At what point

[The_Equalizer]

Most people will just have to used to having less and there is the problem. Medium term I think it's a fair bet that energy cost will escalate and continue to limit growth. I can't see how growing the UK's population can be beneficial to anyone either, especially as a large percentage is stuck in the bottom right-hand corner.

[d000hg]

Only problem they won't have 13 years

As it stands I can't see current Govt getting re-elected.

The current government won't be standing, LibDem & Tory will be standing separately.

There has hardly been any cutting. The country is still borrowing £15B a month. The morons in charge have realised that the main priority is to win the next election which means keep the public sector gravy train speeding along and win another term by keeping them happy.

So they've talked about cutting and pissed off all the public sector workers, but not implemented them? Hardly a winning strategy. And the people I know in the public sector seem to think there have been cuts - maybe they only made cuts in established Labour areas where it doesn't matter though (i.e the north).

[AtW]

The current government won't be standing, LibDem & Tory will be standing separately.

They'll fall together.

Unless Scotland becomes independent in 2014 and all Scottish MPs require work permits.

HTH

[AtW]

maybe they only made cuts in established Labour areas where it doesn't matter though (i.e the north).

What's they've done is continued to print money to depress artificially yields on Govt bonds.

This means they don't pay as much interest as they should have been and thus don't need to borrow as much to finance such repayments.

[DodgyAgent]

If Labour had never been in power we probably wouldn't be in a lot different situation. The US is equally deep in the poo despite of the US republicans with many of Ronald Reagan's ex junior ministers being in charge for a decade. If we remember it was a Reagan/Thatcher project. The key reason most countries (regardless of right or left wing leaders) to varying degrees are in the cr*p is the financial crisis. That caused a huge amount of money to be spent on bailing out banks and deep recession which shows up as a high deficit. I don't think for one minute a Conservative government would have tightened up in the City, and I think the Conservative government contîinuing with John Major and successors would have continued to reinvent themselves and spend money to keep in government. The reason why governments were spending money over the last decade (and that included George Bush) was because they could. Thatcher reigned in spending because the government of the day had no choice.

I think you'll find that in the end most governments are buffeted around by markets, and an electorate's general desire for tax cuts and spending increases leading to inevtiable boom bust cycle, which is largely unavoidable. Spending cuts and austerity only occur when the Bailiffs are at the door so to speak, as soon as the Bailiffs have been sent packing the purse strings will be loosened, and it's irrelevant as to whether you have a left or a right wing government.

A classic exanple of this was Gerhard Schroeder Germany's last left wing chancellor. one day he was sitting in his chancellory perusing over some new left wing policies, when some advisors popped through the door and said "Hey Gerhard we don't have money left and Germany will go to the dogs unless you get off your backside and do something". So he did, and copied Margaret Thatcher.

Firstly it is utterly irrelevant what the Tories would have done. The fact is that they didnt. Neither do they have a track record of fiscal irresponsibility with the exception of the ERM fiasco. Simply, Tories understand the harsh reality of finance. labour do not understand anything other than believing that money grows on trees - very few have either created wealth or understood the concept of wealth creation.

Poor old John Major he cant win. Having left the economy in very good health the mealy mouthed idiots then go and say "well he would have ruined the economy wouldnt he? It stands to reason dunit?!" .

What should happen is that the unemployed and public sector worker surplus to requirement (most of them) should be made to pick fruit, pick up dog turds and remove graffiti. They can in the meantime retrain in Engineering, IT or whatever turns their fancy -benefits would be better spent on this than on paying people to do nothing or work in an environment that teaches nothing but entitlement.

As for the current government what people fail to appreciate is that they have no money and that they are answerable to a party of lefties who like labour live on a different planet. if anyone is to blame it is to those who have indulged labour for the last 13 years.

As for the pathetic cries of "it was all Thatchers fault" for freeing up the banking system and "destroying manufacturing", it is like a sketch from Monty Python. If any of you think this then maybe you would like to argue the case for a government run banking system and a country (straight from the Soviet Bloc) that was running Industry at a loss. Maybe you could also argue why such a system with the rich ones amongst us driving around in Austin Maxis would be preferable to the one we live in today.

