ianrobo1

thanks so richard said much the same, it is Tory policy so can I ask how cutting the expenditure of 40% of GDP helps to rest a decline in GDP ? what happens if a large amount of the tax cuts are saved ? this is the reason Labour did not do it I would argue this is the policy in the 80's and 90's that made the recessions worse ...

in that case Tony all major countries are **** !! EDIT : answered

the trouble for me is that the result wont be seen until years down track ..same as many people won't have paid for Christmas yet , just in the case of "governments" it could be 10 + years before the damage kicks in Brown has an election to face at some point and needs the "now" ..the country needs a long term strategy that goes for every other major country doesn't it with a globalised economy we can not go alone and tglonalisation is a major cause of this added to that you dod not answer my question did you, what would you prefer to do abotut he situation we face ourselves in, that has to be dealt with (or not)

thing is Ian , after this the economy recovered to become the strongest in Europe ..a thriving economy that labour inherited ...so was Lamont right or wrong ..and you have to choose your answer carefully as none other than Gordon brown agreed with Lamonts stance and policies ..or do i have to dig the article out again for you well he is wrong tony and can I ask you if you believe in a recession that a government should be passive or active ? that is the main economic debate is it not ? we saw in the 80's and 90's how horrible a passive government can be the test of active will be seen now

it is no longer a credit crunch but a full blown world wide recession

snowy I am a realist as I posted above whilst humans want to trade there will always be a market system we can not change that hwo much we would love to

just about sums it up really, can not really see how people can disagree with this

these things do go round and round snowy ... because humans will always want to buy things and trade and that means the market will always be there, the question is how to regulate and stablise it now

no snowy read what I said the heart of the debate is over the mess the free marketers got us into the tories subscribe to this theory as the Lamont quote states,

not really snowy because it comes to the heart of the debate it is simple in some terms (I know you do not like me saying 'simple') but this whole credit crunch as the article I linked earlier showed it was called ny total free market deregulation ... the oppsitie also unsutiable is total state control free marketerers like Lamont do believe a recession is a price you have to play ever so often for economic growth despite the impact it has on soceity

no it is not I have always said that I have always advocated miles more state intervention which is happening anyway at least the rabid free marketerers have shut up for a while ! Norman Lamont said this and though the reason is different how many free markerteers believe this is a 'price worth paying' well maybe one

As you have asked me to devise a completely new economic system (on my own without the years studying as an economist or without policy think tanks and academic research to back me up, &c.) you'll have to forgive me as I consider my response... p.s. Why can someone not hold the valid opinion that doing one thing is wrong (and as a result not work tirelessly to perpetuate it) without having to devise a replacement system? simply mate I believe yif you criticse a current system and you have said he should be blown away something has to replace it, like with BIAD at least some say some system because from where I stand I can think of nother viable alternative Pete agree with all that I have to say but if you want to go that way I think a lot would have to nationalised and then we have the costs of that

what is your answer to this crisis Richard in the last post I can detect an answer which states what you believe will get us out, Ok slam Labour thats fine but to claim your line is not exactly the same as Tory line is stupid, every word you have said about saving is what they have said and their polcies would lead to a reduction in GDP even further, you can not as as an indivdual or a government save in a recession because it will only deepen it ... richard is a recession a 'price worth paying' to allow the market to work ?

Thats exactly what I have said. Not Because it encourages people to borrow, borrow , borrow? I'm afraid saving 40p on £16 is not going to encourage me to spend more money on the economy, and thats why it's fecking useless. Look at the sales figures for December. How much did 2.5% help Ian? Sorry but I just do not get the link that you are making well Richard it is simple you are taking the Tory line on this ... the line is one that government reduces the spending next year to pay for tax cuts, is that not correct ? so you reduce spending in the hope all the money goes to private companies when in relaity a fair bit will go into savings (also what the tories wish to encourage) and the GDP fgoes down again so you except do you not that to create and keep jobs you need economic growth ? so therefore how does the two polices square up ? if not please tell me on a general basis how you stop this kind of recession which is world wide despite what you may think and int he next week we will see $800bn pumped in the form of tax cuts and public spending in America also you say borrowing is a socialist answer, so is GEorge Bush a socialist, he took Clinton's balanced budget and within a few years we saw massive defeicts.

So until someone comes up with a better suggestion, does one continue to put one's hand in the fire? Until someone comes up with a better solution for preventing someone else firing rockets at a country's population, should it still continue to do the same things which didn't solve the problem before and, arguably, helped to create and/or exacerbate it? I am totally open for a better solution snowy - fire away ... tell me in broad terms your thoughts on turning from a market economy to another that can still pay for the thinsg we need , Health, education police etc. but does not base it self on what we have now

I think it is always wise to encourage people to save Ian, when it comes to paying back this debt, who do you think will do that? And with what? I think the level of debt (any debt be it yours , mine, BP or the Govt) has to be serviceable. It has to be paid back so that we live more to within our means and not over extend. I'm afraid that in order to pay this debt back then there will have to be a reduction in spending as well as higher taxes and as we are spending so much now on area's we haven't before (ie Bank bailouts) then the govt must look to pay for that within it's budget. It is truly frightening to see how much debt we have as a country, and not private debt but government debt. Really frightening I'm afraid and your points do not, to me, accept that there comes a day of reckonning very soon. No I do not believe that. But I believe that the help that governments give in a recession should be better directed and more measured than just to over extend and encourage everyone else to borrow. For example not wasting £12.5Bn on a frankly useless VAT gimmick right so in a recession you adovcate cutting back spening in the bigger proption of GDP which is the government so that will lead to more job losses, more unemployment benefit, less tax and the circle decreases does it not ? People decry the VAT increase but iit was sure way of pumping money in, direct tax cuts would have led to people saving it and not benefiting it otherwise what is the choice and that is the only body big enough to encourage spending or do you question the validity of the market based economy ?

totally 100% **** correct so if you do not base it on the market what can provide jobs for the workers in thsi country with enough money to provide for all we can not turn back the clock and I have no answers to that, nor do you I suspect so until we do we are stuck with the system we have but one that needs fixing badly because the present model of ultra deregulation was fatally flawed

I'm afraid that lending levels contributed to getting us into this mess in the first place. I cannot accept that increasing those levels will make everything alright I am also absoluetly gobsmacked, and this is not a comment directly at you, how the socialists cure for everything is to borrow. The advice given by this government over a number of problem area's in the last few months has been "it's OK borrow your way out of trouble" Richard it is part of natural economic stabilisers that you borrow in a recession the Tories did in the 80's and 90's you then repay it back in the good times is George Bush a 'socialist' rememinder current American defceit - $1.2 TRILLION sso Richard do you think in a recession it is wish to adovcate polcies that encourage peopel to save ? and also to cut back on government spending ? do you believe in a recession you should leave thinsg as they are as the market will eventually resolve it no matter how much pain there is 'price worth paying' ?

well what else is there snowy, as much as you and I would like a different system, peopel have to buy stuff to keep other people employed, selling, moving and making it that is the system and frankly always has been ... therefore you have to obviously have demand, the question is whether we should set targets for economic growth to modest sones say 1% a year and like with inflation give BofE the power to keep to this good article though on was Bush to blame ??

outside of a recession there is a good argument that saving is positive, defintelty, which is why 5 years ago I took out a cash ISA. in a recession it is nonsense to suggest saving is a cure as the Tories have done obviously we have to get lending moving that is the key and that will take time,s omething I guess people can not wait for

yes totally true

The peacocks centre in Woking near me , has all next to each other Woolworth - gone M&S - one of the stores being closed Zavi - also closing down that's almost one complete side of that floor empty .... I assume that will hit the revenues of the Company that owns the shopping centre putting them in trouble , so the circle kinda keeps going around and around yes it does and do you think advocating making saving money more attractive is the right way to go in a recession ?

to quote myself but why drag up an old thread twice ?

entertainer Ben, most defintely YES shite music though

bohemiam rhaspody the biggest load of prententious shite ever put down on vinyl