The down-grading of the US's AAA credit rating shows that the Coalition was spot-on by implementing cuts and balancing the books.

If we had listened to loony Labour we would have a ZZZ credit rating by now.

In The Know wrote:
The down-grading of the US's AAA credit rating shows that the Coalition was spot-on by implementing cuts and balancing the books.

If we had listened to loony Labour we would have a ZZZ credit rating by now.

jumping the gun aren't we ?. It would take at the minimum 5 years to see if these cuts work.

And how do explain why the USA..that is now so right wing it verges on fascism..is going down the gurgler ?

The greatest period of growth in the USA..the greatest period of expansion..when unions were strong (giving workers tremendous security so they spent) was from the early 1930s onwards when FDR implemented semi-socialism and gigantic government assistance programs (one great furphy was that the USA didn't have good social security benefits when between 1930 and 1990 they were better than Europe's).

Announcements don't do anything ITK. And I still say...many of these cuts will be wound back..such as housing benefit..unless Britain wants to see the mother of all housing price collapse.

No it doesn't.

There is very little difference between what Labour was planning and what the government is now doing.

david wrote:
No it doesn't.

There is very little difference between what Labour was planning and what the government is now doing.

and that's right. Little difference between Labour and Tory.

david wrote:
No it doesn't.

There is very little difference between what Labour was planning and what the government is now doing.

True David, ITK is getting carried away again with its own propaganda

david wrote:
There is very little difference between what Labour was planning and what the government is now doing.

Absolutley correct, David

... but you should have said "There is very little difference between what Labour was planning (but is now denying) and what the government is now doing"

veritas wrote:
jumping the gun aren't we ?. It would take at the minimum 5 years to see if these cuts work.

Not at all, veritas. Our economy is just about holding-up (and the IMF agree we took the right action at the right time).

The countries that didn't are going bang !!!

We STILL have our AAA credit rating (so are seen as a "good bet")

And how do explain why the USA..that is now so right wing it verges on fascism..is going down the gurgler ?

You are comparing 2 entirely different situations, veritas (albiet with the same potential outcome).

The US IS right wing and has very low taxes (and virtually NO social support) - thats entirely different to the UK where people were encouraged to scrounge (and the system was / is very generous).

The US' debt problems are largely due to spending (with borrowed money) more than they earn (on wars / invasions, perhaps?) whereas the UK debt was due largely to not producing any goods anymore and paying far far more than we can afrord to those that will not work (but keep knocking out kids).

We might have been able to afford it once ... but not any more.

You still believe in ratings?

Paul Krugman:
"The point here is not so much the $2 trillion, which makes very little difference to real US fiscal prospects; it’s the fact that S&P stands revealed as not understanding basic analysis of budget estimates. I mean, I don’t think I would have made that mistake; real budget experts, like the people at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, certainly wouldn’t have.

So what we just saw was amateur hour. And these people are pronouncing on US credit-worthiness?"


krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/i-h...hrough-the-baseline/

In The Know wrote:
veritas wrote:
jumping the gun aren't we ?. It would take at the minimum 5 years to see if these cuts work.

Not at all, veritas. Our economy is just about holding-up (and the IMF agree we took the right action at the right time).

The countries that didn't are going bang !!!

We STILL have our AAA credit rating (so are seen as a "good bet")

And how do explain why the USA..that is now so right wing it verges on fascism..is going down the gurgler ?

You are comparing 2 entirely different situations, veritas (albiet with the same potential outcome).

The US IS right wing and has very low taxes (and virtually NO social support) - thats entirely different to the UK where people were encouraged to scrounge (and the system was / is very generous).

The US' debt problems are largely due to spending (with borrowed money) more than they earn (on wars / invasions, perhaps?) whereas the UK debt was due largely to not producing any goods anymore and paying far far more than we can afrord to those that will not work (but keep knocking out kids).

We might have been able to afford it once ... but not any more.

such a bizarre concept.."people encouraged to scrounge".

People who apply for and receive government payments are not 'scroungers'.

Ian Duncan Smith was in Oz last week and the only person he impressed was a right wing Aboriginal leader who hung off every word.."people must get over their reliance on enititlments.." and so on.

It's like saying banks or corporations must get over their reliance on profits.

Funny old place the UK has become...no jobs and those without them are blamed for not having the job that isn't there.

Murdoch has run the country for 3 decades yet pays a fraction of tax on profits earned there..but the 'scroungers'...always the scroungers

veritas wrote:
People who apply for and receive government payments are not 'scroungers'.

...no jobs and those without them are blamed for not having the job that isn't there.

Payments are for those LOOKING for work ... NOT for those who stay in bed all day watching Jeremy Kyle !

Let's look at it another way ... if someone is "looking for work" and still hasn't found employment within a set period (perhaps because they have nails through their noses / faces, or Man Utd tattooed on their foreheads?), they are not likely to ever find a job - and as such are no use to society.

Those who want work find it - the rest vote Labour.

In The Know wrote:
veritas wrote:
People who apply for and receive government payments are not 'scroungers'.

...no jobs and those without them are blamed for not having the job that isn't there.

Payments are for those LOOKING for work ... NOT for those who stay in bed all day watching Jeremy Kyle !

Let's look at it another way ... if someone is "looking for work" and still hasn't found employment within a set period (perhaps because they have nails through their noses / faces, or Man Utd tattooed on their foreheads?), they are not likely to ever find a job - and as such are no use to society.

Those who want work find it - the rest vote Labour.

It was Maggie who pushed many of them onto long term sick in the first place.
Still it does give us another excuse to laugh at u

This is, of course, the same credit agency that failed completely to see the worldwide recession coming. Some experts.

And who 'appoints' these credit agencies? And why do we give them such credence and therefore power?

david wrote:
This is, of course, the same credit agency that failed completely to see the worldwide recession coming. Some experts.

And who 'appoints' these credit agencies? And why do we give them such credence and therefore power?

You dont have to take any notice, David ... but is it wise to lend to someone who is clearly stretched beyond their means ?