Jeremy Clarkson should be sacked!

[BillyStubbsTears]

What, when consumer demand has nosed-dived?? You can only sell stuff when people can afford to buy. Where's the demand going to come from in a flat-lined economy with unemployment made even higher by your sacking the public sector workers in your dash for a smaller state - the demand fairy?

If taxes are cut people will have more money to spend so consumer demand will increase. Simple. More jobs will be created which will take up the slack from the massively bloated public sector. Simple. Guess what we could also increase our exports with this strategy.

See. I'm REALLY trying to help you here, but you won't have it will you? I keep pointing you in the direction of Japan, but you simply will not learn the lessons.

Japan's Lost Decade shows that if you have a struggling economy, it doesn't matter how much money you put into people's pockets - they won't spend it.

And why should they. If the economy is tanking then there are two very, very good reasons to hang onto your money. For one, if you're in actual deflation, it makes sense to wait for a couple of years before you buy that washing machine - it'll be cheaper then. For two, if the economy is struggling, you save up for the time when YOU personally get hit by unemployment.

THAT is why Government has to intervene to stimulate demand and get us spending again.

[madmick50]

THAT is why Government has to intervene to stimulate demand and get us spending again.

It is debt that got Britain into trouble in the first place. Let’s say we do as you want and add to the structural deficit with more borrowing. We’d be gambling the priceless fiscal credibility that this government has earned with the international markets on the bet that borrowing a few billion pounds more would make all the difference.

We’d be putting at risk our precious low interest rates on a change of course that would put those rates up in the full knowledge that any extra billion pounds of public spending would be wiped out by billions of pounds more in higher interest costs for families, businesses, and taxpayers.

We’d be abandoning the deficit plan that has brought us the stability other nations today crave, for say five, ten, twenty billion pounds more of borrowed spending on the illusion that such sums would transform our economy when we’re already spending three trillion pounds over the next few years.

The only realistic way to stimulate the economy is to reduce taxes.

[Glyn_Wigley]

What, when consumer demand has nosed-dived?? You can only sell stuff when people can afford to buy. Where's the demand going to come from in a flat-lined economy with unemployment made even higher by your sacking the public sector workers in your dash for a smaller state - the demand fairy?

If taxes are cut people will have more money to spend so consumer demand will increase. Simple. More jobs will be created which will take up the slack from the massively bloated public sector. Simple. Guess what we could also increase our exports with this strategy.

Borrowing even more money to keep people in unproductive work in the public sector is the economics of the madhouse. Public sector workers need to get real and stop relying on us in the private sector to maintain their cushy lives. It's time they started thinking about others instead of only thinking about what they can get out of others (the private sector).

Only those lucky enough to still have jobs in your model economy, and even then only by a small amount of their disposable income. Certainly not enough to compensate for the consumer demand eradicated by the shrinkage of the public sector (and the concomitant loss of jobs caused by this drop in demand) you espouse.

I'm also fascinated by your overall 15% tax rate. I'd like to know what you'd do with the rate of VAT?

[Glyn_Wigley]

THAT is why Government has to intervene to stimulate demand and get us spending again.

It is debt that got Britain into trouble in the first place. Let’s say we do as you want and add to the structural deficit with more borrowing. We’d be gambling the priceless fiscal credibility that this government has earned with the international markets on the bet that borrowing a few billion pounds more would make all the difference.

We’d be putting at risk our precious low interest rates on a change of course that would put those rates up in the full knowledge that any extra billion pounds of public spending would be wiped out by billions of pounds more in higher interest costs for families, businesses, and taxpayers.

We’d be abandoning the deficit plan that has brought us the stability other nations today crave, for say five, ten, twenty billion pounds more of borrowed spending on the illusion that such sums would transform our economy when we’re already spending three trillion pounds over the next few years.

The only realistic way to stimulate the economy is to reduce taxes.

Rising unemployment, rising inflation, stagnant growth. What wonderful stability. It's like saying a corpse has reached the peak of trancendental meditation.

[madmick50]

Only those lucky enough to still have jobs in your model economy, and even then only by a small amount of their disposable income. Certainly not enough to compensate for the consumer demand eradicated by the shrinkage of the public sector (and the concomitant loss of jobs caused by this drop in demand) you espouse.

I'm also fascinated by your overall 15% tax rate. I'd like to know what you'd do with the rate of VAT?

Look, thanks to Gordon we are in one hell of a mess. There is no magic bullet that is going to sort things out overnight. Borrowing even more money is not the solution, any idiot can see that. However we are still having to borrow and will have to do for years to come because the mess is so horrendous. Your solution to borrow even more money to keep people in artificial jobs in the public sector would be an economic disaster for us as I've explained earlier.

