The Politics Thread

[Bruce Rioja]

Paper over the cracks all you like, Pal. Knock yourself out.

There's a book I recommend to you called 'The Tiger That Isn't'. Look it up.

[thebish]

Paper over the cracks all you like, Pal. Knock yourself out.

There's a book I recommend to you called 'The Tiger That Isn't'. Look it up.

I've read that. it doesn't really answer any of the points that Insane wrote at all..

[thebish]

the crisis was not created by spending too much on nurses and hospitals or schools or welfare - as the tories like to suggest - it was caused by the MASSIVE amounts that were spent bailing out banks. of course there is an argument to be had about the amounts borrowed by labour for public spending - but it's a small-beer argument compared with the financial crisis that led to them bailing out the banks.

were labour culpable for not regulating the banks - yes - but, let's be honest - at the time, Osborne and Cameron were calling for an even lighter touch - claiming the regulation would be the enemy of the economy and drive all the bankers abroad...

[Bruce Rioja]

Paper over the cracks all you like, Pal. Knock yourself out.

There's a book I recommend to you called 'The Tiger That Isn't'. Look it up.

I've read that. it doesn't really answer any of the points that Insane wrote at all..

No, but it does explain how, through numbers, you can present pretty much anything in a favourable light at the expense of the actual issues.

[BWFC_Insane]

Paper over the cracks all you like, Pal. Knock yourself out.

There's a book I recommend to you called 'The Tiger That Isn't'. Look it up.

I've read that. it doesn't really answer any of the points that Insane wrote at all..

No, but it does explain how, through numbers, you can present pretty much anything in a favourable light at the expense of the actual issues.

You can, which is exactly what the Tories are trying and failing to do now, with a difficult situation that they've only managed to make worse thus far.

[Il Pirate]

Did anyone notice on Budget day the amount Barclays paid out in bonuses? Chose a day so it might go unnoticed. The appropriately named Richard Ricci, immediatley banked his £7.9million share bonus. A small percentage of the £59 mill paid out. Still, we're all in it together.................................

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Did anyone notice on Budget day the amount Barclays paid out in bonuses? Chose a day so it might go unnoticed.

That's not actually true - I understand their date was confirmed and in the diary long before the Budget was.

[Harry Genshaw]

the crisis was not created by spending too much on nurses and hospitals or schools or welfare - as the tories like to suggest - it was caused by the MASSIVE amounts that were spent bailing out banks. of course there is an argument to be had about the amounts borrowed by labour for public spending - but it's a small-beer argument compared with the financial crisis that led to them bailing out the banks.

were labour culpable for not regulating the banks - yes - but, let's be honest - at the time, Osborne and Cameron were calling for an even lighter touch - claiming the regulation would be the enemy of the economy and drive all the bankers abroad...

Politically, being slightly left of centre I hope that the above is true but if it is, then Labour aren't getting their message out there imo. It's been said by the coalition enough times that it's almost accepted as fact, that the last Govt left a mess and that they're having to sort it out

[William the White]

Did anyone notice on Budget day the amount Barclays paid out in bonuses? Chose a day so it might go unnoticed.

That's not actually true - I understand their date was confirmed and in the diary long before the Budget was.

Where does that 'understanding' come from? Surely budget day is known long in advance??? And, once it had been in the papers, you know, that there was a budget on the way, Barclays didn't notice it was the same day, and didn't, you know, think, that's an amazing coincidence, but no need to change our date???

[Prufrock]

Maybe the Chancellor picked that day because he knew it was bonus day and he wanted take some of the bad press

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Did anyone notice on Budget day the amount Barclays paid out in bonuses? Chose a day so it might go unnoticed.

That's not actually true - I understand their date was confirmed and in the diary long before the Budget was.

Where does that 'understanding' come from? Surely budget day is known long in advance??? And, once it had been in the papers, you know, that there was a budget on the way, Barclays didn't notice it was the same day, and didn't, you know, think, that's an amazing coincidence, but no need to change our date???

I know a couple of people at Barclays. The Budget date was announced on December 11 last year and Barclays' remuneration cycle, including this date, was put in place before that.

