Homeokocha wrote:PS: Just going to ask Sluffy if he thinks this whole conversation should be moved to a more appropriate thread and, if so, would kindly oblige.
As requested.
See from post 86 onwards.
Who are you voting for in the General Election?
+5
boltonbonce
karlypants
okocha
Norpig
Mad Dog
9 posters
Who are you voting for?
Poll closed
Message [Page 6 of 7]
101 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 12:22
Sluffy
Admin
As requested.
See from post 86 onwards.
102 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 12:27
karlypants
Nat Lofthouse
Sluffy wrote:karlypants wrote:Whitesince63 wrote:Do you seriously need me to explain?karlypants wrote:63, what stupid lockdowns did the Blair/Brown era call for????
Yes. That is why I am asking!!!
My memory obviously needs jogging!
There were no lockdowns under Blair/Brown.
W63 has probably seen some shit posted on the social media he follows and once again believed it and repeated it without even thinking.
I thought so!
103 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 13:08
Sluffy
Admin
Whitesince63 wrote: The OBR report released yesterday clearly indicated a shortfall of no more than £9b less than half that indicated by Reeves.
Well if you actually read it, rather than believing what you read on the social media you follow, it doesn't say that at all!
What it says is that what it was told for the Conservative Budget of March 2024 it showed a black hole of £9.5 billion - however it was never informed by the governments of further pressures on spending that they would have to fund AFTER the budget (an amount stated to be a further £7 billion) which the OBR would have added to their stated £9,5 billion.
"Had we known that information we would have had a materially different view about the level of public spending this year," OBR head Richard Hughes told BBC News.
https://obr.uk/docs/dlm_uploads/Review_of_the_March_2024_forecast_for_DELs.pdf
Was there really a £22 billion black hole that Labour inherited from the Conservative government?
The answer seems to be 'something in that region'.
The numbers stack up like this...
For the last Tory budget in March of this year, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) reported the black hole based on what it had been told at the time by the Treasury, to be £9.5 billion.
HOWEVER at that time it was not made aware of the Tory government future spending commitments, which the OBR now say this -
Nonetheless, it said forecasts in March would have been "materially different" if it had known about ALL the previous government's spending plans.
Reeves said the £22bn came from the £9.5bn of spending plans reported by the OBR, another £7bn before the March Budget, and a further £5.6bn between March and the end of July including public sector pay awards made by Labour.
So in simple terms there was a known black hole of £9.5 billion in March 2024, the Conservative government had committed another undisclosed amount of £7 billion spending that had not been reported to the OBR for their March budget and a further £5.6 billion after the March budget that also included the cost of settling all the public sector pay disputes the Labour government inherited (which the Tory government had made NO provision for).
More detailed explanations here -
Was there a £22bn ‘black hole’ in the UK’s public finances?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2e12j4gz0o
Where does the £22bn claim come from?
The £21.9bn figure was in an audit published by the Treasury at the end of July, external – just a few weeks after Labour came to power.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/672215794da1c0d41942a95d/OBR_review_response_WEB.pdf#page=9
The document looked at areas of public spending which are set to go over budget this year, including:
-Public sector pay rises
- Overspending on certain projects, such as supporting the asylum system
- Unforeseen costs, such as inflation being higher than expected
- Military assistance to Ukraine.
At the time, the OBR wrote that it had not been made aware of the extent of overspends, external and said it would investigate.
https://obr.uk/docs/dlm_uploads/Letter-from-Richard-Hughes-to-the-Treasury-Select-Committee-on-the-OBR-review-of-the-March-2024-forecast-for-departmental-expenditure-limits.pdf
104 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 14:28
Whitesince63
El Hadji Diouf
Karly, my point as you very well know was about Labour governments generally but thank God there wasn’t a virus under Brown because just like under a Starmer one the outcome would still have been much worse I’m sure. In fact I’m certain that Starmer went to bed every night thanking his lucky stars that he wasn’t in charge but could just sit on the sidelines with zero responsibility whilst criticising and regularly voting against anything the government did.karlypants wrote:
Yes. That is why I am asking!!!
My memory obviously needs jogging!
