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.

 

UK Elections

page: 10
8
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 06:10 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

Why are you confusing personal debt with Government debt? The Government could get rid of all it's debt and the people would still be perfectly entitled to spend on their credit cards like they always have.




posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 06:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: crazyewokBut as I have pointed out before our current levels of debt are all within historical norms. As we have our own currency and large developed economy we really have nothing to fear from current debt levels.
The fact that we have a fiat currency is completely irrelevant, all countries have fiat currencies and this is a good thing *controversial to say in ats I know).
The misplaced emphasis on austerity has done more to harm the economy that the debt levels ever have.





.

Better to rein it in now than in 10 or 20 years time when debt does reach crisis point like post WW2 Briton.



Begs the question on how after the second world war we were skint but we managed to build a welfare state, a Health service and build millions of social houses. As opposed to now, after we have paid off our historical war debts, the Government (a Stu) are telling us we've never had it so good, but our health service is in tatters, no social houses being built or what's left of them maintained and the welfare state is being dismantled bit by bit... ?


By a mixture of cutting our massive military, giving colony's there Independence and I hate to say it American "aid" in the form of the Marshall plan.

Basically we had to sell the British empire to the Americans.
edit on 31-3-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 06:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

The NHS is hardly "in tatters" and as for social housing, we had 13 years of the "peoples party" and they did bugger all except stoke the house price rises (as a sign of a "good economy") and allow in 3 million immigrants over the period to push prices even higher.

As for this talk of "privatising the NHS" - why is it a bad thing? As long as it is free at the point of use, I couldn't give a monkeys if I am sent to the Royal Berks or the BUPA round the corner. The recent contract given to private firms for diagnostics, for example, is simply because the NHS is unable to cope with the backlog and is unable to address the issue due to years of under investment.

I would rather go to a BUPA for a scan inside of a week than wait 3 months for an appointment at an NHS hospital. It's not me paying for it, it's the NHS, so how does it affect the service provided?

Personally, I think the NHS should focus on providing the core service and all the ancillary work that can easily be farmed out should be. That way, it free's up space and money in the NHS for treatment while the diagnostics - which is what usually causes the waiting list - get done in short order.

I get accused of being "ideologically driven", but the same could be applied to those who would not countenance any reform of the NHS or how it operates, simply to preserve it.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 06:18 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason

I am not confusing or conflating anything.

The solidity of the position of the British Taxpayer is linked directly to how effective their government is, and a government which mismanages its finances over successive parliaments (as our government has over the last twenty to thirty years, if not longer) cannot be as effective as the people have a right to demand, bearing in mind the amount of tax we pay in this country.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 06:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: alldaylong

One agency downgraded us to one below AAA - the others didn't and kept us at the top. Kind of makes your whole point a bit, well, pointless really.



Your struggling now. Keep it up.




posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 06:31 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason

I voted LD in the last General Election. But I have the impression that they will get so few votes this time, that they won't hold the balance of power. If, and when Labour lose this election, and if they do not form part of a coalition (which seems unlikely) Miliband will be thrown out anyway, but it my vote will have counted for something, other than to be lost to the LibDems.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 06:42 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

Well, it certainly seems that way by you saying that getting rid of debt will kill the economy.

Exactly how will the Government paying off it's debt cripple the economy? People will still be spending and so far, cutting spending has not harmed the economy one iota.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 06:43 AM
link   
a reply to: alldaylong

Haha, struggling? Not likely - all you've done is try to shoot down each one of my posts and failed each time.

Keep it up



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 06:51 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason




failed each time.


I have proved you wrong on every claim you have made. If you think i have failed then your imagination is running away with you.





posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 07:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: stumason




failed each time.


I have proved you wrong on every claim you have made. If you think i have failed then your imagination is running away with you.




No, you haven't - you've at best, quibbled. The front bench one, you could only find 3 out of the whole lot, whereas I've shown the majority are former ministers. I admitted to hyperbole in my reply to you in that regard.

The second time, I showed the UK has maintained it's AAA, you then changed tack to show only one agency downgraded the UK.

You mentioned about VAT - not sure what relevance that has to anything I said, although I pointed out Labour lied too.

As for the deficit - 41% out of a target of 50% isn't bad going - that's a performance of 82% of the target. They did better with that target than my employer did with it's own targets! We only hit 81% last year.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 07:01 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason

For some reason its shortening the URL, copy the link and text up to html and you'll have the ONS paper stating £65Bn. Your figures were disproven a few months back as they don't account for all the black market mesures that were included in new GDP figures.

