IMF gives Tories a glowing report

[Filo]

I don`t know what you`re reading into that mjdgreg, it`s just the finance Minister championing his own budget, just like Gideon does over here, but a couple of months down the line he realises he`s dropped a bollock and does a u turn on certain aspects of his budget

John Key is the Prime Minister not Finance Minister. This policy has been implemented for years and is proving to be successful. The voters have endorsed the policy by re-electing the government. This budget is just the latest stage of the plan. Read the link properly and you will see that it mirrors what's happening in the UK.

Here's more evidence.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/author/danielhannan/

This sentence sums that article up

Like David Cameron, he bases his appeal on competence rather than ideology

competence and Cameron in the same sentence!


How competent was it of Dave to claim he`d recently bought a sausage roll from a shop on Leeds Station that had closed a number of years earlier? Thats not competence, it`s down right lying

[bobjimwilly]

Here's more evidence.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/author/danielhannan/

A personal blog by a Tory MPs is not evidence. And no, I didn't read his whole blog, so if he mentioned any facts or figures, why not quote those specifically, instead of trying to waste everyone's time reading Tory propaganda. 

[BillyStubbsTears]

Oh Mick, this is becoming so tiresome.

Look, I'll agree with you if it makes you feel better, that you are a better economist than Joseph Stiglitz. OK? That out of the way now?

And, to be honest, I've been looking at the numbers and I'm coming round to your thinking that Canada actually did have a good approach to dealing with debt after the last recession. The following two graphs did it for me.

i) Comparison between Canada and Japan's Growth rate from late 80s to mid 2000s



ii) Comparison between Canada and Japan's Govt debt to GDP ratio from late 80s to mid 2000s



Clearly, unarguably, Canada handled things better than Japan. They both had better GDP growth AND got their debt under control.  I take my hat off to you for spotting how smart the Canadians were.

[mjdgreg]

Hopefully all the other leftie viewers of this thread will now realise that my point of view is the correct one and will now decide to harden up a bit and stop praying for a return to power of Labour. Well done Billy for admitting I was right. It must have been very difficult given how badly brainwashed you were about Labour. I was beginning to think you would never see the light but I have been proved wrong which hardly ever happens.

[BillyStubbsTears]

No problem Mick. Looking at those Canadian figures finally convinced me. Thanks for the debate. It's been educational.

[mjdgreg]

c

ompetence and Cameron in the same sentence!

Fido, you're barking up the wrong tree there. Dave has reversed the pasty tax today. If that doesn't show competence and  an ability to relate to the common man I don't know what does.

[mjdgreg]

No problem mjdgreg. Looking at those Canadian figures finally convinced me. Thanks for the debate. It's been educational.

No problem. You learn something new every day (especially if you read my posts). You'll be pleased to know that I intend to carry on educating the masses on a wide variety of subjects in the future. It wouldn't be right for me to keep all my vast knowledge to myself.

[mjdgreg]

A personal blog by a Tory MPs is not evidence. And no, I didn't read his whole blog, so if he mentioned any facts or figures, why not quote those specifically, instead of trying to waste everyone's time reading Tory propaganda.

You really should read his blog. It would be very educational for you. He could well be Prime Minister one day and is the most sensible politician of his generation.

[Filo]

c

ompetence and Cameron in the same sentence!

Fido, you're barking up the wrong tree there. Dave has reversed the pasty tax today. If that doesn't show competence and  an ability to relate to the common man I don't know what does.

Clearly competence is not your strong point, a devout follower of copy and paste can`t even copy a quote from me correctly, tut tut Mick

[Filo]

No problem Mick. Looking at those Canadian figures finally convinced me. Thanks for the debate. It's been educational.

I wondered when you`d give up Mick as a lost cause, as they say, you can`t educate pork!

[BillyStubbsTears]

No Filo. He's opened my eyes. I hadn't realised what a lesson Canada was for how to climb out of a debt problem, but you learn something every day. I'm genuinely in Mick's debt (no pun intended).

[Sheepskin Stu]

Trolling of the highest order from the Tory wine stain.

[mjdgreg]

Trolling of the highest order from the Tory wine stain.

Look if you're going to do abuse I would have expected something much better from someone like you.

[mjdgreg]

I wondered when you`d give up mjdgreg as a lost cause, as they say, you can`t educate pork!

