The Student Room Group

Ed Miliband admitted labour would borrow on a large scale...

...but it is all in the benefit of the British people.

Is this sustainable? Will labour ever learn?

Scroll to see replies

UKIP are looking attractive now. With Labour it's borrowing and with Tories it's cutting.
I don't know if it matters. Remember that in 2005 when Cameron was elected as Tory leader the central plank of his manifesto was that he would match all Labour spending commitments. That was the Conservatives' policy until 2008-9. It's very unlikely that the election will be influenced much by a rational consideration of different economic policies, especially those expressed less recently than immediately prior to the election.
Reply 3
That's what they do. Government spending to fund growth, how is this still a hard concept for people?
Reply 4
Original post by The_Duck
That's what they do. Government spending to fund growth, how is this still a hard concept for people?


Government spending does not create genuine growth, this is why Labour is always an economic failure. The regulations of the private sector is what causes the lack of growth.
Reply 5
Original post by Falcatas
Government spending does not create genuine growth, this is why Labour is always an economic failure. The regulations of the private sector is what causes the lack of growth.


Source?
I'm afraid that basic economics disagrees, at least with your first point.
Reply 6
Original post by The_Duck
Source?
I'm afraid that basic economics disagrees, at least with your first point.



Well its obvious isn't it? Where does the governments money come from? The taxpayer. Higher taxes means less money for individual people to buy stuff ie less money to contribute to the economy.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2009/02/01/debunking-myth-government-spending-stimulates-economy
Original post by Lasershark
UKIP are looking attractive now. With Labour it's borrowing and with Tories it's cutting.


Disagreeing with Lab/Con policy is not a reason to vote UKIP. Btw what is UKIPs 'long term economic plan', other than leaving Europe ofc?


I wouldn't make out like their are huge ideological differences between either side though, both are committed to most spending anyway, neither would dare significantly cut either the NHS or Pensions budget so that is a good 40% of the budget or so locked in, from what I can see commitments on defence and other areas are pretty similar also.

tldr: Lab/Con are arguing over pennies while piles of £50 notes go up in flames all around them.

Original post by The_Duck
That's what they do. Government spending to fund growth, how is this still a hard concept for people?


This Government spends money, that's just what it does. Related point is US Republican presidential candidates who all say they will cut the size of the state, none of them actually have though....
Reply 8
Original post by Lasershark
UKIP are looking attractive now. With Labour it's borrowing and with Tories it's cutting.


You do realise as far as UKIP is concerned; the Tories haven't cut enough?

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by mojojojo101
Disagreeing with Lab/Con policy is not a reason to vote UKIP. Btw what is UKIPs 'long term economic plan', other than leaving Europe ofc?

That's the biggest change in plan offered by any party. It may be more of an anti-plan than a plan itself at this point, but it's pretty radical.
Original post by Lasershark
UKIP are looking attractive now. With Labour it's borrowing and with Tories it's cutting.


You think UKIP wouldn't make cuts?
Original post by Falcatas
Well its obvious isn't it? Where does the governments money come from? The taxpayer. Higher taxes means less money for individual people to buy stuff ie less money to contribute to the economy.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2009/02/01/debunking-myth-government-spending-stimulates-economy


Anyone who says "but where does the money come from?" might as well just write "I don't understand economics I don't understand economics I don't understand economics"
Original post by Observatory
That's the biggest change in plan offered by any party. It may be more of an anti-plan than a plan itself at this point, but it's pretty radical.


But 'leaving Europe' is not, at least by itself, an economic policy, all that I have heard from UKIP other than that is that would magic up an absolute mass of bilateral trade deals with nations all over the world in record quick time, admirable, not exactly realistic.

I'm not criticising anyone for voting for UKIP, just the reasoning that leads you to vote for a party with no fully formed economic policy because the other parties don't have a fully formed economic policy.
Original post by mojojojo101
But 'leaving Europe' is not, at least by itself, an economic policy, all that I have heard from UKIP other than that is that would magic up an absolute mass of bilateral trade deals with nations all over the world in record quick time, admirable, not exactly realistic.

I'm not criticising anyone for voting for UKIP, just the reasoning that leads you to vote for a party with no fully formed economic policy because the other parties don't have a fully formed economic policy.


Being in the EU means that we follow one certain economic policy on a large number of issues: the EU's economic policy. While UKIP certainly doesn't have a complete counter-proposal I find it hard to believe that even a tiny fraction of EU supporters even know what the EU's economic policy is. I am not sure they are on much different ground here, other than the pro-EU position being the status quo.

On both sides this is a question more of desired tendencies than of specifics. One side thinks the best idea is to become some kind of USSR or PRC, a big beast than can threaten and cajole for better terms. The other side thinks the best idea is to become more like a Singapore or Hong Kong, an agile wheeler-dealer type that is too weak to threaten but instead benefits from lacking the sloth of the bureaucratic monsters.

Now of the three parties that could plausibly be in government in 2015, all support becoming part of the big beast, with UKIP the only advocate of the wheeler-dealer approach.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Falcatas
Well its obvious isn't it? Where does the governments money come from? The taxpayer. Higher taxes means less money for individual people to buy stuff ie less money to contribute to the economy.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2009/02/01/debunking-myth-government-spending-stimulates-economy


I would advise looking up Marginal Propensity to Consume, it basically renders that whole line of reasoning obsolete.
You have to speculate to accumulate, and if you can borrow money and put that money to good use it will be worth it.
Im voting green after seeing their manifesto.
Reply 17
Source?
Reply 18
Original post by Falcatas
Well its obvious isn't it? Where does the governments money come from? The taxpayer. Higher taxes means less money for individual people to buy stuff ie less money to contribute to the economy.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2009/02/01/debunking-myth-government-spending-stimulates-economy


Title says they would borrow money .. taxing is not borrowing..


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 19
Imagine UKIP forming a Cabinet. It would involve Nigel himself and errrr who?.Perhaps he could do it all himself! Or he could bring in the guy who thought gay marriage caused floods. He could be in charge of environment.Suppose his wife could be Chancellor!

Oh and he says he didn't run in Newark because he had no connections with the area. So what connections did he have with Buckingham where he ran in 2010.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending