Just unfortunate that it comes with increasingly expensive debt which becomes increasingly difficult to service.
Incorrect. While it can be inflationary in certain situations it isn't always the case. For example borrowing for investment in major infrastructure projects is an example where it would not be inflationary. The UK sold off a lot of its national silverware to the markets and now owns relatively little, so borrowing to back new industries and improve existing ones should be a no brainier for many people. Markets also like it because they can envisige a return on that borrowing.
I agree with much of that. In fact isn't it more or less how Rachel has framed her fiscal rules in respect to borrowing? However, I got the impression that earlier posters would go beyond that in terms of borrowing/money creation.
a fiat currency producing economy creates the money that it them ‘owes’ itself (in the main). All choices are political choices.
Just very basic economics. Taxation pays for very little. All major infrastructure projects are created by the Govt investing. If you buy a house you take on debt to producing an asset. luckily the UK Govt can borrow the money from itself.
The lies of Starmer are many and varied but some people on here are so hypnotized by the fact that he's a Labour liar that they push his deceit to the convenient sidelines. Everything he campaigned on to become Labour leader was a lie if you must know (although its been pointed out on here several times). If you want further examples of his lies and dishonesty I suggest you just type something like 'how many times has Starmer lied?' into a search engine and do your own research.
Its often to plug gaps in government spending when the tax take is not as big as the government needs when its spending money. Its another tool the government has which households dont. Bonds/gilts are basically iou's. If the government borrows a lot through bonds the interest they pay goes up and government debt goes up. So, theoretically, it would make more sense for the government to raise money by other means as they have to pay investors interest when they issue bonds for those investors to buy. In practical terms though all governments issue bonds and have done for as long as the things were invented.
What a pathetic individual Starmer is. Can he bend over any further for Trump and Netanyahu. "UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said the US took action to "alleviate" what he called the "grave threat" posed by Iran's nuclear programme. In a statement, he called on Tehran to agree to talks and reach a diplomatic solution."
Nah, he's definitely got more spine than a jellyfish has our Keir. Interesting though how a man learned in law hasn't yet said that a unilateral attack on a sovereign state is in breach of international law. Funny that. However, the Starmer apologists on here will ignore that as Sir Keir never does anything wrong and is a man of high principle....
I'm a Labourite but don't walk round with my head up my ar*e. Starmer is a lapdog of the US same as Johnson and all the others before indiferent of party. We need to stop this " Britain is a world power" jingoistic bullcrap and stop blowing billions on interfering in other countries politics. Constant tubthumping like " We're being invaded by small boats" but we're standing firm. The sooner we shake the age of empire and stop referencing WW2, Spitfires, Vera Lyn and Dunkirk the better the chance we'll find our proper level on the world stage. we are a medium size european country and should be in the EU offering stability and a voice of reason. ..Here's a heads up Sir Kier...nobody cares what we think anymore
I think people care what British politicians think but I agree with you about our role. Its an anachronistic approach built on our weight 100 years ago and more recently our sympathy and dependency towards American values after 1945. We need to re-assess our role in the world, our role in conflicts, our role in Europe and our role as an automatic ally of the US.
Does this feel like 'Groundhog Day'? Back in 2003 we had the reports of Iraqis 'dancing in the streets' and welcoming the invasion force https://www.voanews.com/a/a-13-a-2003-04-09-56-some/389839.html with only 'pockets of resistance', well that worked out well. Now we have Tom Tugenhat telling us how 'happy' the Iranian people are to have the privelege of being bombed by Israel and the US https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl...ormer-uk-security-minister-claims/ar-AA1HbGu6. Before the hubris sets in (remember 'Mission Accomplished'?) lets see how this poorly planned operation pans out. We aren't talking one unified nation here, it is comprised of Fars, Kurds, both Sunni and Shia Muslims, Turkic peoples and a whole variety of others who all have their own aspiration as to how Iran should be run (much the same as Iraq following our debacle there). Of course into this mix we will have the Jihadis flood in if the whole system collapses, the only unifying factor would be that most of these don't want the place run by the Israelis for the benefit of the Israelis (which is where Netanyahu thinks he is heading). To achieve that aspiration he is going to have to do what he has done in Gaza and kill an awful lot of people, but then the Israelis are now a genocidal nation so that shouldn't be too difficult for them.
I don't think that a UK prime minister of any hue has any choice but to cosy up to America as best we can, regardless of how odious it seems. We have too much vested interest and too little power and influence not to. I don't think SKS is under any illusions about this.
I'm currently wading my way through Jerusalem by Simon Sebag Montefiore. Something of an epic. Not sure I'll finish it before the end of the world.
Yep, Trump has walked straight into Netanyahu's trap and the US are now involved. No long-term strategy, no end game. Nothing. Trump is an absolute, complete moron. This will have big repercussions in the next few years. Netanyahu for the moment will be laughing his socks off but he may or may not be laughing down the road.
The UK is a sovereign state with links all over the world. We're European. We're independent. Any UK prime minister with any backbone can at least say 'The Uk is not in favour of any unilateral attack on a sovereign state'. But, as usual you defend Starmer even though you've applauded his lawyer's credentials in the past. You just will not wake up and criticize will you? We dont need to cozy up all. In fact we should be telling the Americans to back off. We know more about the situation in Iran than they do (ever since 1979). Its countries like Britain (allies) that should be reining the US in ) not cozying up!!!