We all know why Fido uses meat metaphors.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Mick.

It's been a real pleasure sparring with you. And that wit of yours makes this place a pleasure to come back to.

I've got an apology to make though. I forgot the final graph earlier on. Looks a bit odd to me, but I'm sure that you can explain it.



See, what I don't understand is that Canada actually kept running a whopping great deficit throughout the early 1990s. When they went into recession in 1990, they ran a bloody great deficit, and the Govt kept on spending at a high rate right up until 1995. By that time, their growth had come back strongly. And it was only after that that they started to cut back Govt spending. The growth remained strong and the debt then started to come back down.

I'm kind of struggling here, because this approach of keeping Govt spending going until the economy is back on a stable footing and THEN cutting back is kind of what I thought we should have done before you so skilfully put me right.

And then there's Japan. In 1991, their economy fell off a cliff. They'd had 6-10%growth for decades, but it all came shuddering to a halt. So what did they do? They followed your approach Mick, of course, being the wily old inscrutables that they are. They kept running a surplus, sure that growth would come back. But, see, this is where I really am struggling. Because their growth didn't come back. They kept Govt spending low, just like you should. But growth stayed low. And by the time they realised what the damage was, deflation and low growth had set in. And they then HAD to borrow more as a Govt because their tax take had collapsed. And their growth flatlined for 15 years as they couldn't get out of the liquidity trap of everyone saving for the future because of being scared of losing jobs and markets. And as a result, their debt ballooned out of control.

I know what Nobel Prize winners like Krugman and Stiglitz would say. They'd say that Japan and Canada are textbook examples of how to incorrectly and correctly face a recession with Keynesian counter-cyclical Govt spending.

But I agree that they are both chumps.

But Mick. Help me out as your new disciple. Tell me where the problem really is.

[mjdgreg]

But mjdgreg. Help me out as your new disciple. Tell me where the problem really is.

The problem is that you are a disloyal disciple. One minute you're against me and when I batter you into submission you are for me. 5 minutes later you are against me again. I reckon you too must have been put straight on the Cow and Gate.

Please bear in mind that the following is not necessarily what I support. It is just what is happening at the moment and punches big holes in your logic.

You make out that the government is implementing an austerity plan and doing nothing else. You bemoan the fact that they aren't spending to stimulate growth and are cutting back savagely. In that case can you please explain why there is still a large budget deficit every month. Also why is the national debt going to double over the lifetime of this parliament?

I'll tell you the answer. It's because they are still borrowing lots of money and spending it. So you should be happy because they are doing what you seem to want. But you're not happy because you want them to borrow and spend even more!

A report done by the Office for National Statistics in 2010 showed that the true level of debt was almost £4 trillion. For this generation to pay that back would mean a 30% rise in taxes. So what do the politicians do? They pass that bill on to future generations so we can keep on living beyond our means. Before the coalition started cutting back on spending this bill was going to be an extra £200,000 for the next generation of tax payers. Now it's projected to be only £150,000. Only £150,000 ffs.

So lets just harden up a bit and take responsibility for our debt and lets not do the dirty on future generations and pass them the bill. To argue for even more spending to add to their bill is morally reprehensible and does you no credit. I always find with socialists they always think someone else should pick up the bill for their cosy lifestyles. Well it's time it stopped or our children and their children are going to have a very tough time of it indeed.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/britainrsquos-debt-the-untold-story-2025979.html

[BillyStubbsTears]

Mick.

It's perfectly simple. It's about the TIMING of the cuts in public spending. Get the timing wrong by relatively small amounts and the results can be catastrophic.

The graphs I posted earlier show this starkly.

Japan 's leaders, it is now commonly accepted, failed to anticipate the danger of a collapse in confidence and a liquidity trap. They assumed that keeping Govt spending down to a minimum was the necessary and sufficient condition for a return to growth. They were wrong. Badly wrong. The result has been a catastrophe for Japan. It will take them the thick end of half a century to get back on the course that they should have been on.

I'm being deadly serious here. I understand the danger of a runaway debt. It is devastating. But cutting Govt spending is NOT guaranteed to prevent that from happening, as the example of Japan shows only too well. The Japan example scares the living daylights out of me because we are not as strong as they were going into the Lost Decade; if we do not get back to growth quickly, we are in deep, deep shit.

