisis (2019): 2.8%
    Cyclically adjusted terms: 1.6%
    Debt before crisis (2019, % GDP): 79.7%
    Change in debt to GDP ratio 2009-2019: +16.8pp
    Borrowing at peak (2020, OBR forecast): 15.2%.
    So prior to the global financial crisis, Labour had brought down the debt to GDP ratio over the previous ten years and was running a deficit to GDP ratio of about the same size as the one the current government was running going into the current crisis (having presided over a 17pp increase in the debt to GDP ratio over the previous ten years).
    I am not going to criticise the government for borrowing more, they are doing exactly the right thing. I merely note that Labour did the same thing in 08-09 and were crucified for it by Tories ever since. The level of intellectual dishonesty is astounding.
    You're talking absolute nonsense!

    Labour had inherited a balanced budget with the deficit coming down to surplus and then chose, for no good reason, to blow the budget out to a budget deficit during growth times. Labour created the deficit from 2002 onwards, that is what caused the problem.

    The Tories inherited Labour's economic catastrophe and brought the deficit down.

    To claim the Tories had increased the debt to GDP is absolute garbage and shows you to be totally ignorant. The Tories reduced the deficit every year, they didn't create it as Labour had previously. There was no alternative to debt going up unless the Tories had been far more austere ending the deficit overnight.
    You keep calling it Labour's economic catastrophe, you're high on your own supply. There was a global financial crisis (the clue is in the word "global"). Could we have been keeping a closer eye on the banks? Sure, but I don't remember the Tories calling for tougher regulation at the time. And again, this was a global problem since banking rules are largely determined at the international level.
    Yes the deficit was coming down when Labour came in. Why? Because the Tories had mismanaged the economy in the late 1980s, created an unsustainable boom and the resulting recession had crashed the public finances. They were in the process of restoring some semblance of sanity after debt had risen to 37% of GDP by 1996. Labour continued that process so that by 2000 it was running a 1.4% of GDP surplus and debt had fallen to just 27% of GDP (creating concerns that there wouldn't be enough debt to satisfy demands by the financial system). With debt under control and with a dire need for investment in public services, Labour increased borrowing to 2.9% of GDP, which was the average level for the 1979-1996 period so was hardly profligate or dangerous unless you want to accuse Thatcher and Major of that too.
    Labour created the deficit to 2.9 which was far too high and profligate and dangerous for that stage of the economic cycle.

    That 2.9% was the average level for the 1979-1996 period is meaningless. You need to consider the stage of the economic cycle, during 1979-1996 the deficit generally went down during times of growth and up during recessions. As is sane and sensible.

    When the UK went into recession during the 1979-1996 period it did so from a budget surplus allowing the deficit to go back up again and then start coming back down again.

    Blowing the deficit up BEFORE the recession is what Labour did that was so catastrophic.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 33,816
    edited June 19

    Breaking news

    CMO's from all four countries now say we are in level 3

    True for Scotland, NI, Wales and London. Pockets of England should still be a four imho, by the way I am not an epidemiologist.
    No.

    CMO's from all countries including England have made a joint public announcement

    With respect I doubt you have greater expertise in this field
    I have the expertise as a PB poster. Is there a more appropriate qualification?

    Good answer to be fair

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 73,094
    edited June 19
    On topic I see Val Demings is a US representative from Florida, a key swing state and an African American female so ticks all the boxes for Biden.

    Good tip from OGH
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 7,673

    algarkirk said:

    fpt: @Sandpit

    Yes, but he's [Matt] not really a political cartoonist. Of those that are I rate Martin Rowson very highly. Bell's ability and power cannot be questioned but personally I find himtoo acerbic, brutal and at times unpleasant.

    Generally the standard is not high, I'm afraid.

    Perhaps Matt is a political cartoonist but in the same way that Matthew Parris is party political. Subtle, funny, realistic, pragmatic and not entirely predictable.

    There is more to politics than hatred and over simplification.
    I draw a clear distinction between 'gag' and political cartoonists. The former are always trying to be funny whereas the latter are not.

    There's clearly overlap but it's a question of where the priority lies. For example, if a Matt isn't funny, he's failed. If a Rowson carton doesn't score a political point, he's failed. Matt doesn't have to be political, but sometimes is; likewise Rowson doesn't have to be funny, though he sometimes is.
    I'd say there are two types of good political cartoonists: the ones who make you think about an issue by amusing you; the ones who make you think about an issue by making you feel uncomfortable.
    It's an interesting if somewhat narrow topic. You should try talking to Marf about it if you ever get the chance. My guess is she would say the most important requirement of a political cartoon is truthfulness. I suppose the Raab effort fails on that score. It was a minor conversational error, not a major foot-in-mouth moment.

    Likewise Bell's portrayal of Patel as a fat old heifer with a ring through her nose simply didn't work on any level.