On reflection, they'll probably wish they had changed it because of the bad PR it has earned them.

Remuneration in finance is a fascinating subject, but I fear it's becoming so politicised that a proper, principled discussion is impossible. Personally I don't understand the outrage in this particular case, because Barclays has not required a penny of state bail out and none of those receiving this money was implicated in the Libor shenanigans.

[BWFC_Insane]

the crisis was not created by spending too much on nurses and hospitals or schools or welfare - as the tories like to suggest - it was caused by the MASSIVE amounts that were spent bailing out banks. of course there is an argument to be had about the amounts borrowed by labour for public spending - but it's a small-beer argument compared with the financial crisis that led to them bailing out the banks.

were labour culpable for not regulating the banks - yes - but, let's be honest - at the time, Osborne and Cameron were calling for an even lighter touch - claiming the regulation would be the enemy of the economy and drive all the bankers abroad...

Politically, being slightly left of centre I hope that the above is true but if it is, then Labour aren't getting their message out there imo. It's been said by the coalition enough times that it's almost accepted as fact, that the last Govt left a mess and that they're having to sort it out

Cos folk swallow up the shite Cameron and Osborne come out with.

That's the point I was trying to make before.

The Tories are rubbing their hands with glee at once again being able to make the rich, richer and destroy the public sector and welfare state.

They just love the opportunity the worldwide financial crisis has presented them.

People swallow it up.

As for Labour I agree they aren't getting the message out there well enough. But then again they are fighting against the right wing media in this country and people who are suffering.

The Tory lies and spin make me angry, but Labour haven't countered strongly enough.

Like him or loathe him, but Blair would have absolutely massacred this government in opposition.

[Beefheart]

the crisis was not created by spending too much on nurses and hospitals or schools or welfare - as the tories like to suggest - it was caused by the MASSIVE amounts that were spent bailing out banks. of course there is an argument to be had about the amounts borrowed by labour for public spending - but it's a small-beer argument compared with the financial crisis that led to them bailing out the banks.

were labour culpable for not regulating the banks - yes - but, let's be honest - at the time, Osborne and Cameron were calling for an even lighter touch - claiming the regulation would be the enemy of the economy and drive all the bankers abroad...

Politically, being slightly left of centre I hope that the above is true but if it is, then Labour aren't getting their message out there imo. It's been said by the coalition enough times that it's almost accepted as fact, that the last Govt left a mess and that they're having to sort it out

The crisis wasn't caused by public sector spending, but the big structural deficit the government was running (with Brown even breaking his own golden rules and he ignored warnings about the housing bubble) meant that when the shit hit the fan with the banks it really put a strain on things to bail them out. That's not to say that the current strategy seems to be working, you can cut spending but if the economy isn't growing and you're cutting taxes then the deficit isn't going to shrink. A smaller government and lower taxes is obviously what tories want and the deficit gives them the excuse to implement it.

[Bruce Rioja]

You can, which is exactly what the Tories are trying and failing to do now, with a difficult situation that they've only managed to make worse thus far.

And to quote yourself: Bollocks. Utter bollocks.

[thebish]

the crisis was not created by spending too much on nurses and hospitals or schools or welfare - as the tories like to suggest - it was caused by the MASSIVE amounts that were spent bailing out banks. of course there is an argument to be had about the amounts borrowed by labour for public spending - but it's a small-beer argument compared with the financial crisis that led to them bailing out the banks.

were labour culpable for not regulating the banks - yes - but, let's be honest - at the time, Osborne and Cameron were calling for an even lighter touch - claiming the regulation would be the enemy of the economy and drive all the bankers abroad...