105 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 14:40
Whitesince63
El Hadji Diouf
So, just like I said, no £22b black hole and at worst a series of unquantified costs which weren’t confirmed related mainly to public sector pay awards which were still under negotiation but which as we now know were agreed by Labour with their capitulation to the tune of circa £9b so not a black hole.Sluffy wrote:
Well if you actually read it, rather than believing what you read on the social media you follow, it doesn't say that at all!
What it says is that what it was told for the Conservative Budget of March 2024 it showed a black hole of £9.5 billion - however it was never informed by the governments of further pressures on spending that they would have to fund AFTER the budget (an amount stated to be a further £7 billion) which the OBR would have added to their stated £9,5 billion.
"Had we known that information we would have had a materially different view about the level of public spending this year," OBR head Richard Hughes told BBC News.
https://obr.uk/docs/dlm_uploads/Review_of_the_March_2024_forecast_for_DELs.pdf
Was there really a £22 billion black hole that Labour inherited from the Conservative government?
The answer seems to be 'something in that region'.
The numbers stack up like this...
For the last Tory budget in March of this year, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) reported the black hole based on what it had been told at the time by the Treasury, to be £9.5 billion.
HOWEVER at that time it was not made aware of the Tory government future spending commitments, which the OBR now say this -
Nonetheless, it said forecasts in March would have been "materially different" if it had known about ALL the previous government's spending plans.
Reeves said the £22bn came from the £9.5bn of spending plans reported by the OBR, another £7bn before the March Budget, and a further £5.6bn between March and the end of July including public sector pay awards made by Labour.
So in simple terms there was a known black hole of £9.5 billion in March 2024, the Conservative government had committed another undisclosed amount of £7 billion spending that had not been reported to the OBR for their March budget and a further £5.6 billion after the March budget that also included the cost of settling all the public sector pay disputes the Labour government inherited (which the Tory government had made NO provision for).
More detailed explanations here -
Was there a £22bn ‘black hole’ in the UK’s public finances?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2e12j4gz0o
Where does the £22bn claim come from?
The £21.9bn figure was in an audit published by the Treasury at the end of July, external – just a few weeks after Labour came to power.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/672215794da1c0d41942a95d/OBR_review_response_WEB.pdf#page=9
The document looked at areas of public spending which are set to go over budget this year, including:
-Public sector pay rises
- Overspending on certain projects, such as supporting the asylum system
- Unforeseen costs, such as inflation being higher than expected
- Military assistance to Ukraine.
At the time, the OBR wrote that it had not been made aware of the extent of overspends, external and said it would investigate.
https://obr.uk/docs/dlm_uploads/Letter-from-Richard-Hughes-to-the-Treasury-Select-Committee-on-the-OBR-review-of-the-March-2024-forecast-for-departmental-expenditure-limits.pdf
This government is already a disaster and despite the largest borrowing since the 60s Labour still can’t confirm that there won’t be a need for more if their estimations don’t bring in the taxes they’ve budgeted for, which all know they won’t. Let’s wait and see shall we but I don’t expect this first woman chancellor to be still in post for much more than a year as things disintegrate around her.
Get ready for financial carnage because their union “friends” haven’t even got started on their demands yet and the blocks to all the changes this lot want to make will be just as strong for them as they were for the Tory’s. Once again I’ll repeat that even the worst Tory government is better than a Lie bore one.
106 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 15:36
karlypants
Nat Lofthouse
Whitesince63 wrote:Karly, my point as you very well know was about Labour governments generally but thank God there wasn’t a virus under Brown because just like under a Starmer one the outcome would still have been much worse I’m sure. In fact I’m certain that Starmer went to bed every night thanking his lucky stars that he wasn’t in charge but could just sit on the sidelines with zero responsibility whilst criticising and regularly voting against anything the government did.karlypants wrote:
Yes. That is why I am asking!!!
My memory obviously needs jogging!
63, that unfortunately isn’t the answer I was asking.
My question in reply to you was… what stupid lockdowns did the Blair/Brown era call for?
Please answer my question.
107 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 16:23
Norpig
Nat Lofthouse
karlypants wrote:
63, that unfortunately isn’t the answer I was asking.
My question in reply to you was… what stupid lockdowns did the Blair/Brown era call for?
Please answer my question.
108 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 16:27
Sluffy
Admin
Whitesince63 wrote:So, just like I said, no £22b black hole and at worst a series of unquantified costs which weren’t confirmed related mainly to public sector pay awards which were still under negotiation but which as we now know were agreed by Labour with their capitulation to the tune of circa £9b so not a black hole.
