Honest question to Red Kestrel...

... without resorting to insults and rhetoric, what are your views on the following?
The UK, has gone through several years of austerity (mainly for the majority) with, no doubt, a few more years still to come in order to eliminate the huge annual deficit. Putting aside who is to blame for that deficit, (we are where we are) the UK has finally reached the point where the deficit became surplus.
Once that is achieved, it is possible to start reducing the huge national debt, thus reducing the interest payments that have to be made which come from our taxes , diverting them from being spent on investment in infrastructure, education, NHS etc. My question to you is...
What is your view of increasing the deficit by spending £500bn (very crude estimate) by borrowing on these things when it will massively increase the deficit, thereby lowering the UK credit rating and increasing the interest rate on the loan, increasing the National debt thus meaning longer term even more money taken away from the UK infrastructure projects, housing, NHS, education?

This is what Momentum propose

 

Our credit rating has dropped anyway because of following austerity. Borrowing to invest in growth - that won't harm our credit rating and would actually improve it.

If you think austerity is about paying debt off, you are way off mark. It is about shrinking the state and moving more and more profit to the private sector.

 

Several? How many is that then, cos it dunt sarnd enuff.

 

So you advocate spending money you do not have! Really? And have a constantly high deficit to GDP ratio , low productivity is OK? However you argue it, the bigger the loan the bigger the interest payments. So if you have maxed out your credit you think it good to borrow more do you.

Like all arguments borrowing to invest in growth (GDP) is OK but depends on the starting point. If you have a surplus like Germany, debt is manageable and so you can invest but if you are running a huge deficit like we were digging a deeper hole is not teh answer. Also if borrowing is used to prop up the NHS on wages etc where is the "growth" Using borrfowed money to re nationalise induustries is not "growth"

Sheesh! Glad you are not chancellor. God help us if Labour get in!

 

There is probably little point in entering into any kind of debate with you on this. How do you think Germany has a surplus? Because for the last 40 years when we have been running our state infrastructue into the ground and selling it off to the lowest bidder (usually foreign, get that Nationalist) Germany have continued to have a more mixed economy with the State still playing a role.

A nation with a soverign currency cannot "run out of money". Total economic nonsense.

Why is productivity so low? It is certainly nothing to do with teh natyional debt, more like folk getting less and less out for more and more in.

Investing in infrastructure, for example, would generate growth. Funding a National Investmnet Bank to INVEST in companies around the country would generate growth.

We delivered economic growth after the war in a much more parlous state. And nationalised huge swathes of the economy.

I note you avoided the point about the reality behind austerity.

 

One of the reasons I think we'll stay up is that our goal difference is significantly better than most of our rivals. We've also got Brad Potts back in Form.

 

don’t worry about us we’ve got the Momentum I’d be worrying about your own country of choice

 

Valid point. Italy is up sh*t creek. However I have family in the UK so it is them I worry about.

 

Even extreme hard right Brexiteer John Redwood has declared only this week that Austerity was not necessary.
It is ideological and a means of transferring money from the poor to the rich.
Cameron and Osborne crowing over its "success" this week was sickening as so many have suffered and continue to suffer as a result of Austerity.

 

Austerity is a political choice.

A country that prints its own money cannot go bankrupt.

The current government has borrowed more money than every Labour administration that has ever existed.

Mixed economies throughout Europe are the most successful economies.

Investment creates growth see Obama’s response to 2008.

 

Absolute rubbish. Where on Earth did you study Economics? Of course it can. Hyper inflation and total collapse could follow.

"The current government has borrowed more money than every Labour administration that has ever existed." As a result of every Labour administration ramping up the deficit before leaving Office!

 

8 years on and its still all Labour's fault. Comedy gold.

 

My experience and reading of economics is that you grow your way out of recession/debt, you don't cut your way out of it. The pain of austerity has not been evenly distributed - young/old/poor/sick have born the brunt - I'm sure those who are still poorer now then they were in 2007 will be really happy they have contributed to take the economy out of deficit while the top 5% have taken an even greater share of the wealth.

 

Caused by the bankers, the same bankers that prop up the tory government and media.

You really couldn't make it up, that they get anywhere near winning an election the faulty bast4rds.

 

You really do post some unbelievable waffle and ballax, but that above is possibly the most stupid one yet ! You have actually no idea how the economy works have you ?

 

Potts should start on Saturday

 

We had a large National debt when Nye Bevan borrowed more and set up the NHS. In economics it is sometimes not a bad thing to borrow money . Or. You sometimes have to speculate to accumulate
The Tories track record is absolutely abysmal.
I think it is time this country gave Labour a chance. Like Bevan if they borrow so what. The population cannot be any worse off than they are now and hey it paid off for our NHS founder

 

If we drop Gardener to bench and play Mallan,Williams and Potts in midfield we will shock Boro and take all 3 points

 

That is a different argument, and one that I agree with you on. Trickle down economics ( feed the horse enough oats and some of it will end up on the pavement for the sparrows works fine for the horse) The failure of the Conservatives has always been that they manage the economy for the benefit of business, hoping in vain for ethical behaviour from the wealthy instead of legislating for it.
Someone in this thread argued for a mixed economy which I agree with. Certainly service industries that only derive income from Govt i.e. taxpayer should not really be privatised as any profit should be ploughed back under public ownership rather than given out to shareholders etc. Efficiency savings based on an argument 'Governments are no good at running businesses so give it to private enterprise' lacks evidence to support that. Regulation is what has been lacking and any real will to change the status quo.