Politically, being slightly left of centre I hope that the above is true but if it is, then Labour aren't getting their message out there imo. It's been said by the coalition enough times that it's almost accepted as fact, that the last Govt left a mess and that they're having to sort it out

it's a simplified picture - but broadly true - in my opinion... and - yes - the mantra "labour got us into this mess" has been repeated so often that it is now "truth" regardless of what actually happened..

labour's alternative is a fiendishly complex message to sell - borrow some more to stimulate the economy short-term - also because the public very much like the (preposterous) idea that the economy is just a bigger version of your average household budget... and labour don;t seem to have come up with anything even remotely like a snappy and understandable way of saying that which doesn't simply invite the derision: "borrow more to get out of debt!!!!!" response...

in reality - the tories are borrowing BILLIONS more than they said they would - but folk are simply not ready to hear that... they are borrowing more because they have stagnated the economy and hence they are not getting the tax revenues they might have expected...

[William the White]

Did anyone notice on Budget day the amount Barclays paid out in bonuses? Chose a day so it might go unnoticed.

That's not actually true - I understand their date was confirmed and in the diary long before the Budget was.

Where does that 'understanding' come from? Surely budget day is known long in advance??? And, once it had been in the papers, you know, that there was a budget on the way, Barclays didn't notice it was the same day, and didn't, you know, think, that's an amazing coincidence, but no need to change our date???

I know a couple of people at Barclays. The Budget date was announced on December 11 last year and Barclays' remuneration cycle, including this date, was put in place before that.

On reflection, they'll probably wish they had changed it because of the bad PR it has earned them.

Remuneration in finance is a fascinating subject, but I fear it's becoming so politicised that a proper, principled discussion is impossible. Personally I don't understand the outrage in this particular case, because Barclays has not required a penny of state bail out and none of those receiving this money was implicated in the Libor shenanigans.

I feel this has to be a willed non-comprehension. A £17.5 million bonus angering people reeling from the results of the crisis that finance capital has inflicted worldwide is, i feel, understandable... You really don't understand? This has to be a failure of imagination of record breaking order...

[Armchair Wanderer]

Politically, being slightly left of centre I hope that the above is true but if it is, then Labour aren't getting their message out there imo. It's been said by the coalition enough times that it's almost accepted as fact, that the last Govt left a mess and that they're having to sort it out

When Ed beat his brother for the leadership the idea seemed to be admit guilt and move on to dampen down the Labour-bashing there was a lot of at the time. A few years on that's basically where we are.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

It's true that Labour's message is impossible to communicate.

On Wednesday the Eds were mocking the Chancellor for doing too much borrowing whilst offering more borrowing as the solution. If you're going to demand these mental gymnastics of people then you need to be much clearer about what it is you are proposing, if it really is something much different.

If the Government's policies were increasing borrowing because of a massive increase in, say, an increased welfare bill because of unemployment caused by those policies, then the Eds and many of this board's commentators might make more sense. However, the simple fact is that in February the number of people claiming Jobseeker's Allowance fell to its lowest point since June 2011.

The Government "is not getting the tax revenues they might have expected" because the conditions are tougher than expected. So we grew 0.2% in 2012 - what did the other big EU economies do (and people rightly stress the importance of EU trading to our economy)? Germany only grew by 0.7%, France contracted by 0.3% and Italy contracted by 2.3%.

Labour need to be honest and be more clear about the fact that borrowing more now would not repay itself anytime soon. If the argument is that we are damaging long term competitiveness and ability to service debt in the medium-long term by not investing now, then that's a not a completely unrespectable position, but then neither is arguing for the primacy of fiscal credibility with investors when you've already got a debt to GDP ratio that's worse than Cyprus's.

[mrkint]

It's a politically stale argument as well. This argument has been going on about two years, now. And to the general public I'd guess that the general message hasn't changed. As Mandleson said last week, if you're going to criticise the government's policy, fine. But beating that drum for two years without offering a viable alternative kinda becomes boring after a while.

[Prufrock]

Did anyone see The Andrew Marr show this morning? Have a look on i player for the best poiltical interview (and funniest) you'll see for some time as Boris Johnson gets torn apart by Eddie Mair.

I should detest Boris, but despite myself, I atually like the bloke.

I've seen that described elsewhere as a 'massacre'. It really wasn't. I thought Boris handled it quite well. None of those accusations are remotely new, nor was there any new angle on it. All I got from it was yet another journalist who thinks he is the story trying to stop a politician talking about politics.