Dos_Box Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 The situation in teh late 70's and early 80's was pretty similar to now, whereas then we had huge inefficiant state owned industries (mainly nationalised during or just after WWII as a necessity) pulling down the economy, now we have a massive ineffiiciant state pulling it apart. The problem is still the same. Every company I talk to are doing fine, the only ones struggling are the state sector. The state can only be a finite size with a finite amount of money. At the moment we don't have the money. As the Americans would say, it's economics 101.
LosOjos Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 The situation in teh late 70's and early 80's was pretty similar to now, whereas then we had huge inefficiant state owned industries (mainly nationalised during or just after WWII as a necessity) pulling down the economy, now we have a massive ineffiiciant state pulling it apart. The problem is still the same. Every company I talk to are doing fine, the only ones struggling are the state sector. The state can only be a finite size with a finite amount of money. At the moment we don't have the money. As the Americans would say, it's economics 101. But surely based on that, the government should be pulling money from the private sector to help the public sector, not the other way around? That is my problem with the Tories, they have a history of helping those who don't really need it and punishing those already in a mess
mattx Posted June 17, 2010 Author Posted June 17, 2010 The situation in teh late 70's and early 80's was pretty similar to now, whereas then we had huge inefficiant state owned industries (mainly nationalised during or just after WWII as a necessity) pulling down the economy, now we have a massive ineffiiciant state pulling it apart. The problem is still the same. Every company I talk to are doing fine, the only ones struggling are the state sector. The state can only be a finite size with a finite amount of money. At the moment we don't have the money. As the Americans would say, it's economics 101. We don't have the money because of the greedy bankers took massive 'risks' [ as you like to call them ] which put us in this mess. I would not call it american economics 101, I would call it american economics by greedy brain dead 'risk' taking bankers.
Guest Guest Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 Its funny how quickly people forget who got us into this mess and then blame the party who have to make the hard decisions.
PeteM Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 I think the figure of 153bill is the difference between the Government's income & expenditure. eg We have overspent by that amount this year. The country's total debt is around 2 trillion. £2trillion - the terrifying total of our national debt... that's £33,000 for every man, woman and child in Britain | Mail Online also UK National Debt As Percent Of GDP for United Kingdom 1900-2010 - Central Government Local Authorities Whatever the exact figures it will take many years to repay this and these cuts are just the tip of the iceberg. If you think the budget next week is depressing remember that it is an emergency budget and the cuts are going to go far far deeper than what we see next week. Yes, it's a gloomy outlook, but I'd rather someone tackled it now before we end up as a 3rd world nation.
MbroTech Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 Nope, still not forgotten the American sub-prime mortgage market and the mess they made of rolling up risks.
Guest Guest Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 Every company I talk to are doing fine, the only ones struggling are the state sector. I think thats highly dependant of where you live. Since xmas we've lost Corus and another large call centre, totaling over 2500 jobs, and thats before you take into account all the ancillary businesses.
Dos_Box Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 But surely based on that, the government should be pulling money from the private sector to help the public sector, not the other way around? That is my problem with the Tories, they have a history of helping those who don't really need it and punishing those already in a mess They have already taxed the poor and destroyed the pensions. In this age of globalisation it is far to easy for companies to relocate abroad, especially in the financial sector. You simply cannot hammer businesses (who employ tens of thousands) who pay taxes and keep the country ticking over. Remember, it is these businesses who pay for the country, NOT the state sector who feed off these taxes.
localzuk Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 I think the figure of 153bill is the difference between the Government's income & expenditure. eg We have overspent by that amount this year. The country's total debt is around 2 trillion. £2trillion - the terrifying total of our national debt... that's £33,000 for every man, woman and child in Britain | Mail Online also UK National Debt As Percent Of GDP for United Kingdom 1900-2010 - Central Government Local Authorities Whatever the exact figures it will take many years to repay this and these cuts are just the tip of the iceberg. If you think the budget next week is depressing remember that it is an emergency budget and the cuts are going to go far far deeper than what we see next week. Yes, it's a gloomy outlook, but I'd rather someone tackled it now before we end up as a 3rd world nation. The problem with that figure is that it isn't a fair comparison with previous debt levels within the country. The figure which uses the same methodology is around £920bn. I'm pretty sure if we go back through the various calculations and chuck random things into the equation, it'll be possible to say 'we're doing ok, look at that year!'.
localzuk Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 Who exactly is our debt with? Probably the Chinese.
CHR1S Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 I would love to know if anyone can find out. In the same vein, how much does the monarchy cost a year?
maark Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 Who exactly is our debt with? good question - when my son asked i did not know - all of europe, US and Japan are in huge debt - who to exactly?