Here's the other source.

'Roy Ramm, Commander of Specialist Operations at Scotland Yard told BBC Radio 4's Today programme it was understandable that officers involved had not come forward before.

"Don't underestimate the weight of a threat to your career and to your livelihood if someone says to you" he said.'

www.bbc.co.uk...

It was only a few weeks back Cameron publicly dismissed the claims and investigation as a 'conspiracy theory' and that the Home Office were caught shredding the files -

'Concerned about child abuse and cover-ups that two plus two makes nothing. Spinning on the day the Wanless report, into missing Home Office documents said to contain information about powerful people abusing children, was released, Cameron resorted to calling abuse campaigners conspiracy theorists. To do so, he exploited the fact that evidence could not be found within a few weeks to explain just how at least 114 files concerning child abuse went missing. '
www.huffingtonpost.co.uk...

As for NHS privatisation - how will turning it into a for-profit company help patients? Given I've been waiting 32 months for an MRI and even initial appointment and haven't received any after care following a brain injury (plus working for a brain injury charity where not one person has received treatment) it clearly is in tatters. Both Labour and Tories are to blame for this - drop the tory party blinkers for a minute and have a look what's going on in the real world.
edit on 31-3-2015 by bastion because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-3-2015 by bastion because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 07:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: bastion
a reply to: stumason

For some reason its shortening the URL, copy the link and text up to html and you'll have the ONS paper stating £65Bn. Your figures were disproven a few months back as they don't account for all the black market mesures that were included in new GDP figures.


And yet, still no link to these claims, whereas I've actually linked to ONS and Government data showing you're talking utter bollocks. Drugs and prostitution DID NOT add £65 Billion to the economy in 2009. You might be confusing the net effect over the course of the adjustment (1997-present), but I personally think you're confusing the total added figure, which was around £55 billion and assuming all of it was drugs/hookers, which it wasn't.


Here's the other source.


originally posted by: bastion
'Roy Ramm, Commander of Specialist Operations at Scotland Yard told BBC Radio 4's Today programme it was understandable that officers involved had not come forward before.

"Don't underestimate the weight of a threat to your career and to your livelihood if someone says to you" he said.'

www.bbc.co.uk...


Twisting his words much? He was clearly referring to why officers hadn't come forward in the past - owing to the threats they had received - not currently. He then also states the OSA has to be removed as a threat for people to come forward. Note, this article was written before Thereas May made the statement that they should not be prosecuted, so in the end, a moot point from you.


originally posted by: bastion
As for NHS privatisation - how will turning it into a for-profit company help patients?


The outsourcing will involved a fixed cost per patient, this is something that the NHS can then easily budget for. They will also have contractual obligations to meet, such as seeing a patient in x amount of time etc, which they will be penalised for if they fail. They can then use the (massively underused) private hospital capacity to cut waiting times at a fraction of the cost and time it would take to expand, or even build, NHS hospitals. It's simple business. You have one overstretched provider that cannot cope, along with plenty of other undersubscribed providers with space to spare.

No one is saying privatise the whole NHS, but getting companies to pick up the crappy jobs, freeing up resource in the NHS for proper treatment, hospitals etc is a good idea.

EDIT: I notice you edited your post and mentioned about waiting for an appointment for months, yet you, for some reason, are dead set against private firms helping the NHS clear the backlog?

Ok then!
edit on 31/3/15 by stumason because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 07:16 AM
link   
I fail to see how telling you how to access the paper isn't providing a source. Here's another..

'Accounting for drugs and prostitution to help push UK economy up by £65bn

The Office for National Statistics said its latest estimate was that GDP in 2009 was 4.6% higher than previously stated on the back of the planned improvements in measuring the size of the economy.'

www.theguardian.com...

May made the Statement in January 2015 - The article was written in March 2015, two months later, not before.
edit on 31-3-2015 by bastion because: (no reason given)


The NHS doesn't charge to put up noticeboards, private healthcare via virgin/NHS Care charges £75 per board and £50 per lightbulb changed and bills the NHS - if that's your idea of money well spent then there's really no point trying to have an informed debate with you.
edit on 31-3-2015 by bastion because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-3-2015 by bastion because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 07:16 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok
Deficit spending does not mean that debt will continue to rise as a % if GDP. In fact cutting spending can increase debt as a % of GDP. There is actually no requirement or set benefit to ever paying of the national debt and trying to would almost certainly be counter productive.
The idea the the UK was on course for some massive debt based collapse is simply not true, despite the best efforts of politicians to spin it that way.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 07:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: crazyewok

You are absolutely right, but also totally wrong.

Paying down THIS debt will not solidify our economy, because our economy is based on some people having an awful lot, and many, MANY others being forced to borrow money by way of never being paid enough to actually function their existence. This means that no matter what happens with the deficit, the structural problem will still exist, and will still bite us in the rear later on. So we are currently paying to shore up a structure which does not benefit the people, and weakens the pound as a currency.

Why are there no political parties whose intention is to re-establish the Gold Standard, and do away with debt based economy structure entirely? Why is it that the only options we are being offered are collapse now, or collapse later? Why is it that no one seems to want to address the core of the financial crisis, rather than the symptoms of it?

Not one party in this country has a clue how to protect our economy, how to solidify the position of the British citizen in terms of their financial security. Why is it that the only people getting votes these days are those who participate in the shell game, rather than those who seek to upset the apple cart?


The main reason being that the gold standard is a bloody awful idea.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 07:18 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason

You are back tracking quite nicely. Lets recap on what you stated:-

1) The ENTIRE Labour front bench was in power during the 13 years of Labour Government.

No they weren't and i have explained why. So your wrong.

2) The U.K. Didn't loose it's AAA Rating.

Wrong again. I have shown you facts that it did.

3) Osborne has got the U.K. deficit down to 41%, even though he promise to cut it by 50% by 2014-2015.

The article you provided stated the 41% was an estimate not an actual figure. Again Osbourne missed his target.

Just read back on your posts for clarification of what you have stated.

You have a typical trait of a Tory Voter. Economic with the truth.

Just man up and admit some of what you stated was incorrect.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 07:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: bastion
I fail to see how telling you how to access the paper isn't providing a source. Here's another..

'Accounting for drugs and prostitution to help push UK economy up by £65bn

The Office for National Statistics said its latest estimate was that GDP in 2009 was 4.6% higher than previously stated on the back of the planned improvements in measuring the size of the economy.'

www.theguardian.com...



Excellent, thankyou for providing the rope - even though that link too is broken - from your own link:



Tuesday's update on the impact of the changes follows estimates last month from the ONS that in 2009 illegal drugs and prostitution boosted the economy by £9.7bn – equal to 0.7% of gross domestic product and roughly the same contribution as farming.


So, I was right and you got your figures all confused.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 07:23 AM
link   
a reply to: alldaylong

It's in the thread for everyone to see - I even said that me saying the "entire front bench" was hyperbole on my part, yet I still showed my point was valid as most of them actually were. You have yet to come back with more than the 3 you found.

I never claimed anything about the UK credit rating - you brought that up.

The "article" I posted about the deficit (again, a point you brought up, not I) was from the ONS and Government figures. In fact, latest figures from the ONS show the economy is actually performing better than even those figures suggested.

So really, you just "proved me wrong" -really just pointing out my own hyperbole more than an actual outright incorrectness - on one point, the rest is stuff you brought to the table.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 07:23 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason

Read the bit you bolded. That states the £9.7Bn is outdated. The hint is in the word 'updated'. Why would I cite old discredited figures that the ONS no longer supports?
edit on 31-3-2015 by bastion because: (no reason given)


I have no idea why links aren't working for me today - always worked before.
edit on 31-3-2015 by bastion because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 07:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: bastion
May made the Statement in January 2015 - The article was written in March 2015, two months later, not before.


You seem to be confused - again! I would insist on getting that scan sooner rather than later, it's affecting your thinking...

Thereas May statement on whistleblowers and OSA - March 17th, 2015


originally posted by: bastion
The NHS doesn't charge to put up noticeboards, private healthcare via virgin/NHS Care charges £75 per board and £50 per lightbulb changed and bills the NHS - if that's your idea of money well spent then there's really no point trying to have an informed debate with you.


And how much would it cost to employ a member of staff to do that on a full time salary, with pension, national insurance contributions etc and exactly how busy would they be doing light bulbs and notice boards?

Informed debate, you can't even get your own links right, much less read them properly, nor do you have much of a grasp on economics or business.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join