• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Both parties are trying to 'lose' in a hung parliament"

Collapse

  • Gonzo
    replied
    Originally posted by Incognito View Post
    I will put money on it those Lib Dem treehuggers side with Labour in an event of a hung parliament.
    Some sort of Lib-Lab pact to keep a Labour government without an overall majority in power?

    Haven't I heard of something like that before?
    Last edited by Gonzo; 27 February 2010, 05:51. Reason: Cleaning up punctuation.

    Leave a comment:


  • Incognito
    replied
    Originally posted by malvolio View Post
    Actually, in a hung parliament the sitting PM remains in post until it is proven that someone else can form a workable majority, alone or in partnership with another party. We don't lose Gay Gorgon just becuiase he lost the election - which is a bit of a depressing thought...
    I will put money on it those Lib Dem treehuggers side with Labour in an event of a hung parliament.

    Leave a comment:


  • TimberWolf
    replied
    Originally posted by HairyArsedBloke View Post
    Sadly, to achieve all of that at the same time would require one of those paradox machines that the Master had made in the Tardis in Doctor Who the other night.
    True, but isn't that what fiat currencies achieve anyway, they slowly inflate, and why the gold standard was ditched?

    Leave a comment:


  • Doggy Styles
    replied
    Originally posted by TimberWolf View Post
    Yeah, I suppose for many people inflating away debt and holding onto their houses and jobs is preferable to interest rate hikes, austerity and loss of job and home. They'd prefer a run on the Pound.
    Like a bloke with emphysema having one last cigarette. Then another...

    Leave a comment:


  • HairyArsedBloke
    replied
    Originally posted by TimberWolf View Post
    Yeah, I suppose for many people inflating away debt and holding onto their houses and jobs is preferable to interest rate hikes, austerity and loss of job and home. They'd prefer a run on the Pound.
    Sadly, to achieve all of that at the same time would require one of those paradox machines that the Master had made in the Tardis in Doctor Who the other night.

    Leave a comment:


  • TimberWolf
    replied
    Originally posted by Gonzo View Post
    It depends on your point of view.

    There are really people that think continuing to rack up debt to support government spending is absolutely the right thing to do in the circumstances.

    There are also some people that think if the worst comes to the worst then they can always inflate the debt away.
    Yeah, I suppose for many people inflating away debt and holding onto their houses and jobs is preferable to interest rate hikes, austerity and loss of job and home. They'd prefer a run on the Pound.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gonzo
    replied
    Originally posted by TimberWolf View Post
    I can't imagine that any government has been handed such a poisoned chalice before. Not just because of how bad things are likely to become reality shortly after election and after the phony recession ends, but because I don't feel the population appreciate that. Most people think the recession is over, I feel.
    It depends on your point of view.

    There are really people that think continuing to rack up debt to support government spending is absolutely the right thing to do in the circumstances.

    There are also some people that think if the worst comes to the worst then they can always inflate the debt away.

    Leave a comment:


  • TimberWolf
    replied
    I can't imagine that any government has been handed such a poisoned chalice before. Not just because of how bad things are likely to become reality shortly after election and after the phony recession ends, but because I don't feel the population appreciate that. Most people think the recession is over, I feel.

    Leave a comment:


  • Waldorf
    replied
    Originally posted by OwlHoot View Post
    He'd appoint Ed Balls as chancellor, and there'd be a run on sterling within days, no wait, within _a_ day.
    WHS

    Leave a comment:


  • Gonzo
    replied
    Originally posted by TimberWolf View Post
    It would be interesting to speculate what would happen if Gordon won the election outright, without a hung parliament, as unlikely as that is. What would happen to Sterling (immediate crash?), would he implement the savage cuts that many believe believe are necessary? Would we soon be doomed? And given the position we are in, would it be much better under the Tories?
    He would have to.

    It will be a condition of borrowing money from the IMF once the financial markets no longer support the government deficit.

    The same thing happened to Callaghan / Healey in the seventies.

    Leave a comment:


  • TimberWolf
    replied
    Originally posted by OwlHoot View Post
    He'd appoint Ed Balls as chancellor, and there'd be a run on sterling within days, no wait, within _a_ day.
    I'm not so certain a run on Sterling won't happen sooner than that. Mind you, I'm a bit jumpy because most of my savings are still in £ in a UK bank.

    Leave a comment:


  • OwlHoot
    replied
    Originally posted by TimberWolf View Post
    It would be interesting to speculate what would happen if Gordon won the election outright, without a hung parliament, as unlikely as that is. What would happen to Sterling (immediate crash?), would he implement the savage cuts that many believe believe are necessary? Would we soon be doomed? And given the position we are in, would it be much better under the Tories?
    He'd appoint Ed Balls as chancellor, and there'd be a run on sterling within days, no wait, within _a_ day.

    Leave a comment:


  • TimberWolf
    replied
    It would be interesting to speculate what would happen if Gordon won the election outright, without a hung parliament, as unlikely as that is. What would happen to Sterling (immediate crash?), would he implement the savage cuts that many believe believe are necessary? Would we soon be doomed? And given the position we are in, would it be much better under the Tories?

    Leave a comment:


  • centurian
    replied
    Originally posted by Gonzo View Post
    While it is a nice idea for a moment, practically, I don't think that it is possible for anyone to engineer a general election result to that degree of precision.
    Agreed, but whether by intention or not, the Tories are certainly heading in that direction

    Leave a comment:


  • centurian
    replied
    If there's ever an election worth losing, then this one is it...

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X