[Post removed due to abuse -admin]

I wonder where all the money went. Must have been during the banking crisis that the Tories started.

[Post removed due to abuse -admin]

[Post removed due to abuse -admin]

This post was last modified: 23-01-2016 10:54 AM by crassbelch.

I was always taught that quoting what sound to the layperson like HORRIFYINGLY LARGE FIGURES without giving other figures to compare them with was not very illuminating.

[Post removed due to abuse -admin]

Although presumably the figure will halve when the money we (yes we) used to bail out the banks is repaid?

It is an urban myth that our debt is unsustainable now or by historical standards. It is easy to find support for this, just do a search. Here is one example:
Royal Economic Society - The National Debt in Perspective

This post was last modified: 25-01-2016 12:50 PM by lacb.

[Post removed due to abuse -admin]

[Post removed due to abuse -admin]

This post was last modified: 25-01-2016 01:15 PM by crassbelch.

Why spurious? Perhaps it doesn't suit your ideology. Re-read your own citation carefullly and compare with the text of Professor Neild's artiicle. Then read this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/econo...s-IMF.html

The IMF's position has not changed much. Nor has the Telegraph's, strangely, which reported on both stories.

[Post removed due to abuse -admin]

It is a good idea to reduce our debt, though as the IMF now suggests there are more beneficial approaches that we could take to benefit the economy. It is easier and certainly less painful to reduce debt through growth. It is also worth pointing out that the debt has continued to grow since young Mr Osborne has been addressing it.

So in answer to your questions: yes, no, yes probably (refer back to the first article I posted for historical justification for that last point).

[Post removed due to abuse -admin]

Politicians of all persuasions seem to have the hubris to think that they trigger growth purely through policy intervention - growth continues whatever they do - check the history. Osborne may have tried to reduce the deficit but it is surely clear that there may be better ways of doing this. In short, austerity is far from necessary in terms of economics. Now there may be ideological reasons for pursuing this but that is a different matter.

[Post removed due to abuse -admin]

This post was last modified: 25-01-2016 03:06 PM by crassbelch.

You may be determined to make this political but am not going to play along.

It is not speculation at all - the clear trend over centuries is one of growth, read the lessons of history. It is highly questionable to state that France is a failed nation. It is absolutely on a par with the UK and with a more varied economy. We would do well to follow their infrastructure investments.

Nothing vague in this - just read some Keynes for starters. Previous Conservative administrations have had no problem at all in following his approach so not a preserve of left thinking. Did you read the article from the Royal Economic Society?

[Post removed due to abuse -admin]

This post was last modified: 25-01-2016 03:44 PM by crassbelch.

So do we agree that when the money we spent bailing out the banks is repaid the debt will halve?
I believe it was in the region of 850 million we 'loaned' them to cover their gambling debts?

[Post removed due to abuse -admin]

This post was last modified: 25-01-2016 10:56 PM by crassbelch.