LosOjos Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 good question - when my son asked i did not know - all of europe, US and Japan are in huge debt - who to exactly? Martians.
localzuk Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 In the same vein, how much does the monarchy cost a year? Compared to the amount of tourism they attract? Nothing...
CHR1S Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 A quick google says the debt is with the Bank of England, I don't quite get how that works tho!
TechMonkey Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 The way I read it though is there wasn't the money in the first place. So all it meant was that some morons decided to say yes to everything and now someone (not necessarily discounted as a moron) has knocked them down due to there being no money to pay for them. I'm not seeing why it becomes the current governments bad?
CHR1S Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 Compared to the amount of tourism they attract? Nothing... Very good point I missed, and a great new light to look at them in!!
localzuk Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 The way I read it though is there wasn't the money in the first place. So all it meant was that some morons decided to say yes to everything and now someone (not necessarily discounted as a moron) has knocked them down due to there being no money to pay for them. I'm not seeing why it becomes the current governments bad? I'm not one of those saying it is this govt's fault. My comments are more aimed at them being a little too over-zealous with their cuts, thereby putting economic recovery at risk. They seem to be doing the age old trick of blaming the public sector, when it was pretty clearly the banks and private industry that got us into this mess in the first place.
CHR1S Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 Banks. Russians, Chinese and the Middle East, largely. We also sell debt in the form of bonds (guilts). I've got a very good youtube film about the national debt (and money in general), I'll post it when I find it. And how many countries are in debt to us and to what amount? Isn't it time to send the boys round to have a word?? Seems like a global house of cards to me, time to have my wages paid in gold me thinks and I will bury it under a big X in the garden
Hightower Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 My take on the whole thing is we need to get some morals back in this country. Maybe the current government has a chance to get the ball rolling. When I was a kid it was classed as a disgrace to have children and not be married, or not be with the other parent at least. Now, single parents are rewarded while families are left to struggle. The rich will get rich, but this past 13 years the poor have also gotten rich, and that is what has to change. Why should someone who can't be bothered to get out of bed on a morning wear nicer clothes than me, and get to go out socialising more than me. It needs to change! 1
MbroTech Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 So you'd rather keep the poor, poor? The rich can be scroungers too you know. Just because you are poor does not mean you can't be bothered to get out of bed. I almost read your post as satire at first.
localzuk Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 My take on the whole thing is we need to get some morals back in this country. Maybe the current government has a chance to get the ball rolling. When I was a kid it was classed as a disgrace to have children and not be married, or not be with the other parent at least. Now, single parents are rewarded while families are left to struggle. The rich will get rich, but this past 13 years the poor have also gotten rich, and that is what has to change. Why should someone who can't be bothered to get out of bed on a morning wear nicer clothes than me, and get to go out socialising more than me. It needs to change! I think you need to be a little more careful with your choice of words. Making out that the poor getting rich is a bad thing is not really a very sensible thing to say. Making out that the scroungers and wastrels of society are having a cushy life and that is wrong? Now that is a sensible thing to say. 1
Polski Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 And this is just the start..... next year we'll all be going to work in Poland. Oooo! I have always wanted to go there! Just for a visit mind.
Sarconia Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 (edited) When I was a kid it was classed as a disgrace to have children and not be married, or not be with the other parent at least. I'm not sure it should be classed as a disgrace to have children and not be married as crap does occasionally happen but there do seem to be too many single parents out there. I'm fairly sure that in order for any kids to grow up and prosper to the best of their ability they do need two parents and a stable home. Saying that though, I'm not getting married until pre-nuptual agreements are recognised as law (saves all of the faffing around if things do happen to go wrong). My take on the whole thing is we need to get some morals back in this country. Indeed we do but I can't see it happening. The primary thing which I can see though is that we also need motivation... without motivation, nothing happens. I had an argument with someone recently about this and eventually ended up falling out with them over it. I was trying to motivate them into doing something with their life as having left school, they didn't do anything for a good year or so.... eventually they got a part time job (2 1/2hrs a day) and then proceeded to do that for the next 5 years. I couldn't believe that they'd never had any aspirations in life which drove them to do anything and they got rather annoyed when I told them that they needed improvement. I said "how about having more money?" "moving out of your parents house?" "actually getting a girlfriend?" "becoming fitter?" and loads of other general self improvement quotes. Their response was simply "meh" to all of the above, they simply couldn't care less and had no motivation to do anything other than sit at their PC all day. I couldn't really believe it as I'm the complete opposite, I'm always trying out new things and have to have some sort of mental/physical stimulation (err...!) otherwise I get bored. I couldn't just sit at my PC and exist, it's time to live and experience... everything. Edited June 17, 2010 by Sarconia Added another line
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now