Tories good with the economy myth

[Andy_W]

Let me say this again Andy. You are wrong. Even over the last 100 years, and tories have had twice as much in time in power, they are still behind Labour on economics.

More recently they are further behind. Comparing the most recent labour government with the the current tory government. Its not nonsense because you say so.

You picked the g7 comparison because it supported your argument, no other reason. Compare the g20 or Europe v uk.

The dig about brexit is beneath you. If you want to continue that do it with someone else, I won't entertain it.

They're similar to labour, so close that it's statistically insignificant, the main point should be what each chooses to do with that growth, the Tories tend to do things for the rich, and Labour tend to do good things for the least well off.

Look, I'm more against the Tories than just about anyone, but target things which are real, not which you want to be real. We'll probably need a good honest fight when fighting against the Tories, resorting to their horse**** makes no sense unless you're trying to con daily mail and express readers into voting Labour? Elections and votes based on lies or mistruths have got us nowhere.

Your thread title is actually accurate, it is a myth, they're no better than Labour, but they have been doing it for a longer timeframe I suppose.

The world economy plays a massive part on GDP, hence why when there's something like a worldwide recession, the whole world largely suffers and then has to recover from it. It's similar to any boom or bust, or bear or bull market. Anyone can make money in a Bull market, that's why there ends up being a bull market, the opposite is for a bear market, which is why most things go to **** when it happens.

I didn't use the G7 because it suited my argument, I often say comparing against the G7 is the best metric, as it is on most things. Compare us against USA, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan etc, as they're all developed economies, capable of doing well, all with relatively similar standards of progression. You can exclude USA and Japan if you like, as they're the ones with the obvious big differences. The bar to compare to is the countries which are similar to us, which are the ones of similar size, the one's next door and some of our major trading partners. Chances are if they're suffering or booming, then we will be too, or it will explain 75% of it.

Most of the G20 is only recently developed, or on the other side of the planet, they're less comparable. (like how USA/ Japan is in the g7)
Same as the EU, which is made up of some major nations, but many much smaller ones, can't really compare against the latter either.

Brexit is a major economic factor, which will influence our GDP for the next 10,20,30 years or whatever, no point denying it won't.

 

[Laughing]

They're similar to labour, so close that it's statistically insignificant, the main point should be what each chooses to do with that growth, the Tories tend to do things for the rich, and Labour tend to do good things for the least well off.

Look, I'm more against the Tories than just about anyone, but target things which are real, not which you want to be real. We'll probably need a good honest fight when fighting against the Tories, resorting to their horse**** makes no sense unless you're trying to con daily mail and express readers into voting Labour? Elections and votes based on lies or mistruths have got us nowhere.

Your thread title is actually accurate, it is a myth, they're no better than Labour, but they have been doing it for a longer timeframe I suppose.

The world economy plays a massive part on GDP, hence why when there's something like a worldwide recession, the whole world largely suffers and then has to recover from it. It's similar to any boom or bust, or bear or bull market. Anyone can make money in a Bull market, that's why there ends up being a bull market, the opposite is for a bear market, which is why most things go to **** when it happens.

I didn't use the G7 because it suited my argument, I often say comparing against the G7 is the best metric, as it is on most things. Compare us against USA, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan etc, as they're all developed economies, capable of doing well, all with relatively similar standards of progression. You can exclude USA and Japan if you like, as they're the ones with the obvious big differences. The bar to compare to is the countries which are similar to us, which are the ones of similar size, the one's next door and some of our major trading partners. Chances are if they're suffering or booming, then we will be too, or it will explain 75% of it.

Most of the G20 is only recently developed, or on the other side of the planet, they're less comparable. (like how USA/ Japan is in the g7)
Same as the EU, which is made up of some major nations, but many much smaller ones, can't really compare against the latter either.

Brexit is a major economic factor, which will influence our GDP for the next 10,20,30 years or whatever, no point denying it won't.

They are close? Extrapolate the difference over 100 years. I really think its pointless arguing with you. You firm an opinion and it doesn't matter what anyone says, you stick to your opinion in the face of overwhelming evidence.

Remember your ridiculous stance on Ronaldo being the goat? Despite Ronaldo disagreeing with you?

