National Debt

[ThEGr33k]

I just don't understand why we are always in debt. Why on earth do the government spend money when they know in the future we will just have to pay it back with more money on top! Why cant we simply spend what we have?

Please someone make sense of this (in my opinion) backwards thinking!

[the_lone_wolf]

I just don't understand why we are always in debt.

http://cornerstonegroup.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/gordon_brown.jpg

/thread

[gettin2dizzy]

Debt is exponential.

There isn't enough money physically to pay off all debts, and the debt increases with interest every second. This means more money needs to be borrowed to service the existing debts at an exponential scale. We just don't have a choice.

[timwilky]

Because Prudence Brown abolished boom and bust economics (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2001/oct/26/globalrecession2) back in 2001. Yeah right.

[dizzyblonde]

...and we give away our money to others.
Maybe riskeee saying it, but charity begins at home, then if you've got some spare, help others.

Amongst a whole heap of other things the government do with our money

[Bri w]

I just don't understand why we are always in debt. Why on earth do the government spend money when they know in the future we will just have to pay it back with more money on top! Why cant we simply spend what we have?

Please someone make sense of this (in my opinion) backwards thinking!

nowt wrong with your logic there matey.

we get told we're irresponsible etc by a Govt who.......... and relax

[timwilky]

...and we give away our money to others.
Maybe riskeee saying it, but charity begins at home, then if you've got some spare, help others.

+1.

Oh and sort out record unemployment with British jobs for British workers whilst your at it

[punyXpress]

Because Prudence Brown abolished boom and bust economics (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2001/oct/26/globalrecession2) back in 2001. Yeah right.
Just what we expect from The Grauniad!
To give them their due, he DID abolish any hope of boom, and he HAS bust the economy!
What a trud.

[metalmonkey]

http://cornerstonegroup.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/gordon_brown.jpg

/thread

Casue he and rest of have spent so much on second homes, not too mention one they have taken, then work on sly. Like a "cab for hire"

[arc123]

Debt is exponential.

There isn't enough money physically to pay off all debts, and the debt increases with interest every second. This means more money needs to be borrowed to service the existing debts at an exponential scale. We just don't have a choice.

Nail on head. There are differing estimates (depending on the source of information), but some suggest that 50% of all income taxes are used solely to service the interest payments on national debt. Only way out of the situation is complete monetary reform - take the power back from large banks and place it in the hands of a 'responsible' government.

This topic ties directly with the bail out of the banks. I heard a nice phrase to summarise this: "Private profit for public risk". We are saddled with huge debts for generations to come, and a relatively small amount of people/organisations get very, very rich.

[Ed]

...and we give away our money to others.
Maybe riskeee saying it, but charity begins at home, then if you've got some spare, help others.

Amongst a whole heap of other things the government do with our money

+2

I don't understand why the overseas aid budget is ring fenced. Why not cut it, if we can't afford it, we shouldn't be doing it.

[gettin2dizzy]

+2

I don't understand why the overseas aid budget is ring fenced. Why not cut it, if we can't afford it, we shouldn't be doing it.

Many many diplomatic reasons. We easily get our money back from these countries whether we dig it from the ground, or take it from their fields.

[Bri w]

+2

I don't understand why the overseas aid budget is ring fenced. Why not cut it, if we can't afford it, we shouldn't be doing it.

Quite a lot of overseas aid guarantees British jobs.

In a lot of cases the Govt pays a British company to supply the materials for x,y,z.

Its a backhanded way of subsidising British industry without breaking EU rules.

[dizzyblonde]

It also keeps our country supposedly 'looking good and keeping up with the Jones's' in the world big boys stakes.:rolleyes:

[Ed]

Here are the folks responsible. Right rogues' gallery.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/47529000/jpg/_47529338_cabinet466.jpg

[Paul the 6th]

Why cant we simply spend what we have?

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_c5nU_S1VtbY/S6oP8oTdhPI/AAAAAAAADbM/34bjw45oZ9o/article-0-06CAEFD8000005DC-355_468x286.jpg

[peterco]

Currently standing at,but forever increasing

£935,913,164,023

[Bibio]

you can sit and blame the government all you want but at the end of the day it has been the greedy british public that have got us into so much debt.

society today demands that we 'have it now and pay for it later', trouble with that is someone has to foot the bill in the meantime and that would be the government.

think about it, if the national average debt including mortgages is £45,000 and lets say 15,000,000 people in the UK have this debt then thats £675,000,000,000 just in public debt alone. the big problem is when the people who the government borrow the money off want it back sooner rather than later, with the government lending the money to the banks at only 1/2 a percent then they are not recouping the funds quick enough (this is probably responsible for the high living/fuel costs). the government can then say 'look we are keeping the interest rates down even in this time of recession', but in the meantime shafting us with high credit card rates and living/fuel costs. so simple solution is to raise interest rates again.

[ThEGr33k]

I have heard about what you are talking about with the money... Problem is that surely there will eventually be a complete collapse of the monetary system? Surely it cant just keep "inventing money"!? Though I guess writing off debt might eventually = out... Oh joy.

It is right, the system we are under see's the (relatively) poor getting poorer while the rich get super rich.

[Biker Biggles]

I have heard about what you are talking about with the money... Problem is that surely there will eventually be a complete collapse of the monetary system? Surely it cant just keep "inventing money"!? Though I guess writing off debt might eventually = out... Oh joy.

It is right, the system we are under see's the (relatively) poor getting poorer while the rich get super rich.

Correct.Capitalism requires constant "growth" or expansion in order to camouflage the ever increasing debt.In a finite world that is unsustainable and eventually must end in economic collapse.

[yorkie_chris]

you can sit and blame the government all you want but at the end of the day it has been the greedy british public that have got us into so much debt.

society today demands that we 'have it now and pay for it later', trouble with that is someone has to foot the bill in the meantime and that would be the government.

O rly?

Account I've read suggests that the British public was actually doing pretty well at servicing their debts.

[timwilky]

Quite a lot of overseas aid guarantees British jobs.

In a lot of cases the Govt pays a British company to supply the materials for x,y,z.

Its a backhanded way of subsidising British industry without breaking EU rules.

Hmmm, I worked on Pergau dam. That was a classic. We will pay for a hydro electric dam you don't need if you let British companies build it.

However, as we were subcontractors. It was Balfour Beatty & Cementation that got the readies and britain got a deal to sell Hawk aircraft

[punyXpress]

[QUOTE=Bibio;2222773]you can sit and blame the government all you want but at the end of the day it has been the greedy british public that have got us into so much debt.

society today demands that we 'have it now and pay for it later', trouble with that is someone has to foot the bill in the meantime and that would be the government.

And there was no element of the government encouraging this?

[timwilky]

you can sit and blame the government all you want but at the end of the day it has been the greedy british public that have got us into so much debt.

society today demands that we 'have it now and pay for it later', trouble with that is someone has to foot the bill in the meantime and that would be the government.

And there was no element of the government encouraging this?

There is some confusion between personal debt and national debt. In the main, personal debt seems to be handled reasonably well. Even if some stupid banks have made loans more in the hope that the borrower will be able to afford it.

National debt, is as a result of one thing. Government spending. I was brought up with the "If you cannot afford, you cannot have" mentality. Unfortunately ministers in the present government have not understood basic economics. They treated tax payers money as if it was monopoly money and seem to think that if you keep spending the global recession will go away.

No it wont. and there is only one way to spend when you haven't got the cash. Borrow it and expect the tax payer to fund their flawed economic models.

[ThEGr33k]

Correct.Capitalism requires constant "growth" or expansion in order to camouflage the ever increasing debt.In a finite world that is unsustainable and eventually must end in economic collapse.

Guess no one really cares at the moment because "it won't happen to me, and if it does the government will prop us up..."

As tim said, they just love to waste our money on any stupid idea thatcomes along. Sigh.

[TazDaz]

Debt has been steadily rising or thereabouts for near enough the past thirty years, so I very much doubt the country will be out of debt in my lifetime! That is unless they spend a few hundred billion to conquer the middle east, claim all the oil, and double the price per barrell....or invent something which can turn coal into gold. Oh wait...we don't have much coal either! :)

[keith_d]

Government budgeting is a variation on a well known economic problem, "The Tragedy of the Commons". Here's a modern example of how it works.

A group of ten friends decide to go out for a curry. Outside the restaurant they agree to simply divide the bill between them. After eating they find the bill is rather larger than expected and they have all eaten far too much. Why??

It's because if I order an extra prawn puri I get 100% of the joy of eating it, but only pay 10% of the price. So it's always in my interest to order that extra bit from the common budget, and it's the same for everyone around the table.

The demands from voters that, "the government should do something about the XXX" are just the same as ordering an extra onion bahji at the indian. Except that this time the bill is going onto the credit card instead of being paid in cash.

[CoolGirl]

Here are the folks responsible. Right rogues' gallery.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/47529000/jpg/_47529338_cabinet466.jpg
ooh, you never told us you got to sit next to DAvid Milliband at Cabinet!

If the finest economists in the world can't explain how it all works, the org is as good a place as any to come up with the answer !

[punyXpress]

" finest economists in the world "
Who are these people - certainly not that shower of fequits in Whitehall?

[Berlin]

We've just had 10 boom years! Where's the money gone from the boom?

Britain is supposed to be a "Company" in that it needs to balance its books. If it doesn't it goes pop. Just like a company, Britain PLC has shareholders (us) that could leginimately expect a dividend from Britain PLC having a Boom for 10 years. Where is it?

If we'd invested in the stock market we'd have made a killing in 10 years. So what about the dividends for Britain PLC? Where has the money gone? How come we have to borrow so much after 10 years of boom, Why aren't the Coffers full?

Three years ago the canadian Dollar was 2.5 to the Pound. Its now 1.5 to the Pound.

Proud to be British?

Get me out of here!

C

[Jabba]

How come we have to borrow so much after 10 years of boom, Why aren't the Coffers full?

This is the question that should really be asked - spot on.

This stupid govt didn't save for a rainy day when times were good, believing that economic growth would continue for ever. Ask them what they have done with North Sea Oil revenues and watch them squirm.

It was the economics of the madhouse and the whole house of cards fell overs because of something outside of their control - sub-prime mortgage lending in the US. Our money has gone into propping up the banks, the very organisations guilty of dubious lending practices in the first place.

[Caddy2000]

+1.

Oh and sort out record unemployment with British jobs for British workers whilst your at it


Little question, but did you know that there are less people unemployed at during this world recession than there were at the end of the last conservative government? That and the working population of Britian is much greater now.......

National debt is a repercussion of WWII...

[Jabba]

Little question, but did you know that there are less people unemployed at during this world recession......

Is that "unemployed and claiming benefit"?

What about all those on long-term sick or registered disabled?

Or all those 18 to 24 year olds who have been encouraged to go to university taking up all those newly created places that the govt made availble by throwing money at it? The same places that the govt are now cutting because they can't afford it.

The unemployment figures have been systematically massaged over the last 13 years and people removed from that particular list whenever possible.

I might have misheard something on the radio yesterday, the gist of which was that 25% of adults of working age and not in full-time education who are not working is 25%. Happy to be proved wrong on this last point.

[timwilky]

Little question, but did you know that there are less people unemployed at during this world recession than there were at the end of the last conservative government? That and the working population of Britian is much greater now.......

National debt is a repercussion of WWII...

At the end of the last conservative government, none of my family or friends were unemployed. At present my twin brother (Construction projects director) and my son (wall and floor tiler) are. so please don't tell me there is not record unemployment.

Unemployment statistics have been fiddled and recalculated. Why has incapacity benefits claimants increased 10 fold? Simple they have been moved off the unemployment register to make it look like rates have come down for long term unemployed.

National debt is a repercussion of government spending money it does not have.


As for WWII debt, it was $4.3 billion at 2% over a 50 year repayment schedule. Approx $27 billion in modern terms and was paid off in 2006. A piddling amount compared to what this lot have spent over the past few years. Does joe public actually realised in real terms Brown has cost us more the 5 years of global warfare.

[yorkie_chris]

We've just had 10 boom years! Where's the money gone from the boom?

See post #2.

They need to put businessmen into positions of power rather than political d*ckheads who've never done a days work in their lives.