This government is already a disaster and despite the largest borrowing since the 60s Labour still can’t confirm that there won’t be a need for more if their estimations don’t bring in the taxes they’ve budgeted for, which all know they won’t. Let’s wait and see shall we but I don’t expect this first woman chancellor to be still in post for much more than a year as things disintegrate around her.
Get ready for financial carnage because their union “friends” haven’t even got started on their demands yet and the blocks to all the changes this lot want to make will be just as strong for them as they were for the Tory’s. Once again I’ll repeat that even the worst Tory government is better than a Lie bore one.
Are you really that stupid???
I don't know how to make it any simpler for you than this -
The OBR report published yesterday said the £9.5bn total they reported was the deficit that was unfunded at the time of the Conservative's last budget (March 2024) based on the financial information they were shown at the time.
However they now KNOW they WERE NOT TOLD that the government KNEW they it also upcoming budget pressures that were not disclosed to them - AND WERE NOT BUDGETED FOR - (in simple words they knew they had rising costs but had no money saved to pay them!).
That amount was stated to be £7bn by Reeves.
What the OBR said was that they couldn't now put a cost on what the amount would be BUT...
"Had we known that information we would have had a materially different view about the level of public spending this year," OBR head Richard Hughes told BBC News.
And this from the report itself...
Much changes every year between March and July, and especially so when it encompasses a
general election leading to a change of government and associated policies. Decisions on public
sector pay, and/or how the costs of pay increases are to be met, may have a significant impact.
Moreover the effect of decisions taken late in the previous year may only become evident over time.
So even a substantial subsequent adjustment in the overall total for DEL is not conclusive evidence
that the numbers the OBR used in March were inappropriate at the time.
However, the net spending pressures highlighted in July would, if accommodated, have represented
the largest year-ahead overspend of DELs except in the worst year of Covid costs. The size of this
variance inevitably raised the question of whether the Treasury and the OBR engaged sufficiently on
the issues before the March forecast and, even within the limits of what was known at the time,
made sufficient allowance for the pressure on DEL limits.
Or in simple words again 'the net spending pressures highlighted AFTER OBS's March 2024 report's total of £9.5bn' - was a massive understatement of what the black hole total actually was when the Conservatives lost the election.
...a materially different view about the level of public spending this year...
was how the OBR now reports it.
If that isn't enough all the public sector pay issues still had to be settled and once again the Conservatives had made no budget provision for this eventuality.
Reeves states that is another £5.6bn.
That is how the unbudgeted £22bn amounts from.
Let me put it another way to you IF the Conservatives had won the June election they (instead of Labour) would still have had to 'plug' the black hole in the economy.
We know it was at least £9.5bn in March, we are told by the OBR that there was 'a materially different' sum to be added to it that was not disclosed to it for March for expenditure that the government was committed to up to the June election, and we know that the doctors and Nurses, etc wage claims would have to be resolved sooner or later and would add to the growing black hole.
Whether you face up to it or not, there was the country's biggest economic black hole ever that was allowed to grow under the Conservatives in their last year in office (bar the worst year of Covid)...
...the net spending pressures highlighted in July would, if accommodated, have represented
the largest year-ahead overspend of DELs except in the worst year of Covid costs.
You can quibble as much as you like about the numbers but in simple words (yet again) the governments own independent watchdog is stating that it is the largest black hole the government has ever had apart from the worst Covid year.
And that is under a Tory government - Labour didn't cause this mess - they weren't in office.
109 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 16:34
Sluffy
Admin
Norpig wrote:karlypants wrote:
63, that unfortunately isn’t the answer I was asking.
My question in reply to you was… what stupid lockdowns did the Blair/Brown era call for?
Please answer my question.
He's also refused to answer my question of why would the Labour party inflict a £40bn tax raid on the country if there wasn't a black hole in the economy and the NHS was on the verge of collapse. What benefit would they get from doing that?
He also won't say who he's voted for in the Tory leadership - although his choice is between the mentalist Badenoch and the extremely dodgy Jenrick!
110 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 16:35
Whitesince63
El Hadji Diouf
I did but please don’t get like Sluffy and make an argument just for the sake of trying to appear clever.karlypants wrote:
63, that unfortunately isn’t the answer I was asking.
My question in reply to you was… what stupid lockdowns did the Blair/Brown era call for?
Please answer my question.
111 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 16:45
Sluffy
Admin
Whitesince63 wrote:I did but please don’t get like Sluffy and make an argument just for the sake of trying to appear clever.karlypants wrote:
63, that unfortunately isn’t the answer I was asking.
My question in reply to you was… what stupid lockdowns did the Blair/Brown era call for?
Please answer my question.
I don't make arguments for the sake of being clever.
What I do, do, is to call out lies and fake news and post the links to the facts.
Not my problem if you can't accept the truth.
112 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 16:49
Whitesince63
El Hadji Diouf
I just love this site, populated by seemingly sensible and intelligent people but who for some reason can’t see the wood for the trees. Sluffy, there was no black hole and certainly not one of £22b which the OBR have already confirmed as you yourself have posted.Sluffy wrote:
He's also refused to answer my question of why would the Labour party inflict a £40bn tax raid on the country if there wasn't a black hole in the economy and the NHS was on the verge of collapse. What benefit would they get from doing that?
He also won't say who he's voted for in the Tory leadership - although his choice is between the mentalist Badenoch and the extremely dodgy Jenrick!
Mind you this Labour government and Reeves in particular are on a different planet so maybe that explains the “black hole” vision. You can already see that the markets and real experts agree with me when I say how completely naive and catastrophic this budget was. You like to criticise Liz Truss but this will be far more damaging believe me.
You and the other myopics and refusers on here can try to deny it but you know in yourselves how damaging this one budget will be. The simple fact is that the totally inexperienced Reeve has no idea of what the unintended consequences of her actions will be on the economy. Nobody, including the OBR believes that she won’t be back looking for even more borrowing when the plans fail, which we know they will.
You didn’t vote Sluffy so you really should have no say in any of it but at least those of us who did can have an opinion and state it.if we got it wrong that’s tough but at least we voted on what we were told. The fact that from Labour it was a pack of lies and deceit is becoming all too clear now and all those times Sunak was derided for saying it are now being seen to be true. As for Kemi or Jenrick, what could that possibly have to do with you. If I was the racist you say I am though maybe you’d know?
113 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 17:12
karlypants
Nat Lofthouse
Whitesince63 wrote:I did but please don’t get like Sluffy and make an argument just for the sake of trying to appear clever.karlypants wrote:
63, that unfortunately isn’t the answer I was asking.
My question in reply to you was… what stupid lockdowns did the Blair/Brown era call for?
Please answer my question.
I just want the bloody answer to the question.
If you can’t come up with it then why bloody say it then?
114 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 17:45
Sluffy
Admin
Whitesince63 wrote:I just love this site, populated by seemingly sensible and intelligent people but who for some reason can’t see the wood for the trees. Sluffy, there was no black hole and certainly not one of £22b which the OBR have already confirmed as you yourself have posted.Sluffy wrote:
He's also refused to answer my question of why would the Labour party inflict a £40bn tax raid on the country if there wasn't a black hole in the economy and the NHS was on the verge of collapse. What benefit would they get from doing that?
He also won't say who he's voted for in the Tory leadership - although his choice is between the mentalist Badenoch and the extremely dodgy Jenrick!
Mind you this Labour government and Reeves in particular are on a different planet so maybe that explains the “black hole” vision. You can already see that the markets and real experts agree with me when I say how completely naive and catastrophic this budget was. You like to criticise Liz Truss but this will be far more damaging believe me.
You and the other myopics and refusers on here can try to deny it but you know in yourselves how damaging this one budget will be. The simple fact is that the totally inexperienced Reeve has no idea of what the unintended consequences of her actions will be on the economy. Nobody, including the OBR believes that she won’t be back looking for even more borrowing when the plans fail, which we know they will.
You didn’t vote Sluffy so you really should have no say in any of it but at least those of us who did can have an opinion and state it.if we got it wrong that’s tough but at least we voted on what we were told. The fact that from Labour it was a pack of lies and deceit is becoming all too clear now and all those times Sunak was derided for saying it are now being seen to be true. As for Kemi or Jenrick, what could that possibly have to do with you. If I was the racist you say I am though maybe you’d know?
You're bonkers mate, or in denial, or brainwashed, or just plain stupid, or clearly something along those lines.
Try READING the OBR report - they STATE there is a Black hole considerably BIGGER than £9.5bn.
How hard is that to understand?
They go on to say that this black hole (underfunding) is the greatest annual deficit in the history of the UK government bar one (that year being at the height of Covid).
That's THEIR words directly lifted FROM THE REPORT (and dumbed down a bit by me in the faint hope you can understand them).
AND I keep coming back to the point as to why Labour has just gone to the trouble and grief of levelling a budget burden of £40 billon on to the tax payers and businesses of the country if it is (in your head anyway) nothing like that amount?
What benefit could they possibly gain from doing so?
You can't answer that - no one can as it is an utterly nonsensical thing to do.
The only logical explanation is that there was a massive black hole in the economy and it had to be dealt with. (OBR confirms the black hole WAS the biggest ever in the UK governments history bar one at the height of Covid).
As for the bit about "the real experts agree with you" have you forgotten already that the actual WORLD EXPERTS - the International Monetary Fund have already praised the budget???
(See post 99 above).
And of course I suspect I know who you voted for, you seem to have a record of always voting for the most craziest of the crazies on offer!
And of course I have every right to express whatever political opinion I want, whether I voted or not - not voting does not disenfranchise myself in anyway.
But the thing is I DON'T talk about politics - ever.
It just shows how stupid social media is, just a few years ago I was being absolutely hammered on here by posters who believed I was a Tory when I stood up for how the government was doing the best they could with Covid, and when I told everyone that there was NO corruption or cronyism with the awarding of PPE contracts (simply because Civil Servants make the awarding of contracts - not politicians). Now you are apparently hammering me for supporting a Labour government's budget!
In all examples I've merely explained what has happened and why - I've taken no political side and have no political bias towards any party - I just seek truth and fairness.
You on the other hand simply believe right wing propaganda, most of it simply being fake news (lies).
One of us is an idiot - and you believe it to be me...
115 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 21:56
Whitesince63
El Hadji Diouf
I gave you the bloody answer but you’re either struggling to understand English or you’re just trying to be intentionally argumentative but just to try again, I was referring to Labour government actions generally not specifically just Blair/Brown. There were no lockdowns under the B’s, ok?karlypants wrote:
I just want the bloody answer to the question.
If you can’t come up with it then why bloody say it then?
116 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 22:14
Whitesince63
El Hadji Diouf
Crikey Sluffy, now you really are scraping the bottom of the barrel believing anything the IMF says. When have they ever been right about anything, they’re a joke? No Sluffy I look at the real experts, the markets who know for a fact that Reeves budget won’t work and she’ll be forced into more borrowing. They’re expecting interest rates higher and for longer so great help for those with loans and mortgages. Look at the billions wiped off stocks and shares in the last week and the millions removed from fund managers. You hammered Liz Truss when she promised spending without the funds to pay for it but now you think it’s different for Reeves. Double standards there Sluffy.
117 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 22:48
karlypants
Nat Lofthouse
Whitesince63 wrote:I gave you the bloody answer but you’re either struggling to understand English or you’re just trying to be intentionally argumentative but just to try again, I was referring to Labour government actions generally not specifically just Blair/Brown. There were no lockdowns under the B’s, ok?karlypants wrote:
I just want the bloody answer to the question.
If you can’t come up with it then why bloody say it then?
Thank you.
118 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Thu Oct 31 2024, 22:49
Sluffy
Admin
Whitesince63 wrote:Crikey Sluffy, now you really are scraping the bottom of the barrel believing anything the IMF says. When have they ever been right about anything, they’re a joke? No Sluffy I look at the real experts, the markets who know for a fact that Reeves budget won’t work and she’ll be forced into more borrowing. They’re expecting interest rates higher and for longer so great help for those with loans and mortgages. Look at the billions wiped off stocks and shares in the last week and the millions removed from fund managers. You hammered Liz Truss when she promised spending without the funds to pay for it but now you think it’s different for Reeves. Double standards there Sluffy.
You are utterly bonkers mate.
You claim I have double standards!!!
Who was it who crashed the UK economy following Truss 'Mini Budget?
Wasn't it the exact same folk who you name above - "the real experts, the markets"
Yes it was!!!