If my tax policy was followed eventually people would have a lot more disposable income and the problem would be sorted. People in the public sector may even be encouraged to start their own businesses!!! Shock horror, can you believe it. They may start to think 'I'm going to have a go at standing on my own two feet' instead of always wanting the government to look after them.  Who would you trust with your money the government or yourself? Who do you think would spend it more wisely? It's a no brainer.

The rate of VAT would eventually be zero. I've previously stated that the ultimate goal should be an overall tax rate of 15%. That covers any tax you can think of. Poor people wouldn't pay any tax. Simple. Problem sorted.

[madmick50]

Rising unemployment, rising inflation, stagnant growth. What wonderful stability. It's like saying a corpse has reached the peak of trancendental meditation.

I'm glad you are starting to see what the tax and spend policy of Gordon has done to our economy. Welcome on-board. We need as many converts as we can get because most Labour supporters only vote Labour because their parents did and they are incapable of thinking things through for themselves. They have also fallen for the myth that Labour looks after ordinary people and the Tories only look after the rich. To that I would say one thing - Margaret Thatcher!!!

[madmick50]

By the way Mick, that glib comment that \"Japan has had problems because of massive state intervention amongst other things\" really won't stand without some back-up.

Japan is a completely different economy to our own. However they do have one thing in common - massive debt. They have many other problems as well but massive debt has not helped them. Going on and on about Japan and other debt riddled countries is making you not see the wood for the trees but here is an article to back up what I've previously stated to keep you happy.

http://www.economist.com/node/15867844

[Glyn_Wigley]

The rate of VAT would eventually be zero.

So you want to leave the EU, including the Customs Union? Nice one, that slaps at least £60 on every single consignment of goods to and from the rest of Europe. If you don't understand why, it just shows how much you don't know what you're talking about.

[madmick50]

So you want to leave the EU, including the Customs Union? Nice one, that slaps at least £60 on every single consignment of goods to and from the rest of Europe. If you don't understand why, it just shows how much you don't know what you're talking about.

Yes I do want to leave the EU. It costs us money and adds layer upon layer of bureaucracy to anything you can think of.

You assume that we'd have to stick with the current arrangements. Again this is indicative of the mindset of public sector leftie socialists. I would renegotiate our deal with them to our mutual benefit. I'd trade with the rest of the world. It's a pretty big place you know. Sorted.

[CusworthRovers]

Anybody fancy a pint?

Look on the bright side, it will soon be Christmas boys......and if you suffer from insomnia, then it's only 2 more sleeps. Result

[Glyn_Wigley]

So you want to leave the EU, including the Customs Union? Nice one, that slaps at least £60 on every single consignment of goods to and from the rest of Europe. If you don't understand why, it just shows how much you don't know what you're talking about.

Yes I do want to leave the EU. It costs us money and adds layer upon layer of bureaucracy to anything you can think of.
You assume that we'd have to stick with the current arrangements. Again this is indicative of the mindset of public sector leftie socialists. I would renegotiate our deal with them to our mutual benefit. I'd trade with the rest of the world. It's a pretty big place you know. Sorted.

Except import/export declarations of course, we don't have those when importing/exporting with the EU. That's what would instantly add £60 to the cost of every consignment going to or coming from Europe if we left the EU (and we'd have to if you want to get rid of (or even reduce) VAT), and no amount of 'negotiations' will change that fact of life. As you would put it, 'any idiot knows that'. How come YOU don't?

[madmick50]

Except import/export declarations of course, we don't have those when importing/exporting with the EU. That's what would instantly add £60 to the cost of every consignment going to or coming from Europe if we left the EU (and we'd have to if you want to get rid of (or even reduce) VAT), and no amount of 'negotiations' will change that fact of life. As you would put it, 'any idiot knows that'. How come YOU don't?

You need to look at the bigger picture and not just look at one thing. That is far too simplistic. I think you'll find I know  a lot more about the EU than you do. OK, you've asked for it. Here is the case for EU withdrawal.

Britain’s share of the increase in the EU budget this year – not our share of the budget, our share of the increase – will be £435million: enough to pay for 12,000 nurses, 15,000 police officers or 22,000 Army privates. But our direct contributions are only part, and not the most important part, of the overall costs of the EU.

The Common Agricultural Policy hurts our farmers and costs every household an extra £1,200 a year in higher taxes and higher food bills. The Common Fisheries Policy has wiped out what ought to have been a great renewable resource off our coasts.