 

[Andy_W]

They are close? Extrapolate the difference over 100 years. I really think its pointless arguing with you. You firm an opinion and it doesn't matter what anyone says, you stick to your opinion in the face of overwhelming evidence.

Remember your ridiculous stance on Ronaldo being the goat? Despite Ronaldo disagreeing with you?

Did you not see the article which showed the 100 years of data being close? You should have, you quoted some of the numbers from it, where the article specifically said they're so close it's statistically insignificant, and that was from a pro-labour article. It was there to quash the myth that the Tories are better with the economy, which is does, but it doesn't prove Labour are any better, or that they're immune from world events.

Labour are much better at running the economy than voters think – new research

We looked at 100 years of Tory and Labour governments to see who was better at producing GDP.

theconversation.com

Why don't you think the world economy has an impact on our economy? No economist would ever agree with you on that, because it's crazy talk.

Overwhelming evidence? There's none to prove anything either way, as it's pretty much down the middle.

Cherry-picking from an economic boom (for the world/ G7 etc), comparing that to post-recession, and forming an opinion on that is absolutely ludicrous. Even look at the data from 1980 to 2023, it's practically identical with a gradual decrease in YOY growth (as it becomes harder to grow, once you've grown).

I wish I could say Labour were much better with the economy, but I can't, but equally, I'll shoot anyone down who says the Tories are too, as that's just as bad.

Concentrate on what Labour do, whilst maintaining economic growth, and what the Tories don't do by maintaining economic growth.

Brexit is going to be the biggest impact on the economy, relative to the G7, going forward, no matter who is in charge, unless they become pally with the EU again.

Which Ronaldo? When did I say either was the GOAT? I don't think I've ever said R9 was the best ever, hard to say that as he never had the longevity (due to injuries and hyperthyroidism) but I often say he had the highest ever peak of any player I've seen, playing at a time when defenders where very good also (and very defensive).
CR7 is probably the most complete footballer of modern times (but I still think Messi is better, albeit in different roles, better team player too), those two are the top two, ever, I think. They dominated the top two for over a decade, and if either wasn't there then the other would have 12+ Ballon d'Or.
Hard to say about anyone pre televised games, especially those outside of England, and playing in awful leagues, but the standard was lower, as was fitness etc.

 

[Redwurzel]

Economic growth in the UK has been around 0.5% a year since 2008 (see FT graph in Andy's post) - its the lowest since the start of the Industrial Revolution. Low investment in the UK infrastructure and people, with heavily over centralised economy in the UK are commonly blamed for our poor productivity.

Just travelling around its pretty obvious how old buildings are, and how little development there has been in the places like Teesside and how many lost opportunities there are. Some areas of Teesside look almost like wastelands and certainly areas that look like they have seen better days. The opportunities were lost under Labour and Conservatives and much before 2016 (before we get the Remainers on saying everything was fine/much better in the good old EU days).

To a lot of "Middle England" people the period from 2008 has been fine, their house has risen 60% to 70% in value, their income has gone up slightly above inflation (e.g state pensions) and their shares are up about 50% too, while their debts cost less to service because interest rates have been so low. What some don't realise is that this has been made possible through increased Government debt/borrowings/private debt and restricting new housing, opposed to increased productivity and output.

 

[bencha]

Tories are often seen as the government of fiscal responsibility. I came across this graph, which whilst not new, it is relevant today in the middle of a financial and economic crisis.

View attachment 42863

it really is easy to see that the economy grew at a fairly predictable rate under both previous labour governments and, to be fair, thatcher and major. After the financial crash there was a very real dip in economic growth but the thin red line is a forecast of where Labour were heading under brown, and that may have gotten even better, given a bit more time. Since 2012, under successive tory leaders the economy has grown at a contracted rate, with May, Johnson and will continue in this vain with Truss.

The contraction is about 15% per year. Given that salaries follow economic growth closely, it would be like getting the equivalent of a 15% pay rise every year over the last 10 years.

The graph clearly shows that a contracted economy, battering the poor, slaughtering the NHS, policing and public services has been a tory ideology and not the result of the financial crash, brexit, covid or the war in Ukraine.