[Philbo]

See post #2.

They need to put businessmen into positions of power rather than political d*ckheads who've never done a days work in their lives.

Yeh Business men who are used to handling huge budgets, and making decisions in the interest of the "Company", Britian. We could ask those nice Bankers!

Am I the only one here who sees that this is a GLOBAL problem?

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&language=en&pcode=teilm020&tableSelection=1&plugin=1

The debt taken on was done to stop the colapse of the GLOBAL banking system, to protect the life savings and pensions of British citizens. If the banking system had colapsed this recesion would look like a walk in the park by comparison. Even America, the "F**k you Jack I'm alright" country decided it had to spend money to prop up the banking sector. This is the down side of living in a Capitalist world.

Do you really think Britain would have been the only major economy to escape this recesion if there was a different government in charge?

Do you honestly think that the government of Great Britain caused this Global problem? Grow up, it came from the private sector. OK the regulation could be better, but it's a balancing act. If you make it too difficult for private companies to do business the way they see fit, they'll just go somewhere else, and up goes unemployment and down goes government revenue. That's why it needs a global response, with all the worlds major economies signing up to it. And that's what this government is trying to broker.

Unemployment might be a terrible new experience for some people, but it's certainly not new. Just ask the 3 million unemployed of 1982! 20% in Northern Ireland, 15% in Scotland and northern England.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/january/26/newsid_2506000/2506335.stm

Yes we all know the figures are fidled, but again this isn't new, I'm sure Maggy new how to cook the books too... I wonder what the real figure was?

Oh yeh, and back then there was no global banking crisis.

[embee]

National debt is due to reach £1,406 billion (that's £1,406,000,000,000) by the end of the next parliament according to the latest assessments. Assume 60 million inhabitants, that's equivalent around £24k per person (man woman and child) the Government will want to find from us all one way and another. How's that going to work?

Even if the borrowing miraculously fell to zero overnight, it would still take 20 or more years to bring the debt down to near zero. We're in serious doo-doo for the next 50 years at least. That's depressing to say the least. Unfortunately the media/government have now made the term "bilions" quite meaningless, so numbers just escalate out of control.

The main problem is the the Government departments who spend money, don't have to earn it, they just take it. They have no concept of affordability. We have huge huge huge public spending. Similarly the MPs lose sight of "earning" their wages, they are just given too much too easily. Bring on performance related pay, or payment in shares in UK Plc (i.e. the MPs get paid in IOU's, when the national debt is paid off, then they start getting paid).

Brown believed his own bull$hit so much that he just used the boom revenues to justify borrowing more and more on the basis that there couldn't be a bust, because he said he'd ended boom+bust, QED. It's never his fault, always someone else's. He didn't want the Banks etc to stop the imaginary money creation because he was raking in tax from it.

He clearly never read the Bible (even though his father was a Minister apparently), otherwise he might remember the lean/fat years parable. It's not rocket science. Norway (I think) salted away bits of North Sea oil revenue so it now has a huge sum saved up, we used our revenue to fund more borrowing.

The serious dilemma is just who do you vote for at the upcoming election, I mean really? Are any of them actually capable of dealing with the disaster of the UK economy?

[Philbo]

The serious dilemma is just who do you vote for at the upcoming election, I mean really? Are any of them actually capable of dealing with the disaster of the UK economy?

That's the problem, it's not just the UK economy is it?

People also need to realise that if you want puplic services, like the NHS, like schools and education you need to pay for it. Look at Denmark, they have execelent puplic services, but then again the average joe does pay 50% tax.

A friend of ours from Denmark married a Scotsman, and they live in Denmark. Before he moved he owned a shiny new Firblade, the cost of ownership is shuch that he had to sell it in the UK, and buy a third hand SV as that's all he can afford to own. It was one of the slow curvy ones in super slow yellow too;)

[arc123]

Originally Posted by Berlin http://forums.sv650.org/images/ca_morpheus_gray/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.php?p=2223621#post2223621)
How come we have to borrow so much after 10 years of boom, Why aren't the Coffers full?
This is the question that should really be asked - spot on.10 years of boom? we have been encouraged to spend money/accumulate debts on credit cards/loans etc in order to sustain the boom. The government hasn't had 10 years of boom - national debt has been increasing the entire 10 years. The only people gaining from the national debt are the lenders, in the form of interest payments.