Worst of all is the cost of red tape. Here, I can do no better than to quote a survey by the most recent internal market commissioner, Gunter Verheugen. He found that the cost of regulation in the EU was 600billion euros a year. On the European ­Commission’s own figures, the advantages of the ­single market are worth only 120billion euros a year. In other words, Eurocrats themselves admit that the costs of the EU outweigh the benefits by five to one.

What about commerce? We are often told that half of Britain’s trade is with the EU. True, but look at the balance of that trade. For most of the period of our membership, we have run a healthy surplus with the rest of the world but a deficit with Europe.

Since the financial crisis hit, we have run a small overall deficit on the non-EU share of our trade, too. Even so, our deficit with the EU last year was £14.4billion, as against just £1.1billion for the rest of the world.

Those figures are the answer to those who say that, if we left, our exports would suffer.
The other ­members benefit far more from cross-Channel commerce than we do. In any negotiation, the customer generally has the last word over the salesman.

In any case, we don’t need to be part of the EU’s political structures to be part of the single market. Norway and Switzerland both sell around twice as much per head to the EU as we do. They participate fully in the freedoms of the European market but are outside the CAP and CFP, police their own borders, settle their own human rights issues, trade freely with non-EU countries, and make only token contributions to the EU budget.

Oh, and unlike EU members, they pass the majority of their own laws.
Norway and Switzerland are ­thriving as independent states. So could ­Britain. I rest my case.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Good argument Mick. I takes hat off to you. You're better than I gave you credit for at putting a case together.

[The L J Monk]

The Daily Express couldn't have put it any better...

...but they could have put it identically.

And did you know that Gideon has quoted you word for word

[Glyn_Wigley]

The Daily Express couldn't have put it any better...

...but they could have put it identically.

And did you know that Gideon has quoted you word for word

Did Gideon say \"I think you'll find I know a lot more about the EU than you do\" as well, or did he say the truth, which is \"I think you'll find I think I know how to plagiarise someone else's words and try to pass them off as my own, but not as well as I think I do\"?

Perhaps all our debates should be cut'n'paste jobs. Much simpler, saves time and we don't have to think about things too hard, eh mick?

[madmick50]

Good argument Mick. I takes hat off to you. You're better than I gave you credit for at putting a case together.

Cheers Bill. I like a man who knows when he is beaten and is prepared to admit it. Good on you. I just hope you are no longer a leftie socialist and have seen the light.

[BillyStubbsTears]

You're welcome Mick.

Course, when I said \"putting\", it was an iPhone auto-correct mistake. I actually meant to type \"pasting\".

[Glyn_Wigley]

You're welcome Mick.

Course, when I said \"putting\", it was an iPhone auto-correct mistake. I actually meant to type \"pasting\".

Quite. If I'd have wanted to bandy words with Daniel Hannan I'd have done it directly with the organgrinder, not his monkey.

Mind you, it explains all the times Mick's ignored questions in the thread - he's obviously just cut'n'pasted stuff without understanding it and therefore hasn't got a clue how to answer anything with anything except sneers.

[BillyStubbsTears]

I'm struggling to decide if this is the mother of all WUMs or if the lad is unhinged.

[madmick50]

Mind you, it explains all the times Mick's ignored questions in the thread - he's obviously just cut'n'pasted stuff without understanding it and therefore hasn't got a clue how to answer anything with anything except sneers.

I think if you check back through the thread I have answered every single question that has been put to me. I've not just answered it I've demolished the opposing view. 90% of the questions I've asked have been ignored or partially answered with a load of old waffle. I on the other hand have only dealt in facts.

This forum dislikes my pugnacious debating style and people on it can't handle it when they are proved categorically wrong about something. They don't like it when they have been made to look foolish so they then try to find fault in any way possible with my views even if they agree with them. All they then end up doing is looking even more foolish.

Fair play to vaya he kept coming back at me but eventually the penny dropped that he was looking foolish so he stopped posting to limit the damage to his reputation. When Streatham Dave posted about how hard done to as a teacher he  was, I spectacularly demolished his argument and he went away with his tail between his legs.

It's not my fault that I've got a photographic memory and incredible brain power. I can read an article and recall it years later no problem. I can categorically state that I have never cut and pasted anything on this forum. Indeed I have posted many links to help you all see the light. If anything I've posted seems like a cut and paste job then that is just testament to my amazing powers of recall.

Is it not obvious that I am extremely knowledgeable about what I post about? Why is it so easy for me to systematically take apart other peoples ill thought out arguments? It's because I have been blessed with a wonderful memory and extremely high level of intelligence.

Those of you that think I may be a wind up merchant couldn't be more wrong. I 100% believe everything I've posted and deep down most of you that have looked at the debate impartially know that my arguments have easily been the best. I admit I am not the most diplomatic person on this forum but I much prefer to deal with people who are straight talkers and can't bear people that beat about the bush. If you want to debate with me you better get your tin hat on because I will not pull any punches. If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen like vaya and Streatham Dave have done.

[Glyn_Wigley]

It's a good job that you've now shown us not to take anything you post seriously otherwise BST could be right about you being unhinged.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

So Cameron didn't budge in the European talks, that won't go down well with them, but he's done the right thing I think, they wanted things from our country to solve a problem that we didn't create.  Clearly it's Euro countries who need to fix their problems not us.

[The Red Baron]

So Cameron didn't budge in the European talks, that won't go down well with them, but he's done the right thing I think, they wanted things from our country to solve a problem that we didn't create.  Clearly it's Euro countries who need to fix their problems not us.

I think this probably merits a new thread but I agree with you. The \"Merkozy\" plan seemed to have little to do with sorting out the Eurozone's debt crisis and more to do with creating a federal \"United States of Europe.\"

I'm not a Cameron fan but I'm glad he was representing the UK and not Mr \"DonnyWhite\" Ed. He'd have probably taken us into the Euro!

[BillyStubbsTears]

So Cameron didn't budge in the European talks, that won't go down well with them, but he's done the right thing I think, they wanted things from our country to solve a problem that we didn't create.  Clearly it's Euro countries who need to fix their problems not us.

I think this probably merits a new thread but I agree with you. The \"Merkozy\" plan seemed to have little to do with sorting out the Eurozone's debt crisis and more to do with creating a federal \"United States of Europe.\"

I'm not a Cameron fan but I'm glad he was representing the UK and not Mr \"DonnyWhite\" Ed. He'd have probably taken us into the Euro!

Highly simplistic analyses going on here.

1) There is a worldwide problem that has developed over the last few years. Yes, EZ debt is a big part of that, but equally so, recklessly un-regulated global finance is a part of it. The EZ wants to rein in the City of London to prevent the pivs and barrow boys making their billions by unrestricted speculation. The EZ needs time to get things settled and sorted and constant buffetting by the markets is a disaster in this regard. This is an opportunity for politicians to come together and bring the City boys to heel. We've just stepped out of that. It speaks volumes for the Tory party.

2) Looking at the general worldwide responses this morning, it does not look good for the future of the Euro. The turbulence that Cameron has chucked into the mix by pandering to a few dozen swivelled-eyed Tory right wingers is a big part of that problem.

3) And don;t get me started on Clegg. Elected as an avowedly Euro-phile Lib Dem leader, he's now chucked that principle away, along with the other dross he's left behind him.

4) In a thread full of particularly stupid comments, that one about Miliband takes the biscuit. While the Tories and UKIP were spending the last decade flapping about Europe, it was the Labour party that actually kept us out of the Euro. Balls said this week that we'll never be members in his lifetime. Daft, daft comment to make TRB.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Agree on point 4 Labour did want the Euro but they were actually sensible enough to see it just wouldn't work out for us. I still firmly believe the Euro is a flawed plan and causes too many problems.

But the fact of the matter is that what Europe wanted from us was just not really acceptable.  This financial transaction tax on the basis of it isn't that bad an idea IMO.  But it has to be worldwide that much is clear.  Give Cameron some credit he's stuck by what he said he would do all along. It's all well and good saying we should accept that the city needs tougher rules but equally do we want to push these skills, jobs and big impact on our economy away?  It does grate me that the big thing they wanted would have impacted on the non Eurozone countries far more than those in the Eurozone.  Don't be fooled that Europe doesn't need us, we take more in trade from them than they do from us.  I've always said they're too loosly regulated but it has to be global, you can't just do it in one area and let the rest get away with it.  If you were a bank what would you do?  Stay in a heavily regulated London or move to a loosly regulated foreign country?  We all know the answer to that, we've seen it with IT services and outsourcing, financial services would be no different.

On the Clegg point I tend to agree actually.  He's always been pro europe so why change?  Well you could argue he's doing what's right, you can be pro Europe without being a European puppet.  But the more I hear from Clegg the more you sometimes think actually he's in the wrong party.

[BillyStubbsTears]

This is now nemesis for Cameron. He has pandered to his own right wing. He has then portrayed himself as the saviour of his country by saying that he would hold a referendum in the event of powers being passed to the EU. Now we are reaping the rewards of that approach.