    I take your point though. The Raab 'toon wasn't amusing and didn't make you think. The Patel effort wasn't funny and made you think but not in the way intended. Both fails, I'm afraid.

    For the record, I respect Bell rather than like him. I don't care for Brookes' work. In fact I like very few current political cartoonists.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 5,056
    Pulpstar said:



    Are you vegetarian or vegan ?

    You don't have to be vegan to think watching an animal being ripped to bits as the centrepiece of a social event is a prick's game.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 23,686
    IshmaelZ said:

    Try hunting, and then come and tell us what's cruel about it.

    He's in a bit of a pickle this morning.

    Not understanding that once excess spending for crises has been sanctioned, just watch the number of crises that crop up; and also, not really understanding hunting, vaguely aware that people who do it dress funny in red coats and, ahem, top hats, and therefore has latched on to what he thinks is an acceptable position on it whereas it is one born of ignorance.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 46,935
    edited June 19
    I see there is now proof covid was in Italy from December. I wonder when it really got to the UK? Would we be shocked to find it was in London also months before the first case was recorded?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,178
    TOPPING said:

    Stocky said:

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    In a recession all progressives become Keynesians.
    During periods of growth, they stop being Keynesians.
    I am not sure I would describe Philip as a progressive lol. Reactionary contrarian perhaps.
    I'm not a progressive, I'm a libertarian.

    I'm not who Malmesbury was referring to though, [I think] he was agreeing with me.
    You proved yesterday you are not a libertarian or a liberal (small l). You said you are against countrysports (bloodsports as you call them). To be a true liberal, or even more so, a libertarian you need to oppose laws that restrict the rights of individuals even if you morally disapprove. To be a libertarian you would also need to be in favour of a massive relaxation of gun laws back to pre-1914 levels. So, sorry to disappoint you, you are neither. Reactionary contrarian fits you. Wear it with pride!
    I think Nigel has skewered you on this one Philip TBF. I too would have expected you to be opposed to the state banning of country sports on libertarian grounds.
    Sports that don't involve animal cruelty absolutely I'm opposed to banning. If you want to go hurling, or play polo or croquet or roll cheese down hills or whatever other country pursuits you may find interesting then I couldn't care less.

    I do not approve of lifting bans on animal cruelty. If I saw someone torturing a cat or dog I don't think that needs to be legal in order to be libertarian.
    As I said, fox hunting is not cruel.
    I don't agree.

    But do you accept that if it is cruel then its reasonable for it to be banned?

    Or do you think eg a pet owner should be able to torture their pet without the law getting involved? I don't and I don't think that's a liberal policy.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 2,538
    Dura_Ace said:

    Pulpstar said:



    Are you vegetarian or vegan ?

    You don't have to be vegan to think watching an animal being ripped to bits as the centrepiece of a social event is a prick's game.
    You have to be a complete prick to pretend to think that is what happens out hunting because it confirms your petty snobberies.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 339
    HYUFD said:

    With Klobuchar out, Harris and Warren are Democrats preferred picks to be Biden's VP candidate



    In effect, the Democrats have two people on their ticket because of the concerns over Biden's health mean a large chunk of voters will be looking at the VP candidate as the potential President. So a VP pick needs to take that into account. That suggests he goes with a Senator or a Governor which would mean Demmings and Lance Bottoms out (I think Rice would pass the test because of her xp in the Obama administration).

    I would be shocked if Biden goes with Warren. Not only is there the issue with BLM but his "you ain't black" comment also means he needs to show that he is not just an old white guy taking the Black vote for granted. That caused a big amount of controversy and hit Biden. If he picks Warren, Stacey Abrams in particular - who I don't have much time for but doesn't command a certain audience in the Democrat activist base - would go nuts ("he didn't call me for VP pick but he chose a white woman!").

    But Harris is also disliked. BLM members have said they won't vote for Biden if she is the VP pick. Her record as AG in CA has a lot of problems. And - irony of ironies - she is not really considered part of the African-American community (she is half Jamaican - descended from a slave owner - and half Indian). There is a fair chance that, if he goes with Harris, he does not get the Black vote out.


  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,178
    edited June 19

    I see there is now proof covid was in Italy from December. I wonder when it really got to the UK? Would we be shocked to find it was in London also months before the first case was recorded?

    Yes I would be.

    If it was then why didn't it exponentially grow for months?

    Especially in December when everyone is indoors and full of Christmas Parties and other sorts of probable superspreader events.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 23,686
    Dura_Ace said:

    Pulpstar said:



    Are you vegetarian or vegan ?

    You don't have to be vegan to think watching an animal being ripped to bits as the centrepiece of a social event is a prick's game.
    However, it's not cruel. So the central premise of his argument, and yours, is flawed.

    Good on the emotive language, that said, as always.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 59,930
    Dura_Ace said:

    Pulpstar said:



    Are you vegetarian or vegan ?