The puiblc has conveniantly been blamed for this economic crash - being too greedy, borrowing too much blah blah blah. The fact is that money is created as debt. If there was no debt, then there would be no money.

[ThEGr33k]

I see the problem as being this. The economy has been made to look like it has been getting bigger and bigger by letting people borrow more and more and spend more and more... Obviously to someone who forgets the debt (government) it looks like the economy is going REALLY well "look at all the spending that is going on! How can things be going bad?"

Then the people borrowing the money say "we cant pay it back", the housing market goes through because the banks cant finance people to buy them, which is a downward spiral, in the end the bank has no money to loan. So the banks loan other Banks more money and eventually that dries up as well, the banks then say:

"We don't have the money now to cover all these loans that are falling through, we cant recoup on our loans because no one can afford to buy a house without our backing and we cant back them, what can we do!?"

So then obviously we the people (government) has to save the whole thing.



This is a bit of an aside to the real problem which is the fact that Gordon didn't save money for if anything did go wrong, he basically kept borrowing more and more. He is just an idiot. Ill be VERY disappointed if he got back in!


As to Denmark and 50% tax, just how much tax do you think we have? Off the top of my head 20% income tax, then 17.5% VAT. National insurance which no matter how you try to dress it up is TAX is about 10%... Then of course fuel costs which are stupid, Road tax etc etc, id say the Government is getting more than 50% of my money!

[rpwoodman]

I don't understand why the overseas aid budget is ring fenced. Why not cut it, if we can't afford it, we shouldn't be doing it.

I think there is a difference in providing money for people so that they can live (clean water, sanitation etc) and giving larger unemployment benefits so that people can smoke more, drink more, spend more on lottery tickets (not forgetting Sky TV) etc.

[Philbo]

I see the problem as being this. The economy has been made to look like it has been getting bigger and bigger by letting people borrow more and more and spend more and more... Obviously to someone who forgets the debt (government) it looks like the economy is going REALLY well "look at all the spending that is going on! How can things be going bad?"


Availability of credit is hardly something you can blame on the/any government. That's down to the privately owned; only worry about the dividend for the shareholder, banks. And if any government did try to step in they would be accused of being a nanny state, interfering with people’s rights.


Then the people borrowing the money say "we cant pay it back", the housing market goes through because the banks cant finance people to buy them, which is a downward spiral, in the end the bank has no money to loan. So the banks loan other Banks more money and eventually that dries up as well, the banks then say:

"We don't have the money now to cover all these loans that are falling through, we cant recoup on our loans because no one can afford to buy a house without our backing and we cant back them, what can we do!?"

So then obviously we the people (government) has to save the whole thing.


Majority of this problem originated America, how is that the UK Governments fault? If they didn't prop-up the banks things would be much worse, and people all over the world would find that the life savings account they had tucked away in the private bank vanished when the bank went bust.


This is a bit of an aside to the real problem which is the fact that Gordon didn't save money for if anything did go wrong, he basically kept borrowing more and more. He is just an idiot. Ill be VERY disappointed if he got back in!


Well, I don't suppose we really need nuclear weapons do we? And why does such a small nation have such a big army? OK, more could have been done to put some cash aside, but any government is judged on what it delivers. In a stable healthy economy what government is going to say "No you can't have access to the new cancer drug, were saving for a rainy day". Lets be objective, this government was elected on promises to spend money, not save it. Anyway they would have had to have put aside some serious money to make any sort of dent on this problem, and if they had they would be accused of hording tax payers cash when people are in need of X, Y, or Z.


As to Denmark and 50% tax, just how much tax do you think we have? Off the top of my head 20% income tax, then 17.5% VAT. National insurance which no matter how you try to dress it up is TAX is about 10%... Then of course fuel costs which are stupid, Road tax etc etc, id say the Government is getting more than 50% of my money!


I don't have full detials of all Danish taxes, but the 50% figure isn't the only tax. Read the bit where I mentioned the cost of motorcycle ownership.

