Thursday, June 6, 2013


Well that's the word that springs to mind when Millipede E suggests that spending all the money and overloading the country with debt wasn't to blame for our economic woes...
Labour’s spending in the last Government was not to blame for leaving Britain ill-prepared for recession, Ed Miliband claimed today.
The Labour leader made the claim after he had delivered a speech on welfare in east London in which he confirmed that Labour would remove the winter fuel payment from well-off pensioners, and not reverse the Coalition’s child benefit cut.
Asked whether he accepted that the “Labour party you were part of until 2010 spent too much”, he replied: “No, I don’t agree with that. “You can take two views about this – you can either say that what happened was that the deficit caused the financial crash, or you can believe that the financial crash caused the deficit. “The reason why President Obama is having to deal with the deficit, and President Hollande is having to deal with the deficit, why every country around the world is having to deal with the deficit is because of the financial crash.”
Um yes, we know their was a recession, but that doesn't mean that it wasn't your parties fault for not having the wherewithal to at least assist in ameliorating the effects of it by saving in the good times for the bad times. No, you and your boss just presumed that you could hock the family silver so many times that the interest we have to pay on it means our great grand-kids will have the right to use your name as a curse.
This is the leader of the party whose treasury secretary Liam Byrne insolently left a note declaring that there was no money left.
Because, that's what Labour do, economic competence and socialist economics are pretty much diametrically opposed to each other as concepts go as socialism/leftism believe in the magic money tree of public spending in that peoples pockets are deep and will never run out to pay the taxes. Not that the Tories are any better, their idea of economic competence seems to spring from merely reducing the borrowing, rather than paying it back and getting rid of the debts in a return to small efficient government (I know, I know, wishful thinking etc)
I get the feeling that the politicians know what we think of their pronouncements in the MSM and really don't give a damn about it.
After all what else could you think?

1 annotations:

Barry said...

When businesses are in trouble, staff are often reduced according to what the business can afford and managers are told to find a way of coping. Those who can't are replaced with more inventive ones who can. Been there. It's harsh, but it certainly concentrates the mind.

Wouldn't work throughout the Civil Service of course, but I'm sure there are bloated areas that wouldn't be missed.