It is massively, massively in our interests for the Euro to succeed, and for us to be part of the solution (more on that below). But Cameron has painted himself into a corner. He now could not sign an agreement that would leave him open to being ravaged by the Right of his party. So, to save Cameron's face and save him from a battering by his back benchers we refuse to sign up to something that would be massively in our favour.

Now, why was it in our favour to be on the side of the solution? Well, as it is, as Europe tries to pull itself together, we stand on the sidelines, give them the rods and say, \"Good luck lads\". Do you think there will be no payback for this? Either the Euro now tanks, which will be a catastrophe for us economically. Or the Euro survives and strengthens. And THEN the payback will come. Europe will stick the knife into us economically like you cannot begin to imagine. And they will be right.

As a French diplomat said on the radio today, Britain is behaving like a man who wants to join a wife swapping party, but refuses to bring his wife. We want all the benefits and none of the costs. Not a chance in a million that the rest of Europe will wear that.

But hey. Hungary agrees with us...

[madmick50]

Well done Dave! Thank God red Ed isn't our prime minister. I'm over the moon. Let's hope this is the first stage to our complete withdrawal from the EU. It will be their loss. The Euro is a flawed currency and the less we have to do with it the better.

[The Red Baron]

So Cameron didn't budge in the European talks, that won't go down well with them, but he's done the right thing I think, they wanted things from our country to solve a problem that we didn't create.  Clearly it's Euro countries who need to fix their problems not us.

4) In a thread full of particularly stupid comments, that one about Miliband takes the biscuit. While the Tories and UKIP were spending the last decade flapping about Europe, it was the Labour party that actually kept us out of the Euro. Balls said this week that we'll never be members in his lifetime. Daft, daft comment to make TRB.

Not at all stupid. Miliband has refused to rule out joining the Euro. Credit where it is due- Gordon Brown was right to keep us out and given their closeness I wouldn't expect Balls to take a different view. But it was the then Labour leader, Tony Blair, who wanted to take us in.

You want to take off the Labour blinkers.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Also worth noting just how strict under this EU plan they would be on deficit control.  If we had signed up we would be pretty quickly under sanction as sanctions would come in to place for countries with a structural deficit of greater than 3% with the aim to keep them all below 0.5% as a rule.  How the hell then could labour reduce the deficit more slowly in this case?  Intriguing that this one appeared to be in place against all countries not just the Eurozone countries.  If we'd signed up what argument could they have had in the economy?  Should we allow the EU to control our public spending?  The more you read on these proposals you more you realise that we're better off out.  It's all well and good Sarkozy preaching about financial regualtion, we already regulate more strictly than the Eurozone and we have the new report to come next month on the new regulation of financial services, which will make interesting reading.

Not sure the Irish will like the plan to have changes made to their corporation tax rates aswell.  This isn't surprising, the Germans have been trying to get that changed for years.

[BillyStubbsTears]

As I said TRB. The Labour Party kept us out of the Euro. Yes Blair wanted to join. So what? He was wrong on that as he was wrong on many things. The Labour Party prevented him from taking us into the Euro.

As for today's decision, there will be immense ramifications for decades over this. Anyone who thinks that the rest of the EU is simply going to say, \"OK Britain. We understand that you want it different. Never mind. We'll sort out the mess then it'll be no hard feelings.\" is in cloud cuckoo land. It's going to be us against the rest for decades from now. Even Thatcher wasn't so pig headed as to put us in that situation (she spun it that it was us against the rest - in fact she was a hard but sensible negotiator). See what Malcolm Rifkind (one of Thatcher's \"one of us\") has to say about it. Utterly sensible line on how you conduct negotiations, whereas the rabid right, obsessed by Daily Mail leaders and Yesterday programmes about the War think it's all about us taking on the nefarious bas**rds in Europe on the beaches, on the landing grounds, in the fields and the streets and in the hills.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/9657974.stm

We are on the verge of doing untold damage to our long term position. And all the talk about Norway and Switzerland won't change that. 1) They DON'T have all the benefits of being in the EU. 2) They are both far, far richer, stronger economies than ours, with overwhelming advantages in niche areas (oil, pharamaceuticals and banking) meaning that they can drive their own bargains. We by contrast are a relatively weak economy which will be told what the deal will be by Europe. We've now chucked away any right to be involved in the discussions over the next 20 years that will fundamentally affect our own position. Just to prevent Cameron having to face down his own minority of right wingers. Utter stupidity.