Also, the tories cut back public services when in power. When Labour become the government, they have to spend to rebuild the public sector.

 

[bencha]

its all the workers fault - says Lizzy Dripping - we are not doing enough graft to keep the rich in their riches - tory apologists and enablers take a look in your mirror.

Liz Truss accused of branding British workers lazy in leaked audio

The Tory leadership hopeful is accused by critics of branding workers lazy in leaked audio.

www.bbc.co.uk

Her true feelings for the UK workers, she also wrote the Britannia Unchained book in which she says that UK workers just watch football and listen to pop music! And recently she wanted to pay northerners less than southerners. Red wall tory voters are deluded if they think that truss is the best option.

 

[Andy_W]

its all the workers fault - says Lizzy Dripping - we are not doing enough graft to keep the rich in their riches - tory apologists and enablers take a look in your mirror.

Liz Truss accused of branding British workers lazy in leaked audio

The Tory leadership hopeful is accused by critics of branding workers lazy in leaked audio.

www.bbc.co.uk

She lives in a dream world, and she's going to be just as bad as BJ, if not worse.

Our only hope is they get absolutely battered at the next election, and it puts this far-right crap to the sword for good.

 

[Redwurzel]

Liz Truss wants to get out in white van and deliver 150 parcels a day.

 

[Laughing]

Did you not see the article which showed the 100 years of data being close? You should have, you quoted some of the numbers from it, where the article specifically said they're so close it's statistically insignificant, and that was from a pro-labour article. It was there to quash the myth that the Tories are better with the economy, which is does, but it doesn't prove Labour are any better, or that they're immune from world events.

Labour are much better at running the economy than voters think – new research

We looked at 100 years of Tory and Labour governments to see who was better at producing GDP.

theconversation.com

Why don't you think the world economy has an impact on our economy? No economist would ever agree with you on that, because it's crazy talk.

Overwhelming evidence? There's none to prove anything either way, as it's pretty much down the middle.

Cherry-picking from an economic boom (for the world/ G7 etc), comparing that to post-recession, and forming an opinion on that is absolutely ludicrous. Even look at the data from 1980 to 2023, it's practically identical with a gradual decrease in YOY growth (as it becomes harder to grow, once you've grown).

I wish I could say Labour were much better with the economy, but I can't, but equally, I'll shoot anyone down who says the Tories are too, as that's just as bad.

Concentrate on what Labour do, whilst maintaining economic growth, and what the Tories don't do by maintaining economic growth.

Brexit is going to be the biggest impact on the economy, relative to the G7, going forward, no matter who is in charge, unless they become pally with the EU again.

Which Ronaldo? When did I say either was the GOAT? I don't think I've ever said R9 was the best ever, hard to say that as he never had the longevity (due to injuries and hyperthyroidism) but I often say he had the highest ever peak of any player I've seen, playing at a time when defenders where very good also (and very defensive).
CR7 is probably the most complete footballer of modern times (but I still think Messi is better, albeit in different roles, better team player too), those two are the top two, ever, I think. They dominated the top two for over a decade, and if either wasn't there then the other would have 12+ Ballon d'Or.
Hard to say about anyone pre televised games, especially those outside of England, and playing in awful leagues, but the standard was lower, as was fitness etc.

View attachment 42909

I give up.

 

[r00fie1]

Hes back!

 

[Andy_W]

Hes back!

View attachment 43014

He never does anything right, lazy ****, why isn't he carrying one of the kids (I assume they're his?), or helping with all that gear?

It's not like aircraft steps are super safe....

Jees I'd even be offering to carry people's bags even if I didn't know them if they had kids or were struggling.

 

[r00fie1]

He never does anything right, lazy ****, why isn't he carrying one of the kids (I assume they're his?), or helping with all that gear?

It's not like aircraft steps are super safe....

Jees I'd even be offering to carry people's bags even if I didn't know them if they had kids or were struggling.

Thats his tucker-bag with a few toys to play with on the plane, an etch-a-sketch and a box of wet wipes in case of emergency.
Luvvverly family foto int it

 

[Laughing]

Hes back!

View attachment 43014

Thank christ for that.