Tories set to lose Britain second AAA credit rating

245

Comments

  • Glyn WGlyn W Posts: 5,819
    Forum Member
    flagpole wrote: »
    I'm not sure the blame for this lies squarely with the tories.

    the significance of the credit rating has changed. when GO said that stuff all the major economies were AAA, now there is really only a hand full. the AAA is only important in as much as it affects borrowing costs. and it doesn't any more.

    https://i.canvasugc.com/ugc/original/7b85b4eff952caf172366bd2f1b9d7aeb4bcc5ff.png
  • flagpoleflagpole Posts: 44,641
    Forum Member
    Phil 2804 wrote: »
    Ah the sweet smell of desperation. :D

    It didn't matter in 2010 either. That is the truth and its about time you Tory Boys admitted it to the public.

    The Tory party made its own bed with its ridiculous and unhelpful scaremongering that we were the next Greece. A country with one of the largest economies in the world, issuing one of the safest currencies in the world was NEVER going to end up like Greece. Our national debt, in real terms isn't even that high by historical standards.

    Whether we eliminated the full deficit or just half of it in this parliament was irrelevant, the main thing the markets wanted was a clear plan to get control of spending, how we did that mattered less as long as the growth was there to absorb our borrowing.

    Osborne still doesn't get that is the key piece missing from the plan- GROWTH. The markets are saying it, the IMF are saying it and the ratings agencies are saying it.

    Time to get your heads out of your arses and start listening.

    i have no idea what makes you think you have the right to call me a Tory Boy.
  • GibsonSGGibsonSG Posts: 23,681
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    WindWalker wrote: »
    Why did government debt rise markedly in 2008 through 9 and remain high since?

    Because we bailed out the banks and it is high now because we our income is reduced..
  • flagpoleflagpole Posts: 44,641
    Forum Member
    GibsonSG wrote: »
    Because we bailed out the banks and it is high now because we our income is reduced..

    the bank bailout is not included in the figures.
  • GibsonSGGibsonSG Posts: 23,681
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    flagpole wrote: »
    I'm not sure the blame for this lies squarely with the tories.

    the significance of the credit rating has changed. when GO said that stuff all the major economies were AAA, now there is really only a hand full. the AAA is only important in as much as it affects borrowing costs. and it doesn't any more.

    Please! You can't change the rules when it looks like your side is getting a pasting.
  • GibsonSGGibsonSG Posts: 23,681
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    flagpole wrote: »
    the bank bailout is not included in the figures.

    You may want to have a look round this website;

    http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_debt_chart.html
  • Raring_to_goRaring_to_go Posts: 20,565
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It’s all relatively simple, we are currently paying the price for Labours folly, it’s going to take some time.

    That is based on the time it took to clear the debt as a result of WW2.
  • Glyn WGlyn W Posts: 5,819
    Forum Member
    flagpole wrote: »
    the bank bailout is not included in the figures.

    That's because the bank bailout came from the magic money tree. ;)
  • Glyn WGlyn W Posts: 5,819
    Forum Member
    It’s all relatively simple, we are currently paying the price for Labours folly, it’s going to take some time.

    That is based on the time it took to clear the debt as a result of WW2.

    Thing is, how did we clear the WW2 debt? Was it by encouraging growth or by cutting spending..?
  • flagpoleflagpole Posts: 44,641
    Forum Member
    GibsonSG wrote: »
    Please! You can't change the rules when it looks like your side is getting a pasting.

    no you are right everything must always stay the same. context is irrelevant.

    the east india company must never lose the opium trade.
  • Auld SnodyAuld Snody Posts: 15,171
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    flagpole wrote: »
    no you are right everything must always stay the same. context is irrelevant.

    the east india company must never lose the opium trade.

    LOL. Remember, when in a hole, stop digging:D
    ( I am talking about the government fiscal policy here , not you personally)
  • Raring_to_goRaring_to_go Posts: 20,565
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Glyn W wrote: »
    Thing is, how did we clear the WW2 debt? Was it by encouraging growth or by cutting spending..?

    The WW2 debt was effectively cleared over a period of 50 years by keeping the economy under control sad to say this has been reversed by the last Labour government and we are now back to square one with the added complication that we no longer have a substantial manufacturing sector.

    Success will only come by using a combination of solutions by trying to achieve growth and reducing the debt, that is precisely what the present government doing.
  • flagpoleflagpole Posts: 44,641
    Forum Member
    Glyn W wrote: »
    Thing is, how did we clear the WW2 debt? Was it by encouraging growth or by cutting spending..?

    War bonds were an altogether different affair. we just didn't pay them back. still haven't.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,845
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Phil 2804 wrote: »
    Osborne still doesn't get that is the key piece missing from the plan- GROWTH. The markets are saying it, the IMF are saying it and the ratings agencies are saying it.

    Growth. Is that the analogous term for give me more freebies?
  • GibsonSGGibsonSG Posts: 23,681
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    flagpole wrote: »
    no you are right everything must always stay the same. context is irrelevant.

    the east india company must never lose the opium trade.

    Come on now!
  • helioslumoshelioslumos Posts: 516
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It's hard to know where to start with such an innaccurate post. But here goes ...
    The WW2 debt was effectively cleared over a period of 50 years by keeping the economy under control

    Please explain what you mean by this. How did we keep the economy under control?
    sad to say this has been reversed by the last Labour government and we are now back to square one

    Utter bollocks. Up until the global financial crash, debt as a proportion of GDP was lower under the previous Labour Government than it had been under Major's / Thatcher's administrations.The myth that Labour bankrupted us is only a convenient vote-winning tool. In reality all political parties and countries should have been aware of building growth on debt
    with the added complication that we no longer have a substantial manufacturing sector.

    A process started in earnest by Thatcher, not made any better by Blair and Brown
    Success will only come by using a combination of solutions by trying to achieve growth and reducing the debt, that is precisely what the present government doing.

    So by your logic the deficit should be decreasing, growth should be improving and the economy should be healing. Only that it's not, is it?
  • GibsonSGGibsonSG Posts: 23,681
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    flagpole wrote: »
    War bonds were an altogether different affair. we just didn't pay them back. still haven't.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6215847.stm
  • helioslumoshelioslumos Posts: 516
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Growth. Is that the analogous term for give me more freebies?

    An economy which is growing means less freebies. Nice to see a bit of your prejudice creeping in though ;)
  • Phil 2804Phil 2804 Posts: 21,846
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The WW2 debt was effectively cleared over a period of 50 years by keeping the economy under control sad to say this has been reversed by the last Labour government and we are now back to square one with the added complication that we no longer have a substantial manufacturing sector.

    Success will only come by using a combination of solutions by trying to achieve growth and reducing the debt, that is precisely what the present government doing.

    Can you explain why the national debt stood at £400 billion in 1997, if the debt had been cleared?:rolleyes:

    Of course you can't. No Government in history has cleared our national debt, what we do, is what every other nation does, inflate it away in real terms with a good long period of growth, but the actual debt remains in place.

    As for the highlighted bit, if you consider a whole 0.6% growth in 2 and a half years a success then Christ help us all. Just to clarify, there were more quarters of growth in 2009/10 than there have been since Osborne took control of the economy.
  • helioslumoshelioslumos Posts: 516
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Phil 2804 wrote: »
    Can you explain why the national debt stood at £400 billion in 1997, if the debt had been cleared?:rolleyes:

    Of course you can't. No Government in history has cleared our national debt, what we do, is what every other nation does, inflate it away in real terms with a good long period of growth, but the actual debt remains in place.

    As for the highlighted bit, if you consider a whole 0.6% growth in 2 and a half years a success then Christ help us all. Just to clarify, there were more quarters of growth in 2009/10 than there have been since Osborne took control of the economy.

    Please don't bring facts into this argument, it clouds the propaganda
  • Phil 2804Phil 2804 Posts: 21,846
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    flagpole wrote: »
    i have no idea what makes you think you have the right to call me a Tory Boy.

    It annoys them, that's reason enough. :D

    Its the same as calling anyone who questions the wisdom of Tory HQ a "leftie".
  • flagpoleflagpole Posts: 44,641
    Forum Member
    GibsonSG wrote: »

    that is nothing to do with the war bonds which we still haven't paid back.
  • Phil 2804Phil 2804 Posts: 21,846
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Growth. Is that the analogous term for give me more freebies?

    Good god. Its that thing where the economy grows larger each year and generates extra tax revenues without the need to actually increase the rate of taxation. It has the magical effect of reducing a Government's borrowing requirement quite quickly.

    Its absence is the entire reason Osborne is in the mess he's in now. If the economy had continued to grow at the pace it was during the final year of the Labour Government, its fair to say Cameron would probably be coasting to a landslide re-election.
  • Glyn WGlyn W Posts: 5,819
    Forum Member
    flagpole wrote: »
    War bonds were an altogether different affair. we just didn't pay them back. still haven't.

    Because they're part of the National Debt and have been ever since they were issued. along with all the other Government Bonds and Treasury Bills.
  • Glyn WGlyn W Posts: 5,819
    Forum Member
    flagpole wrote: »
    no you are right everything must always stay the same. context is irrelevant.

    the east india company must never lose the opium trade.

    Funny when things change though. Before losing the AAA rating it was the most important thing to judge the country's economy by; as soon as we lose it then it's relevance suddenly disappears in a puff of spin.
Sign In or Register to comment.