Evan Kwarteng admits that's what did for him and Truss Mini Budget...
https://inews.co.uk/opinion/kwasi-kwarteng-tories-honest-rachel-reeves-budget-3352020
And you clearly don't understand the basic difference between Truss and Reeves budgets
Truss budget DIDN'T show how it was to be FINANCED "she promised spending without the funds to pay for it" - as you put it.
Whilst Reeves budget DID show how it was to be financed - 'she promised spending AND SHOWED the funds to pay for it!!!
Through the £40 billion Tax Revenue charges she introduced - you total Muppet!!!
Whitesince63 wrote:You hammered Liz Truss when she promised spending without the funds to pay for it but now you think it’s different for Reeves. Double standards there Sluffy.
Don't you even understand what you are saying???
I've not got any double standards - it's you who clearly doesn't understand what you are talking about.
Christ this is really basic stuff you haven't got a clue about.
As for the IMF it is the global banker of the last resort.
As in for example, The Bank of England is the banker of the last resort in the UK.
If a country goes bust, (say the Bank of England went bust and could not pay the nations debts that were due, then the IMF is the place they go cap in hand to to be bailed out and must comply with all the financial conditions the IMF sets them, in order to be bailed out.
If the IMF doesn't know what it is talking about then no one does.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is a major financial agency of the United Nations, and an international financial institution funded by 190 member countries, with headquarters in Washington, D.C. It is regarded as the global lender of last resort to national governments, and a leading supporter of exchange-rate stability. Its stated mission is "working to foster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth, and reduce poverty around the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Monetary_Fund
Whether the international markets likes Reeves budget or not is up to them BUT it certainly won't be because it wasn't funded like the Truss budget wasn't!
The difference between the two budgets is that - Truss budget CREATED a black hole in the economy (haven't you grasped that yet?) and Reeves budget is trying to plug one!
Don't you understand the difference?
There was no financial crisis until Truss created one - we are currently in a financial crisis thanks to the last government and Reeves is trying to lead us out of it.
That's the difference - Truss drove us deliberately off a financial cliff and Reeves is clinging on to the edge of the cliff trying to climb back up to financial security again.
Both budgets were/are bad for the country, Truss Mini Budget was a suicide pill that nearly killed us whilst Reeves is foul tasting medicine that is intended to make us better.
The markets and the money men on the side can see that the country is financially unwell in both cases but could see we were on our way to the mortuary with Truss (that's why her budget was scrapped to save the nation from going bust) whilst this time they are weighing up how bad the medicine will taste like until we start to get financially better again.
The difference between the IMF and the markets/money men, is that the IMF isn't commercial and seeking profits, whilst the markets are looking for the largest returns on their investments - the UK economy has tanked (due to the black hole the Conservatives allowed to grow) and need to borrow money to plug it, the markets are simply exploiting our need for foreign capital and are having to pay more interest on our loans from them until things get more stable again.
I also remind you again that if the Conservatives had won the election in June, they too would had to have come up with a budget to deal with their financial black hole too and be in the same shitty situation that Labour found itself in - they certainly wouldn't have settled with the doctors and nurses - nor borrowed more to bring waiting lists down - so the NHS would be in peril - so their medicine wouldn't have tasted quite so bad but it probably would have brought the sell off of the NHS that much closer to actually happening.
Maybe you would have been mush happier with that scenario?
Also and worth noting is that the Conservative government created two separate black holes in the economy - the first with Truss Mini Budget, that was plugged by Hunt replacing the sacked Kwarteng and scrapping the budget in its entirety and the second one (possibly seeded by the massive losses incurred due to the Mini Budget) first revealed in the last Tory budget of March 2024 and the concealed growth of it until Labour won the election and formed the current government.
Finally you remind me of someone in need of this sound advice...
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt.
Far too late in your case though.
119 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Fri Nov 01 2024, 15:11
Whitesince63
El Hadji Diouf
More blah blah blah, can’t be arsed Sluffy you’re unbelievable. 
120 Re: Who are you voting for in the General Election? Fri Nov 01 2024, 15:15
Norpig
Nat Lofthouse
You should be a Politician WS63, you sound like you know what you're on about but there is no substance to anything you say on here regarding politics, its just lazy slogans learned from the likes of the Daily Fail.
Message [Page 6 of 7]
Similar topics
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum