It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What Is The End Game, Mr Cameron?

page: 4
18
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 03:59 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason
In economics the deficit normally refers to the borrowing requirement not the balance of payments so does have interest. You are however correct that current debt is not that big a deal. Particularly as we have our own currency. Not sure I share your optimism on getting better bond rates as uk credit rating got worse.
What do you mean SNPs management of budget? They have ran a balanced budget as they are required to every year till this one when they have borrowed for infrastructure projects?


edit on 9-12-2014 by ScepticScot because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 04:01 AM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

Quite - I've had the same sort of experience in the Job Centre years back, so nothing much has changed. I went to whatever interviews they set up for me, some in jobs I would never have considered, just so I could get work. At the same time, the same old faces were down there when I went and they were having the same conversations you just described, expecting to land some dream job with no qualifications of any relevance, or making up excuses as to why they couldn't work/get to interviews.

I used to have to walk past the Job Centre in Reading on my way to and from work (before we moved to Bracknell) and I would regularly see the same sorts hanging around outside, smoking (or bothering me for a smoke) with discarded cans of Tenants super everywhere. There is definitely a common theme when it comes to the "long term unemployed" and that is a total lack of desire to do anything themselves and an expectation that society owes them something.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 04:06 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason

I definitely think there's an air of no hope thet settles around the shoulders of some of the people there, a lot of the others are just plain useless though. The kind that never worked, see every job as beneath the and think they have the right to all of the good things that others obtain by working.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 04:09 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason
Blah, Blah , Blah, Typical wind and pish from you as usual. You are the one how needs to "live a little". may i suggest a month or two on benefits. i'm sure you would come back here with a completely different attitude.

People are being Sanction because Job centres are being pitted against Job Centre when it comes to sanction figures with threats of "if you dont sanction more this office could close".

everything i have said in this thread are facts that can be proven over and over again. what you try and spin is Government Propaganda as Usual..."Hater of Labour"???? yeah, i'm Guessing what you mean is "Hard Work".

As for the Portuguese Brickies. I'm guessing as usual that the numbers are small and the BBC or the Daily Mail in cahoots with "The Party" and Party Members like yourself have spun the story once again to have the Sheeple believe the UK Brickie along with everyone else born in the UK are now a bunch of Lazy Bastards who wont work for anything less than £2000 a week...even if their are Brickies in London earning £1000 a week i'll bet my arse they are made to work 12 hours+ a day 7 days a week for that...trust me, they wont last long at that rate in the brickie game...

A £1000 quid is not nearly enough for those hours and given the extortionate rents in London you would need to live 5 to a room to see any benefit at the end of the week.

People like yourself could only dream of working as hard as a Brickie does and if you ever did i'm sure your back and limb joints would be broken, Like most bricklayers, by the time they reach 50, but hold on Mr Brickie, you have another 17 years..(so far) to work before you even think of retiring.

Why dont you try your hand at being a brickie before you start criticising them. or are you happy earning what your earn..probably pushing a pen.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 04:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
In economics the deficit normally refers to the borrowing requirement not the balance of payments so does have interest.


Perhaps I used the wrong term, but the deficit itself does not carry interest - the money borrowed to pay for the overspend does.


originally posted by: ScepticScot
You are however correct that current debt is not that big a deal. Particularly as we have our own currency. Not sure I share your optimism on getting better bond rates as uk credit rating got worse.


Only marginally worse and as the economic/fiscal situation improves, that rating will improve back to AAA. It is only one or two steps below that at the moment.


originally posted by: ScepticScot
What do you mean SNPs management of budget? They have ran a balanced budget as they are required to every year till this one when they have borrowed for infrastructure projects?


A balanced budget? I think not, it's in worse shape than the UK budget and that is saying something. They've spent far more than they've brought in for several years. For example, FY 12/13 the deficit was £8 Billion (including a geographical oil share) which equates to a deficit of 6.3% of GDP.

Scottish Government spending



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 04:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
a reply to: stumason
Blah, Blah , Blah, Typical wind and pish from you as usual. You are the one how needs to "live a little". may i suggest a month or two on benefits. i'm sure you would come back here with a completely different attitude.


You really are a vindictive little man, aren't you? I'll have you know I've done my time at the bottom of the heap - I have even been homeless - but rather than bleat on about how it's Maggies/The Tories/The English/"insert demon here" fault, I pulled my socks up and got on with it, rather than play the eternal victim card.

As for benefits, as a single, white bloke in his early 20's, I was entitled to jack crap. They wouldn't even house me as I was living out of a bag on a mates sofa, so as far as they were concerned I was "housed".


originally posted by: Soloprotocol
People are being Sanction because Job centres are being pitted against Job Centre when it comes to sanction figures with threats of "if you dont sanction more this office could close".


Are they really?


originally posted by: Soloprotocol
everything i have said in this thread are facts that can be proven over and over again. what you try and spin is Government Propaganda as Usual..."Hater of Labour"???? yeah, i'm Guessing what you mean is "Hard Work".

As for the Portuguese Brickies. I'm guessing as usual that the numbers are small and the BBC or the Daily Mail in cahoots with "The Party" and Party Members like yourself have spun the story once again to have the Sheeple believe the UK Brickie along with everyone else born in the UK are now a bunch of Lazy Bastards who wont work for anything less than £2000 a week...even if their are Brickies in London earning £1000 a week i'll bet my arse they are made to work 12 hours+ a day 7 days a week for that...trust me, they wont last long at that rate in the brickie game...

A £1000 quid is not nearly enough for those hours and given the extortionate rents in London you would need to live 5 to a room to see any benefit at the end of the week.

People like yourself could only dream of working as hard as a Brickie does and if you ever did i'm sure your back and limb joints would be broken, Like most bricklayers, by the time they reach 50, but hold on Mr Brickie, you have another 17 years..(so far) to work before you even think of retiring.


Why the personal attacks, Solo? You don't know me - want to know how many hours I worked last month? 252 hours in 6 day blocks of 12 hour shifts - half of which were overnight shifts - I am a telecoms engineer by the way so I am no stranger to physical work. What is it you do again?

And I'm not sure what you mean by "party member" - sounds like an ad hom mixed with a straw man to me. I'm not a paid up member of any party and I am certainly not a committed Tory voter.

As for your £1000 a week not being "enough", that is a take home pay after tax and NI of £3,108 a month, which is an annualised salary of £37,301. Now, I have just looked on RightMove and you can easily rent a single bedroom flat, close to the Tube from as little as £270 a week and they are a decent size too, not a studio.

This would leave our UK/Portuguese bricky with close to £500 a week after paying his rent, taking away other bills and utilities, he could be looking at close to £300 a week disposable, when all is said and done, assuming he is of course living in London. If not, then he'll have even more money.

Perhaps if one removed one's head from your arse and did a little research, you'd find the sky isn't falling, Solo.


originally posted by: Soloprotocol
Why dont you try your hand at being a brickie before you start criticising them. or are you happy earning what your earn..probably pushing a pen.


Who criticised them? Certainly not I - care to point out where I did that? Probably not, that's not the way you operate is it?

And yes, I am happy earning what I earn and no, it doesn't involve "pushing a pen", see above. What is it you do, by the way?
edit on 9/12/14 by stumason because: (no reason given)

edit on 9/12/14 by stumason because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 04:38 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason

The deficit is the money borrowed to pay for overspend. Debt is the accumulated defecit. Both are relevant for calculating repayment's.
Scottish government budget is set by Westminster and expenditure had been within budget every year till this one.
The figure you are referring to is estimated tax take based on Scotland share of UK economy(is flawed for a number of reasons).
This would only be relavent when Scotland becomes independent. Until then the Scottish parliament can only spend what it is given.


edit on 9-12-2014 by ScepticScot because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 04:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
a reply to: stumason
Blah, Blah , Blah, Typical wind and pish from you as usual. You are the one how needs to "live a little". may i suggest a month or two on benefits. i'm sure you would come back here with a completely different attitude.

People are being Sanction because Job centres are being pitted against Job Centre when it comes to sanction figures with threats of "if you dont sanction more this office could close".

everything i have said in this thread are facts that can be proven over and over again. what you try and spin is Government Propaganda as Usual..."Hater of Labour"???? yeah, i'm Guessing what you mean is "Hard Work".

As for the Portuguese Brickies. I'm guessing as usual that the numbers are small and the BBC or the Daily Mail in cahoots with "The Party" and Party Members like yourself have spun the story once again to have the Sheeple believe the UK Brickie along with everyone else born in the UK are now a bunch of Lazy Bastards who wont work for anything less than £2000 a week...even if their are Brickies in London earning £1000 a week i'll bet my arse they are made to work 12 hours+ a day 7 days a week for that...trust me, they wont last long at that rate in the brickie game...

A £1000 quid is not nearly enough for those hours and given the extortionate rents in London you would need to live 5 to a room to see any benefit at the end of the week.

People like yourself could only dream of working as hard as a Brickie does and if you ever did i'm sure your back and limb joints would be broken, Like most bricklayers, by the time they reach 50, but hold on Mr Brickie, you have another 17 years..(so far) to work before you even think of retiring.

Why dont you try your hand at being a brickie before you start criticising them. or are you happy earning what your earn..probably pushing a pen.





Hmmm and there you were, a couple of months ago on a referendum thread berating the long term unemployed, talking about their dirty old clothes etc

Ooops forgot, that only applied to the so-called "unionists"

Hypocrisy much



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 04:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
The deficit is the money borrowed to pay for overspend. Debt is the accumulated defecit. Both are relevant for calculating repayment's.


Only in so far that the deficit includes the repayments, whereas the debt is the total bonds issued on which you pay the interest.


originally posted by: ScepticScot
Scottish government budget is set by Westminster and expenditure had been within budget every year till this one.


Is it? There I was thinking it goes before the Scottish Parliament every year for approval and it was a totally devolved issue. The only thing Westminster sets is the block grant - it is the Scottish Government which decides how to spend it. If anyone has told you otherwise, they are lying to you.

The figure you are referring to is estimated tax take based on Scotland share of UK economy(is flawed for a number of reasons).
This would only be relavent when Scotland becomes independent. Until then the Scottish parlinent can only spend what it is given.


And saying something is "in budget" is not the same as saying you're not running a deficit. All the Scottish Government figures they have released over the years shows spending to be way above revenue - FY12/13 was actually the lowest overspend in a while. It's interesting you say "when" Scotland becomes independent - you're not one of those who wants another bite because you didn't get the answer you wanted this time round?



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 05:00 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason
The block grant is set by Westminster. The Scottish parliament decides how to spend it. It has always spent within the block grant. How can you spin this to be in defecit?.
Also from memory don't the Gers figures show Scotland would have run a smaller deficit that the rest of the UK most years?
I think another referendum is almost inevitable just a matter of when.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 05:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: stumason
The block grant is set by Westminster. The Scottish parliament decides how to spend it. It has always spent within the block grant. How can you spin this to be in defecit?.


It is when compared to the relative revenue generated in Scotland - you are right though that these figures are only really relevant in an independent Scotland, I am simply digging up old info I had from that very debate to try and disprove Salmonds lies.


originally posted by: ScepticScot
Also from memory don't the Gers figures show Scotland would have run a smaller deficit that the rest of the UK most years?


It depends on the year - early on in the financial crisis, yes they did. Lately, not so much. FY 12/13 was actually higher as a % of GDP than the entire UK.


originally posted by: ScepticScot
I think another referendum is almost inevitable just a matter of when.


So the "once in a Generation" thing was just another lie then? Or did it only apply if the Yes camp won? Once you factor in those who simply could not be bothered enough to vote, support for independence is no higher than it ever was, with around 38% of all eligible voters choosing Yes.