[bobspud]

Firstly it is utterly irrelevant what the Tories would have done. The fact is that they didnt. Neither do they have a track record of fiscal irresponsibility with the exception of the ERM fiasco. Simply, Tories understand the harsh reality of finance. labour do not understand anything other than believing that money grows on trees - very few have either created wealth or understood the concept of wealth creation.

Poor old John Major he cant win. Having left the economy in very good health the mealy mouthed idiots then go and say "well he would have ruined the economy wouldnt he? It stands to reason dunit?!" .

What should happen is that the unemployed and public sector worker surplus to requirement (most of them) should be made to pick fruit, pick up dog turds and remove graffiti. They can in the meantime retrain in Engineering, IT or whatever turns their fancy -benefits would be better spent on this than on paying people to do nothing or work in an environment that teaches nothing but entitlement.

As for the current government what people fail to appreciate is that they have no money and that they are answerable to a party of lefties who like labour live on a different planet. if anyone is to blame it is to those who have indulged labour for the last 13 years.

As for the pathetic cries of "it was all Thatchers fault" for freeing up the banking system and "destroying manufacturing", it is like a sketch from Monty Python. If any of you think this then maybe you would like to argue the case for a government run banking system and a country (straight from the Soviet Bloc) that was running Industry at a loss. Maybe you could also argue why such a system with the rich ones amongst us driving around in Austin Maxis would be preferable to the one we live in today.

+1

[OwlHoot]

Most people will just have to used to having less and there is the problem. Medium term I think it's a fair bet that energy cost will escalate and continue to limit growth. I can't see how growing the UK's population can be beneficial to anyone either, especially as a large percentage is stuck in the bottom right-hand corner.

I was just about to post something similar, about spiralling energy costs and population in the UK. "Great minds" and all that

The graph at World Development Indicators and Global Development Finance - Google Public Data Explorer is quite revealing :

Between 1975 and 1995 (20 Tory years) the population increased from 56 to 58 million, about 2 million

Between 1997 and 2010 (13 Labour years) it increased from 58.3 to 62.2, about 4 million.

and by the look of that graph, it is still increasing, at an ever faster rate.

[BlasterBates]

Firstly it is utterly irrelevant what the Tories would have done. The fact is that they didnt. Neither do they have a track record of fiscal irresponsibility with the exception of the ERM fiasco. Simply, Tories understand the harsh reality of finance. labour do not understand anything other than believing that money grows on trees - very few have either created wealth or understood the concept of wealth creation.

Poor old John Major he cant win. Having left the economy in very good health the mealy mouthed idiots then go and say "well he would have ruined the economy wouldnt he? It stands to reason dunit?!" .

What should happen is that the unemployed and public sector worker surplus to requirement (most of them) should be made to pick fruit, pick up dog turds and remove graffiti. They can in the meantime retrain in Engineering, IT or whatever turns their fancy -benefits would be better spent on this than on paying people to do nothing or work in an environment that teaches nothing but entitlement.

As for the current government what people fail to appreciate is that they have no money and that they are answerable to a party of lefties who like labour live on a different planet. if anyone is to blame it is to those who have indulged labour for the last 13 years.

As for the pathetic cries of "it was all Thatchers fault" for freeing up the banking system and "destroying manufacturing", it is like a sketch from Monty Python. If any of you think this then maybe you would like to argue the case for a government run banking system and a country (straight from the Soviet Bloc) that was running Industry at a loss. Maybe you could also argue why such a system with the rich ones amongst us driving around in Austin Maxis would be preferable to the one we live in today.

You seem to have forgotten the bust in the middle of the Thatcher years, deep recession housing bust etc etc.

I'm not a labour supporter and I've never voted for them, and I didn't say Thatcher caused the banking problem, the banking problem would have happened even if she hadn't existed.

...and no I didn't support the Labour party of the 1970's the Tory party did what needed to be done.

[BrilloPad]

His defence secretary has sacked the navy, army and air force just as john nott did.

Only now, we have no carriers (they were 'through deck cruisers' actually) or harriers.

Hmmm.

We still have nuclear weapons - so maybe we had better pick a fight with someone further away than France.

What about the Chinese?

[MarillionFan]

UK

2050