I was saying back at the time of the General Election that we were running the risk of ending up with a loss of confidence due to Govt spending being reined in too quickly. I'm not happy to see these predictions coming true.  But it's not just my opinion by the way. The Bank of England's Japan expert Adam Posen said in 2010:
"since the global shock of 2008, UK non-financial corporate have had their own surplus rise towards 8% of GDP. The good news is that this rules out a balance sheet recession here as well. The bad news is if this indicates some form of self-insurance by companies against lack of future access to credit.

"The worst news would be if this sitting on funds was not temporary but lasting. In that case, it would represent a lack of faith in future UK economic prospects. That would be a structural slump, with all the prospects for slower growth that portends. I do not believe this to be the case."

So, Posen explained two years ago what the nightmare scenario was. He said that he didn't expect this fiscal retrenchment by companies to occur. But it HAS occurred. We are in the middle of the start of this nightmare scenario right now. UK non-financial companies are sitting on mountains of cash which they are terrified to re-invest because they are concerned that we are not going to get out of the slump. So the slump happens. And they invest even less. And the slump gets worse. Just like in Japan in 1990 onwards

The truly depressing thing is that we know how to avoid this.

Posen himself said:
"we should think of Japan’s Great Recession as largely demonstrating the validity of much textbook, even old fashioned Keynesian, macroeconomics – and thus amenable both to comprehension and, within limits, avoidance, or at least amelioration."

In other words: Governments can take steps to avoid long-term liquidity traps. The tools for doing this have been known since Keynes's time. The tragedy of the last two years is that they have been ignored and we are stumbling headlong into the same problem.

It means that you don't cut back Govt spending when the economy is on its knees, or the economy will end up face down in the f**king dirt. we've known that for 80 years. And in a mad, ideological frenzy, we have ignored it, by insisting that the ONLY thing that matters is balancing the books as quickly as f**king possible.




He's fine by the way. Thanks for asking.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Mick.

It's perfectly simple. It's about the TIMING of the cuts in public spending. Get the timing wrong by relatively small amounts and the results can be catastrophic.

The graphs I posted earlier show this starkly.

Japan 's leaders, it is now commonly accepted, failed to anticipate the danger of a collapse in confidence and a liquidity trap. They assumed that keeping Govt spending down to a minimum was the necessary and sufficient condition for a return to growth. They were wrong. Badly wrong. The result has been a catastrophe for Japan. It will take them the thick end of half a century to get back on the course that they should have been on.

I'm being deadly serious here. I understand the danger of a runaway debt. It is devastating. But cutting Govt spending is NOT guaranteed to prevent that from happening, as the example of Japan shows only too well. The Japan example scares the living daylights out of me because we are not as strong as they were going into the Lost Decade; if we do not get back to growth quickly, we are in deep, deep shit.

I was saying back at the time of the General Election that we were running the risk of ending up with a loss of confidence due to Govt spending being reined in too quickly. I'm not happy to see these predictions coming true.  But it's not just my opinion by the way. The Bank of England's Japan expert Adam Posen said in 2010:

"since the global shock of 2008, UK non-financial corporate have had their own surplus rise towards 8% of GDP. The good news is that this rules out a balance sheet recession here as well. The bad news is if this indicates some form of self-insurance by companies against lack of future access to credit.

"The worst news would be if this sitting on funds was not temporary but lasting. In that case, it would represent a lack of faith in future UK economic prospects. That would be a structural slump, with all the prospects for slower growth that portends. I do not believe this to be the case."

So, Posen explained two years ago what the nightmare scenario was. He said that he didn't expect this fiscal retrenchment by companies to occur. But it HAS occurred. We are in the middle of the start of this nightmare scenario right now. UK non-financial companies are sitting on mountains of cash which they are terrified to re-invest because they are concerned that we are not going to get out of the slump. So the slump happens. And they invest even less. And the slump gets worse. Just like in Japan in 1990 onwards

The truly depressing thing is that we know how to avoid this.

Posen himself said:

"we should think of Japan’s Great Recession as largely demonstrating the validity of much textbook, even old fashioned Keynesian, macroeconomics – and thus amenable both to comprehension and, within limits, avoidance, or at least amelioration."

In other words: Governments can take steps to avoid long-term liquidity traps. The tools for doing this have been known since Keynes's time. The tragedy of the last two years is that they have been ignored and we are stumbling headlong into the same problem.

It means that you don't cut back Govt spending when the economy is on its knees, or the economy will end up face down in the f***ing dirt. we've known that for 80 years. And in a mad, ideological frenzy, we have ignored it, by insisting that the ONLY thing that matters is balancing the books as quickly as f***ing possible.




He's fine by the way. Thanks for asking.

[mjdgreg]

The solution is to cut taxes not increase spending. When I say cut taxes I mean cut them substantially. None of this 2.5% off VAT malarkey. That kind of thing will only scratch the surface. It's time for people to have more control over their finances and to stop giving so much money to governments who are notorious for wasting most of it.

This solution is likely to prove academic anyway as the Eurozone crisis escalates leading in my opinion to the break-up of the EU. Then of course there is China that doesn't appear to be on many people's radar. That country's economy is heading for the rocks and this will cause a bigger crisis than what's happening in Europe.

So all in all we're doomed no matter what the government does. Take my advice. Do as I've done. Get rid of any debt (including mortgages). Get a substantial amount of money put by for a rainy day. Invest in gold not the stock market. Assume you are going to see your wages cut in real terms for many years to come and start to adjust your standard of living accordingly. Start your own businesses to make sure you come through on the other side. Invest in buy to let. There are going to be many people needing a roof over their heads when they lose their homes. It's the socially responsible thing to do.

You have been warned.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Right Mick.

So you're saying that we need massive tax cuts?

Now we're getting there. That means that you agree that a huge fiscal stimulus is required, because that is what tax cuts are. So that's the end of Austerity and cutting the debt as the key aim.

We're getting somewhere.

Now. Why will huge tax cuts actually exacerbate the situation? For all the liquidity trap reasons that I've pointed out previously, and which you, in your folksy way back up in your latest post. Give tax cuts to people and businesses now and they will say, "Ta very much" and use that to pay off their debt. That is a very sensible decision for each individual. But when everyone does it, the result is a catastrophe. No-one spends, so people providing goods and services have no market so they lay off workers so no one spends. It's the Paradox of Thrift that is in the basic economics textbooks (I'm sure you're aware of it). It's what screwed Japan. It's something we're already in the initial stages of.

The answer is also in the economic textbooks. It requires Govt spending to kick start growth. It always has done and always will do. That's been the core of this discussion. Sooner or later, Austerity-obsessed Governments will finally cotton on to the way that we got out of the last Depression. It was by Governments massively increasing demand in the economy. Unfortunately, that was in the form of the Second World War. Let's hope that our leaders can push the demand by a different route this time.

As for your other doom predictions, if you believe them and stay huddled up under your bed, then there'll be a benefit for all of us. But they won't come to pass. The Euro zone will not break up. Germany is playing poker, but they daren't push it to the edge. The results would be too devastating for Germany. It'll be messy and there will be some heart stopping moments, but the Euro will pull through once Germany finally accepts (under enormous pressure from America and China) that it has to accept Eurobonds, higher inflation and a federal Europe. All those things will come to pass over the next decade.

[mjdgreg]

I've never said I only believe in austerity. It is you that has made that assumption. I don't believe in giving the government more money to spend and waste. You do. That's the real difference between us. I have faith in the ordinary man in the street that he will use the money he's not giving to government far more wisely than any government ever would. Unless of course if I was the Prime Minister.

Substantial tax cuts are needed along with cutting back government spending. There's no point cutting taxes if all the government is going to do is borrow and waste more money to make up the shortfall.

Why don't people do what I do? Pay off your debts then save money and when you can afford it buy goods. Unfortunately 'saving' is a dirty word in our economy. For example when I go into a car showroom and discuss buying my latest new cars the salesman looks at me in horror when I ask 'what's your best deal for cash?' He's just so used to people paying on finance at crippling interest rates.

Companies that are holding onto their profits instead of investing it are far more likely to invest if tax rates are lower. There are plenty of companies out there without a debt problem. Many more new businesses would also get off the ground. Very quickly we would have growth and more taxes coming in and everyone would be better off.

Unfortunately I'm not Prime Minister and it isn't going to happen. So take my advice in my previous post. It's every man for himself. Get your own personal finances in order as best as you can. You will then be far better placed to weather the incredibly turbulent times that are just around the corner.

Europe is going to fall apart, banks are going to go bust and China is heading for the rocks. That's enough to cause havoc without all the other problems the world is facing.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Why don't people do what I do? Pay off your debts then save money and when you can afford it buy goods.

They did. In Japan throughout the 1990s. The results were catastrophic.

The way in which entire economies work is not the same as the way in which personal finances work. if everyone puts away money for a rainy day and stops spending, the economy collapses. No ifs, no buts. It's basic economics.

Remember the Tory Party conference in 2010? Remember Cameron's gaffe in encouraging people to stop spending? Remember the furore as business leaders, economists and the Bank of England screamed, "Christ up above man, are you TRYING to force a paradox of thrift-type recession on us"? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/8808294/David-Cameron-rewrites-conference-speech-after-credit-card-gaffe.html

That is what I'm talking about.

The problem is that we have tipped into precisely this sort of problem over the last couple of years. Business confidence has fallen rapidly across the UK and Europe over the last 12 months, as the consequences of Austerity on growth prospects have emerged.
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/business-confidence
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/euro-area/business-confidence

Consumer confidence across the UK and Europe is always pessimistic, but it has also fallen recently. Having started to emerge from the depths of the 08-09 recession in response to the co-ordinated fiscal stimulus in 09-10, it has now collapsed again in the face of Austerity.
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/consumer-confidence
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/euro-area/consumer-confidence

So we are currently in a phase where a great many people and businesses throughout the UK and Europe are doing precisely the single thing most likely to deepen and prolong a recession. They are (rightly) worried about the future, so they (sensibly) stop spending and start saving.
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/euro-area/retail-sales-annual
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/retail-sales-annual

And it is this collective action that is the biggest economic danger at the moment. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy of a serious recession. The lack of spending by individuals and companies reduces demand for goods. So the market shrinks. So companies get into trouble. So they lay off staff. So people get even MORE worried about the future. So they cut-back spending even more. It is a classic crisis of capitalist economies. It has happened time and time again throughout history.

Fortunately, JM Keynes explained 80 years ago how to get out of this situation. The ONLY solution to this danger is for Government spending to boost Aggregate Demand and THEN cut back spending once the economy has got back to growth. Just like Canada did in the early 1990s The alternative is a decade-long Depression. Just like Japan in the 1990s.

Unfortunately, the UK and Germany are currently run by politicians who were brought up hating the concept of Keynes's approaches, for ideological reasons. They hate it because it requires an acceptance that there is a role for Governments in stimulating the economy. They refuse to accept that on ideologocal grounds, despite the fact that there was 30 years of clear evidence that it worked between 1940 and 1970. Despite the fact the Roosevelt's Government spending in the depths of the 1930s Depression kick-started America's recovery. They insist that the only solution is for Government to butt out and leave it to businesses and individuals to make sensible rational decisions. Even though there is a wealth of evidence that they DON'T make the right decisions in crises like this, as we saw throughout the world in the 1930s. As we saw in Japan in the 1990s.

That is why we are stumbling into a deeper crisis. Because Cameron and Merkel both refuse to believe that Keynes's approach can work. The solution is there waiting to be dusted down and put into practice if only they would put aside their ideological prejudices and get on with it.

[Dagenham Rover]

c

ompetence and Cameron in the same sentence!

Fido, you're barking up the wrong tree there. Dave has reversed the pasty tax today. If that doesn't show competence and  an ability to relate to the common man I don't know what does.

Just a technicality  he hasn't reversed the pasty tax, What is actually happening  is vat is being applied to pastys etc that are kept hot i.e. in a heated cabinet and pastys put on the shelf and allowed to cool naturally are not subject to vat another brainwave that is ill thought out and difficult to police

[mjdgreg]

The government is up to its eyeballs in debt. The consumer is up to his eyeballs in debt. Future unborn generations are up to their eyeballs in debt. I on the other hand am up to my eyeballs in savings and investments which I regularly use to buy goods to keep the economy afloat.

The last thing we need is more debt. Have a look at this link and if you still think people should be spending even more money to get into even more debt then I'm afraid I can't help you anymore:

http://www.creditaction.org.uk/assets/PDF/statistics/2012/february-2012-summary.pdf

[bobjimwilly]

mjdgreg,

It's obvious you either don't read or fully understand the rational arguments being put your way, but in reply to your last post, please enlighten us: what would you have those people who have no savings or investments and have no spare cash at the end of the month do?

By the way, no-one is keeping the economy afloat at the minute my friend - we have gone back into recession! 

[mjdgreg]

but in reply to your last post, please enlighten us: what would you have those people who have no savings or investments and have no spare cash at the end of the month do?

Harden up. Cut back on the fags, booze, drugs, holidays, designer clothes, season tickets (especially now we we've got that clown Saunders in charge), meals out, cars, Sky etc. Use the comparison websites to get the best deals on gas , electric, phone, insurance, mortgage etc. Start your own part time businesses to supplement your income. Get a better job. Get a promotion. I could go on but I'm sure you get my drift.

Too many people spend every penny they get every month without a seconds thought as to how to budget. Then they complain they haven't got any money. Well for the most part I've got no sympathy for them. They're usually just to lazy to sort out their finances and aren't prepared to go without.

Anyone who just carries on spending every penny they've got is going to be in deep trouble very soon if they don't take my advice. Please don't come back at me and say you already do all these things because I am the only person I know that does.

I guarantee if I sat down with someone for an hour I could save them a lot of money just by doing some of the above and using common sense. I could even get them up and running with their own tax free business in less than 1 hour with money coming in within 48 hours (as long as they've got a computer and internet connection). This business would then generate them an income for the rest of their lives and could be done at any time to suit other commitments.

[donnyroversfc]

I could even get them up and running with their own tax free business in less than 1 hour with money coming in within 48 hours (as long as they've got a computer and internet connection). This business would then generate them an income for the rest of their lives and could be done at any time to suit other commitments.

Come on then, i'm game for that. Which webcam site will i have to signup to?

[bobjimwilly]

but in reply to your last post, please enlighten us: what would you have those people who have no savings or investments and have no spare cash at the end of the month do?

Harden up. Cut back on the fags, booze, drugs, holidays, designer clothes, season tickets (especially now we we've got that clown Saunders in charge), meals out, cars, Sky etc. Use the comparison websites to get the best deals on gas , electric, phone, insurance, mortgage etc. Start your own part time businesses to supplement your income. Get a better job. Get a promotion. I could go on but I'm sure you get my drift.

Too many people spend every penny they get every month without a seconds thought as to how to budget. Then they complain they haven't got any money. Well for the most part I've got no sympathy for them. They're usually just to lazy to sort out their finances and aren't prepared to go without.

Anyone who just carries on spending every penny they've got is going to be in deep trouble very soon if they don't take my advice. Please don't come back at me and say you already do all these things because I am the only person I know that does.

I guarantee if I sat down with someone for an hour I could save them a lot of money just by doing some of the above and using common sense. I could even get them up and running with their own tax free business in less than 1 hour with money coming in within 48 hours (as long as they've got a computer and internet connection). This business would then generate them an income for the rest of their lives and could be done at any time to suit other commitments.

You, madmick, are full of bullshit my friend. That is, in the words of some others posters on here, "FACT"

[BillyStubbsTears]

The government is up to its eyeballs in debt. The consumer is up to his eyeballs in debt. Future unborn generations are up to their eyeballs in debt. I on the other hand am up to my eyeballs in savings and investments which I regularly use to buy goods to keep the economy afloat.

The last thing we need is more debt. Have a look at this link and if you still think people should be spending even more money to get into even more debt then I'm afraid I can't help you anymore:

http://www.creditaction.org.uk/assets/PDF/statistics/2012/february-2012-summary.pdf

Mick.

End of debate I think. I have explained to you what the perils are of everyone simultaneously tightening their belts and Govt cutting back its spending at the same time. You simply respond with a diatribe about your own habits and a homely sermon about the dangers of debt.

I think we've both posted more than enough and anyone reading can clearly see where we are coming from and can make up their own minds. I've done now.

And he really is absolutely fine, so don't worry. So kind of you to enquire.

[mjdgreg]

You, mjdgreg, are full of excellent advice my friend. That is, in the words of some others posters on here, "FACT"

Thank you for your kind words.