(post by Soloprotocol removed for a manners violation)

posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 05:36 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 05:40 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason
So just to confirm you are retracting your erroneous statement that the SNP have run a deficit.
So how many years since the information I available has Scotland run a bigger deficit than the rest of the UK? Might be more instructive than one cherry picked year.
"once in a generation" clearly does not rule it out forever. Besides which it is not any one politicians choice. Another referendum will come when it is the will of the Scottish people.
Going by your math there was not a majority voting no either. 2things you need to consider. 1. Polls adjust for likelihood to vote so there was a massive increase in support for independence. 2.referendums are decided by those who actually vote.


edit on 9-12-2014 by ScepticScot because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 06:17 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

Only in so far that Scotland cannot run a deficit, but the fact remains, they spend far more than they generate in tax it's just hidden within the block grant and the Treasury accounting. An independent Scotland would have to radically alter it's spending plans, especially as the price of Oil has collapsed to half of what Salmond was basing his figures on in the first place.

(EDIT to add: It is also worth pointing out and independent Scotland would be subject to the whims of the Oil price - if it holds like it is expected to at $65 a barrel for some time, that would have punched a huge whole in finances, but within the UK, Scotland get's the block grant regardless of what the Oil price is doing, so we insulate you from the price shock)

You could play that game and it's only fair I suppose, but you cannot assume those who simply did not care to vote would have voted Yes, otherwise they would have done. They simply did not care if Scotland was independent or not, so 38% voted Yes, 46% voted No and 15% simply didn't give a toss, which is a damning indictment on the "strength of feeling" for independence in Scotland and merely confirms what the polls have always said for years, it is a 60/40 split.
edit on 9/12/14 by stumason because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 06:29 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason
Every country in the western world spends more than it it generates, Scotland is not some unique little lamb that needs protected from economic realities. The figures also assume that Scotland would have continued with similar tax and spending plans to the UK. While in the shirt run this may have been true it would not be the case always.
The 15 % that didn't vote includes those sick, out the country,in mental institutions, prison and the recent dead. You cant assume they all just don't care. Worth also pointing out was a higher turnout any post war election.
I fully accept the result was no, however it was close enough that the matter is not over. A lot will depend on the next general election.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 06:39 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason
Re you edit. 10year oil price forecasts range I believe from around #50 to #190 a barrel.
If you have a method of predicting more accurately than that I can suggest a great way we can make some money.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 06:41 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

True points, but Salmond was predicating a lot of his "richest country" crap on a price of oil twice what it is now and is forecast to be for quite some time.

As for you're reasons for not voting - I highly doubt there were some 600,000 sick, mentally ill or indeed people in prison in Scotland.

Surely, unless you were on your death bed, if the subject mattered you'd vote? Leave a legacy for the kids or what have you. What do you mean by "sick"?

I get the mentally ill thing but surely they still would have voted unless you're saying they were in an institution? Surely there cannot be that many in custody?

Prisoners aren't even allowed to vote, so that's a moot point altogether, so we're left with around half a million Scots all deciding to go on Holiday during the biggest ever vote for the country? Either way, there are only 7,600 prisoners in Scotland in total and this includes those waiting on remand (so could technically still have the right to vote as they are not convicted)

Pull the other one...



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 06:52 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

If I had money to invest I'd be buying up Tesco shares, buddy. Just like BP shares in 2010 - going cheap as chips now but they will bounce right back. The market has a very short memory.

As for the Oil, it all depends on what OPEC does. If they keep production going then I see no reason for it to rise too much, if they cut it, we will see it all go to pot, but I have a feeling that behind closed doors people are puling strings as a low Oil price helps the global recovery.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 06:53 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason
Not pulling anything just pointing out that your assertion that those who didn't vote couldn't be bothered is not the whole story. The electoral role is not a 100% accurate. For example my partner is registered at 2 addresses (but only voted once). That is one reason why they are changing the system.




top topics



 
18
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join