    You don't have to be vegan to think watching an animal being ripped to bits as the centrepiece of a social event is a prick's game.
    I know, but wanted to hear Phil Thompson's view in this session of Mr Thompson's questions though.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 22,337
    Never thought I'd ever agree with the guy, but incredible pretty well nails it.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 23,686

    TOPPING said:


    As I said, fox hunting is not cruel.

    IshmaelZ said:


    Try hunting, and then come and tell us what's cruel about it.

    Oh God, they've been activated.
    Remember - you squeeze, not pull triggers.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,178
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    FPT

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    BREAKING: Coronavirus: Borrowing soars to record £103.7bn as debt outstrips GDP for the first time in 60 years.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-borrowing-soars-to-record-103-7bn-in-a-month-12010125

    Fake news once you take into account "debt" to the Bank of England the reality is very different.

    That entire months borrowing was paid for by the BoE yesterday.
    Weird how we can suddenly lend money to ourselves after so long being told it was impossible and we would be saddling our grandchildren with debt. Tory economics folks
    There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. If you don't understand that I'm not sure how to break it down into smaller pieces to explain it to you.
    Unless...the level of poverty in this country and in particular the level of child poverty constitutes a crisis every bit as grave as the Coronavirus? Or the closure of libraries represents a crisis for peoples' literacy and access to learning. Or the rundown of the NHS constitutes a crisis which...etc.

    One man's crisis is another's BAU. Once you get to choose the crisis (by being in government) you can justify anything.
    No because the difference between a health crisis and what you're describing is it is temporary. We will get through the coronavirus crisis to the other side. Once we are through to the other side of the pandemic then we will need to restore balance to the economy.

    That's not the case with writing blank cheques for permanent things. I'm assuming you don't want the library open temporarily? If you want the library permanently open you need to be able to afford it.
    That is your definition of a crisis which justifies near-unlimited borrowing. And your criteria about libraries. The govt can make its own definitions. Including a Labour government.
    No the definition of recession and growth is a global one, not mine.
    Absolutely. What is the global definition of a crisis?
    A recession.

    I specifically said an economic crisis as opposed to "times of growth". After the recession the deficit will need to be resolved.
    You have deemed an "economic crisis" as being worthy of spaffing money up the wall and turning on the spending taps.

    But Labour might say that a "library crisis" is worthy of doing the same.

    You have accepted that a crisis (economic in this case) justifies such borrowing. And other governments are therefore justified, by your own argument, in deeming other crises likewise worthy.

    Once you have decided that a crisis is justification for such spending then lo there will be crises.
    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession has been accepted for centuries.

    Countercyclical borrowing during a recession is not a novel idea invented by the Tories during this recession.

    If other parties wish to tear up economics and borrow more during growth times then I will oppose that as I always have. If my party sought to do that I would too.

    A recession being justification for such borrowing was accepted centuries before I was born and always will be accepted. Your whatabouterism is absurd.
    blah blah blah.

    You said an "economic crisis" justifies unprecedented spending. I am just pointing out to you that once you say a crisis of one sort or another justifies unprecedented spending then you can't complain if the crisis that is picked is not one you would spend an extra fiver on.
    I was talking about countercyclical spending during a recession. If you were too incapable of reading comprehension to understand that I was talking about a recession then I apologise that my point wasn't explained in simple enough words for you to understand.
    You decided to talk about countercyclical spending during a recession.

    You started off by saying:

    "There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis..."

    To which I responded that if you are picking and choosing crises that it is ok to borrow for then you can't criticise other governments or views that agree with that principle (albeit you might not agree that their crisis needs money spending on it in the same way as "your" crisis does).
    That in italics is not the sentence I wrote.

    When someone uses the word "between" there's normally two or more options for it to be between so please quote the full sentence to see what 'economic crisis' was contrasted with. Feel free to snip the rest of the post but if you're going to quote a sentence including the word "difference between" then please include the full sentence to show what it is meant to be between.

    If you do that it might aid your reading comprehension.
    "There's a difference between borrowing for an economic crisis during the crisis and doing so during times of growth. "

    Is wot u wrote.

    Actually it is an illogical statement. You have identified a crisis that is worth excess borrowing. You have therefore accepted that for certain crises (presumably the ones you think justify it) excess borrowing is ok. Whereas there are plenty of crises that are worth excess borrowing.
    Only outside of "times of growth" according to that sentence.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 5,056
    IshmaelZ said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Pulpstar said:



    Are you vegetarian or vegan ?

    You don't have to be vegan to think watching an animal being ripped to bits as the centrepiece of a social event is a prick's game.
    You have to be a complete prick to pretend to think that is what happens out hunting because it confirms your petty snobberies.
    This post has outdated attitudes, language and cultural depictions which may cause offence today.
Sign In or Register to comment.