[Jase22]

Borrowing money was actively encouraged by this Governement in order to fuel the false boom which it created. Agreed that the availability is down to the private banking sector, but would the credit have been offered had the Government's spend, spend, spend policy not been in effect I wonder?

[ThEGr33k]

Availability of credit is hardly something you can blame on the/any government. That's down to the privately owned; only worry about the dividend for the shareholder, banks. And if any government did try to step in they would be accused of being a nanny state, interfering with people’s rights.

People's rights... Spending money that you havn't earn't isn't a right in my opinion.


Majority of this problem originated America, how is that the UK Governments fault? If they didn't prop-up the banks things would be much worse, and people all over the world would find that the life savings account they had tucked away in the private bank vanished when the bank went bust.

What America does is not our problem but what we should have done is made it so our banks cant take silly risks... But then our government was loving the risks as much as the banks, like I said, boosted the economy.

Well, I don't suppose we really need nuclear weapons do we? And why does such a small nation have such a big army? OK, more could have been done to put some cash aside, but any government is judged on what it delivers. In a stable healthy economy what government is going to say "No you can't have access to the new cancer drug, were saving for a rainy day". Lets be objective, this government was elected on promises to spend money, not save it. Anyway they would have had to have put aside some serious money to make any sort of dent on this problem, and if they had they would be accused of hording tax payers cash when people are in need of X, Y, or Z.

Our armed forces is not big at all. The US's's forces gets 14% of the budget, ours gets 5% of our considerably smaller total spending. We waste money on benefits mostly. N' now debt interest is now more than our spending on the forces... I know which one is the better value for money!

What stable economy? Obviously it was so stable we arnt just about crawling out of a recession because of an unstable economy. :rolleyes: MP's and it seems most people only have an eye for the short term... Look at what we are stuck with now! We have been spending like crazy since about 2007 and then the banks last year... We should have spent what we had not what we could borrow.

I don't have full detials of all Danish taxes, but the 50% figure isn't the only tax. Read the bit where I mentioned the cost of motorcycle ownership.

To be honest I would guess that moving to any country (or even in our own) would hit the wallet... Its probably more down to the move than the Taxes that he had to get a cheaper ride.

[sunshine]

learn how the economy works boom, bust, boom, bust... guess whats going to come next?
its not efficient, its not the best way to run an economy but every 20 years you get get massive growth, and then a few years in a recession. These recessions only happen when one thing happens, greed is greater than the economical growth.
the national debt is caused by the attempt to grow, think of it as a business does a business save when it needs to grow? no
the growth needs to money injecting into it quickly so it borrows money and pays it back with money from the growth same with the economy, the debt does go down when we are making high economical growth, normally the year before a recession has the highest economical growth.

[Philbo]

People's rights... Spending money that you havn't earn't isn't a right in my opinion.

There are millions who would argue about that. Part of me actually agrees with you here, but it's the old free country, free market stuff again. For some folk, in certaim circumstances, it's the ony option.




What America does is not our problem but what we should have done is made it so our banks cant take silly risks... But then our government was loving the risks as much as the banks, like I said, boosted the economy.



Again I don't exactly disagree, but without global standards it would simply have meant bye bye to the financial sector the UK. Not much of an option in my view.



Our armed forces is not big at all. The US's's forces gets 14% of the budget, ours gets 5% of our considerably smaller total spending. We waste money on benefits mostly. N' now debt interest is now more than our spending on the forces... I know which one is the better value for money!

The British Armed Forces has the fourth highest declared expendature of any military in the world, behind the USA, China and France... We also have the largest Airforce and Navy in the EU. Why? We still seem to have this empire attitude. We don't have an empire any more, we need to remember this and cut our cloth accordingly.



What stable economy? Obviously it was so stable we arnt just about crawling out of a recession because of an unstable economy. :rolleyes: MP's and it seems most people only have an eye for the short term... Look at what we are stuck with now! We have been spending like crazy since about 2007 and then the banks last year... We should have spent what we had not what we could borrow.



Do you have a mortgage? I couldn't afford to buy a house without one. By the "only spend what you have" arguement none of use would own our homes. It's not such a big leap to extend this concept to government spending.
We are in a recision becuase of a GLABAL banking crisis. One of the joys associated with Capitalism.
As mentioned, do you really think the UK would have been the only major world economy unaffected if there was a different government in charge?

