UK sinks into double-dip recession

[Pete]

One has to ask the question, "Is George Osborne any good at his job?"

OK he is very rich and does not feel the pinch like ordinary folks do, but shouldn't he have made some sort of positive impact since the last general election? Is he in touch with the man in the street? Is he in touch with anyone?

He is quick to blame the outgoing government for the mess we are in, but hasn't come up with anything substantial that has improved the situation in any way. He, like most Con MPs, bang on and on about necessary "austerity" measures, but farts about with ideas that only seems to make sense to him, as in his last budget, which even baffled some of his own party's MPs.

He's screwed the middle classes, pensioners and the young in one way or another - and prices are rising all the time making anyone on a tight budget struggle to keep going - yet he gives the very rich a tax cut. What's that all about?

We don't mind taking the medicine Mr Osborne, but only if it cures the problem.

I sometimes wonder if there was instruction from the top that MPs should preface every speech or statement with the words, "With the huge mess we inherited from the last Labour government…"

It's time this excuse stopped and the government did something concrete that gets results.

There is way out of this situation, one quite radical idea that would solve most of our economic problems. It is simple, can be understood by 99% of the population - but there are some very powerful vested interests that would suffer. That, however, is a whole new thread.

But to me, the overwhelming problem that stops growth is the issue of confidence. No one is confident that matters will improve, so ordinary people hold back on spending, and more importantly, businesses hold back on spending. Why? Because the powers that be keep reminding us over and over again just how bad things are - and as I have said before, blaming the last government.

Can we have some positivity please?

[therealjr]

Evidently not
Cameron has answered 5 or 6 questions in PMQ's and every single one has refered to the mess they inherited and then added that 'we'd be in a bigger mess if we had followed the policies of the party opposite'.

Of course taking the medicine depends on what it is you are trying to cure.

[k4blades]

But to me, the overwhelming problem that stops growth is the issue of confidence. No one is confident that matters will improve, so ordinary people hold back on spending, and more importantly, businesses hold back on spending. Why? Because the powers that be keep reminding us over and over again just how bad things are - and as I have said before, blaming the last government.

Can we have some positivity please?

Spot on Pete.

[Stuart]

One has to ask the question, "Is George Osborne any good at his job?"

Define "Job." "Chancellor?" I don't think so. "Increaser of the Wad for his toff mates?" I'd say he's doing fine, so far.

[Slacker]

Thatcher's standard response for years was to blame the previous government so nothing new there.

Warning signs from history shows that austerity measures make things worse not better.

[Fly]

I might be not very politically on-form Andy, but can you put that in a simple way.
Every Gov blames the one before ?
I'm getting sick of it all now as I get older.
Sack the fuc**** lot of them.

Something needs doing, but I don't have the answer 

[k4blades]

Thatcher's standard response for years was to blame the previous government so nothing new there.

Something Labour would never do.

Warning signs from history shows that austerity measures make things worse not better.

Really, you have a strange view of history.

Our biggest austerity time ever was during WW2 but once it was over there were boom years.
Austerity through the seventies, (as the BBC2 show is showing) followed my Thatcher making 3million unemployed etc, lead to a massive growth and economic boom in the late 80s.
That growth was so good that Brown spent many years telling us he had got rid of boom and bust, then went on to nearly bankrupt the country!

Furthermore, I would say what austerity. A recent report showed that only about 30% of the planned cuts in spending have actually happened. All the talk when the coalition came to power was just that, talk. Cameron hasn't got the balls to do anything that creates a bad headline so he constantly backs down or changes his plans, meaning the Government is now spending more than it did when it came to power....what cuts! (there was meant to be a "bonfire of the quangos", we now have more quangos)

If he had been a much stronger leader he would have cut a lot more much earlier, which in the long term would mean they would be in a much better position to cut taxes. The single biggest thing he could do to help the economy in my view, would be to slash petrol duty, helping individuals and business alike, but they can't afford to because public spending is still way too high. He could also have taken a much stronger stand against the EU / Euro instead of constantly handing over more and more of our money to failed economies....which everyone knows will collapse in the long run...so why drag it out.

As Pete has said recently, the biggest issue we have in this country is confidence. The public have been force fed constant bad news for the past few years, which doom mongers of Labour encourage, rarely mentioning the good things that happen and that lack of confidence holds everything back.

Cameron could have been much braver and decisive in the past couple of years meaning that by now the medicine would be starting to work, and we could be more positive about the future....but instead  everything just creeps on and on without any real change because no one has the balls to be bold.

I only think there will be real change in this country when people on the continent raise up against the EU / Euro leading to their collapse and our politicians will be forced to react.
 

[therealjr]

Cameron is not a strong leader because he doesn't have a mandate to be one. He has to drag the Lib Dems along with him to support his policies. This is where my contention has been that rather than criticise the Libdems for joining the coalition we should perhaps be more thankful that they are reining in some of the more radical tory policies.

Incidently councils blame the previous administration as well !!!!

[Scimitar]

Its already been said by economists that the bail out funds sent to the likes of Greece, for example, will never be repaid, at all, never mind even some of it.
So why send more? Its just "writing off" funds, which we can ill afford.
Why can't we, just for once, look after our bloody selves.
If the Gov't slashed duty on fuel with a proviso that food prices come down immediately, i.e. it costs less to deliver it to the supermarkets, public transport could also be cheaper, and fewer cuts in services to rural areas etc.
They tax everything to the hilt, alcohol,tobacco,fuel. Surely they can make a conscession on fuel.
It's no good just making a token reduction in tax allowances when its outstripped by inflation. People can't spend money they haven't got, nor can they take on credit they can't afford, or that the banks won't even lend.
Many people are having to put up with a pay freeze - just to keep in employment.
Just my thoughts for what they are worth.

[k4blades]

Cameron is not a strong leader because he doesn't have a mandate to be one. He has to drag the Lib Dems along with him to support his policies. This is where my contention has been that rather than criticise the Libdems for joining the coalition we should perhaps be more thankful that they are reining in some of the more radical tory policies.

Incidently councils blame the previous administration as well !!!!

Until recently the Tories were polling around the high 30s% while the Libdems were around 10% so they have less of a mandate, and suggests that maybe they are the ones who are more radical, if radical means being out of touch with the public. The more radical tory policies you refer to are probably supportted by a vast majority of the public, including the left, if you think about some of the issues relating to the EU or immigration.

[Slacker]

The boom years came after the war because despite the huge debt there was public expenditure to create the Health Service

[k4blades]

Nothing to do with the massive boom in house building then, or the heavy industries.

Also the public spending then was no where near what it is now but then it was spent on things we needed instead of crap like, err.........red swirly lines on the side of vans!

[k4blades]

Furthermore, I would say what austerity. A recent report showed that only about 30% of the planned cuts in spending have actually happened. All the talk when the coalition came to power was just that, talk. Cameron hasn't got the balls to do anything that creates a bad headline so he constantly backs down or changes his plans, meaning the Government is now spending more than it did when it came to power....what cuts! (there was meant to be a "bonfire of the quangos", we now have more quangos)

According to what was said last night on Question Time, 88% of the planned cuts have not yet happened. All the "pain" we are going through with lack of growth is because of the fear of cuts, not because of the cuts themselves. So we are getting the pain without any of the gain, which should be reduced public spending, meaning lower taxes. But thats not happening, public spending is increasing!

[Old Cruser]

and now leisure centres, libraries etc may have to close to put money into having to look after our elderly.
Disgraceful that they send money to other countries and can't find any to care for our aged without penalising the rest of us.