And be fair, this crisis asside, this has probably been the most stable the UK economy has been in living memory. Healthy? Well it's all relative isn't it!


To be honest I would guess that moving to any country (or even in our own) would hit the wallet... Its probably more down to the move than the Taxes that he had to get a cheaper ride.

I thought you might say that! It was the cost of ownership. The money he would normally have spent in the UK to put/keep a shiny new fireblade on the road would only allow him to run a third hand SV650.

[yorkie_chris]

People's rights... Spending money that you havn't earn't isn't a right in my opinion.


You advocate a return to the landower/serfdom system?

Mortgaging property is different, right? :-P

[Berlin]

This is the question that should really be asked - spot on.

This stupid govt didn't save for a rainy day when times were good, believing that economic growth would continue for ever. Ask them what they have done with North Sea Oil revenues and watch them squirm.

It was the economics of the madhouse and the whole house of cards fell overs because of something outside of their control - sub-prime mortgage lending in the US. Our money has gone into propping up the banks, the very organisations guilty of dubious lending practices in the first place.

The coffers aren't full because we are "At War"... in two countries. Everything we've made in the last 10 years in Britain PLC has been spent in a "Hostile takovers" of Iraq PLC and Afghanistan PLC.

I put a motion forward of No confidence in the Borad of Britain PLC!

C

[Biker Biggles]

What makes the current situation so much more serious than ever before is that we now have no means of getting out of the mess.After the war we had our manufacturing base which could be rebuilt and hence the "export or die" mantra of the fifties and sixties.Along came Thatcher who started the trend towards a finance biassed economy away from a manufacturing based one,and the whole restructuring was propped up by huge income from North Sea oil and flogging off anything that wasnt nailed down(privatisation).This disguised the uncomfortable truth that GB plc hasnt been solvent for decades and naw the gravy train has hit the buffers.What is going to prop up the economy for the next thirty years?Anyone who has an answer for that should be made Prime Minister ASAP.

[punyXpress]

[QUOTE=sunshine;2224396]learn how the economy works boom, bust, boom, bust... guess whats going to come next?

BOOM! 'cos Brown G will be down the road.

[bm1957]

...and we give away our money to others.
Maybe riskeee saying it, but charity begins at home, then if you've got some spare, help others.

Amongst a whole heap of other things the government do with our money

Sorry, but that's a crock of sh!te.

Who says this country is 'home'? If you want to service this country over and above others less fortunate, just because you had the privilege of being born here, why stop there? What if someone from London argued that money made there on the financial markets (most of the time :cool:) shouldn't be re-distributed across the rest of the country. After all, charity begins at home. Anyone one unfortunate enough to live in an old mining town should sort themselves out without any help from the government; if that town can't pay their own unemployed, let them rot???!!!

Surely it sounds crazy when you here it taken to that extreme???

There's a whole world out there guys and we all live in it.

\Rant over

[Biker Biggles]

The reason we generally regard this country as "home" when looking at economic issues is because the government is a national one,organising finances on a national basis,raising tax from individuals and corporations based in this country.Hence the thread title -----National Debt.When we succumb to world government your comments might make more sense.

[yorkie_chris]

There's a whole world out there guys and we all live in it.

\Rant over

But I don't like paying one Pound stupid a liter to line the pockets of a 3rd world savage and can't see it's a good idea except to prop up British industry.

[bm1957]

But I don't like paying one Pound stupid a liter to line the pockets of a 3rd world savage and can't see it's a good idea except to prop up British industry.

Sorry, did I miss your point or was it just irrelevant?

I was replying to someone who thinks we shouldn't be trying to feed and clothe kids in Africa until everyone in this country has a job and enough money for Burger King every day (hyperbole added ;)).

Using the corrupt governments that might run those countries as a moral excuse for having those views is just weak.

But other than the irrelevance, I couldn't fault a word of what you said.

[yorkie_chris]

Sorry, did I miss your point or was it just irrelevant?

Using the corrupt governments that might run those countries as a moral excuse for having those views is just weak.

You replied to a post which mentioned the vast amount of money spent on overseas aid, it is relevant.

Not a moral excuse, a practical one. Morals very swiftly go out of the door when you're skint.

[bm1957]

You replied to a post which mentioned the vast amount of money spent on overseas aid, it is relevant.

Not a moral excuse, a practical one. Morals very swiftly go out of the door when you're skint.

I don't think suggesting that we shouldn't be giving aid is any way related to being pi$$ed off that aid we do send is skimmed (if that is the point you were making).

Morals too often go out the window because people aren't satisfied with what they've got. But skint? Do you think that starving African kid would be happy with the lifestyle of some of the hard-up brits? Roof, food, NHS, police... he wouldn't think he was 'skint'. It's all relative and too many people are narrow minded and blinkered.

I'm no saint, I could give more to charity. I don't think it's healthy though to think that we somehow 'deserve' the wealth of this country more because we live here. Are we 'better' than those in developing countries? And what right do we have to wealth which is built on an empire of 'free labour'? I think we have a responsibility to pursue humanitarian policies and that when things start going Pete Tong they shouldn't be the easy option to cut. That's just me though I guess.

[yorkie_chris]

Humanitarian policies =/= pouring money down the p*sser.

I'll keep my mouth shut before I offend the entire forum for the second time this week :)

[dizzyblonde]

Sorry, but that's a crock of sh!te.




I'm sorry, but i'm afraid giving millions away that we as a country didn't ask to give is perfectly relevant. However if we choose as a public to raise money for charity from our own 'skint' pockets then that is an entirely different matter. You don't need to patronise me on people out there being less fortunate than ourselves.
Our government should be looking after the people of this land, sometimes they do well sometimes they don't. Trust me where I live there are some seriously needy people, in more ways than monetary, that the government neglect.
And by people of this land I mean any that have a right to live here.


BTW I may have had the privilege of being born here, but am descended from a family(on one side) that lost everything in a none too distant war in the past. I have been brought up to work hard for what you have, even though it could get taken away, have dignity and pride in everything you achieve...
Not one of us, that were born here, are true people of the land.....if you want to argue that fact. I am partner to a man who although born a Brit is from somewhere else, so you if think you I am being the old BNP type, you are sadly mistaken.


I truely believe in charity begins at home. I give my own part when I can.....because I made that decision, not because someone taxed me to do so.

[bm1957]

I'm sorry, but i'm afraid giving millions away that we as a country didn't ask to give is perfectly relevant. However if we choose as a public to raise money for charity from our own 'skint' pockets then that is an entirely different matter. You don't need to patronise me on people out there being less fortunate than ourselves.
Our government should be looking after the people of this land, sometimes they do well sometimes they don't. Trust me where I live there are some seriously needy people, in more ways than monetary, that the government neglect.
And by people of this land I mean any that have a right to live here.


BTW I may have had the privilege of being born here, but am descended from a family(on one side) that lost everything in a none too distant war in the past. I have been brought up to work hard for what you have, even though it could get taken away, have dignity and pride in everything you achieve...
Not one of us, that were born here, are true people of the land.....if you want to argue that fact. I am partner to a man who although born a Brit is from somewhere else, so you if think you I am being the old BNP type, you are sadly mistaken.


I truely believe in charity begins at home. I give my own part when I can.....because I made that decision, not because someone taxed me to do so.

The only irrelevant bit was about expensive petrol and lining the pockets of corrupt governments. I agreed with it though, it just wasn't really a valid argument against my point.

I never meant to patronise. I'd agree that there are many people in this country who deserve more, and I agree that the government doesn't always do a good job. All I'd disagree about is Foreign Aid being at the top of your list of things to cut, just seems like a cop out. If we stopped wasting and squandering money here and still couldn't afford the economy, then it would be fair enough.

I know that no-one born here is a true person of this land, but that only strengthens my point!!! Why should any wealth be due to us just because we have the fluke and privilege to be born here, we're not even native...

Do you really think those less fortunate should suffer because of the mess our capitalist economy got us into just because they aren't part of 'our' country?

[dizzyblonde]

It was a mere example. NOT at the top of my list, read back it says 'amongst others'.