£829.7 billion in debt

#2
It's OK, Liebour has done what Liebour always does when something needs sorting, they're going to pass a law to ban it, the ludicrous Fiscal Responsibility Bill
 
#3
Of course he doesn't. He sold 1/2 our gold reserves for a third of their value as soon as he became chancellor. "What do we need all that gold for anyway?" :roll:
 
#4
and from reading the queens speech ... he intends to increase spending further!
you couldnt make it up!
 
#5
By my rough reckoning Brown has put every man, woman and child in this country into £13,600 worth of debt
Seeing as only half the population is economically productive that means her indoors and myself have £27,200 to pay off for Brown's follies. Thays before the idiots sends more of my money I don't fooking have.
Thanks a fooking bunch Brown you cnut.
 
#6
jagman said:
By my rough reckoning Brown has put every man, woman and child in this country into £13,600 worth of debt
Seeing as only half the population is economically productive that means her indoors and myself have £27,200 to pay off for Brown's follies.
Thanks a fooking bunch Brown you cnut.

In years to come, the 'Brown Years' will become a standard textbook example of how you can destroy a countries economy.
 
#7
It was a particularly pointless inclusion in the Queen's Speech to put in law 'the budget will be balanced'... rather than explain how this will be done.
 
#8
#9
whyohwhy said:
It was a particularly pointless inclusion in the Queen's Speech to put in law 'the budget will be balanced'... rather than explain how this will be done.
The whole world looks at this one as a stitch up. The only reason for a piece of legislation like that is as a blatant atempt to knobble the next govrnment.
 
#10
jagman said:
whyohwhy said:
It was a particularly pointless inclusion in the Queen's Speech to put in law 'the budget will be balanced'... rather than explain how this will be done.
The whole world looks at this one as a stitch up. The only reason for a piece of legislation like that is as a blatant atempt to knobble the next govrnment.

Indeed, force the Conservatives to dish out the bad medicine in large doses and get the economy fixed, then campaign on the ticket of 'those nasty Tories raised your taxes, vote for us and you can have all the jam and double cream you want for free'…

The chav classes will vote them back in and they can start all over again.
 
#11
Oil_Slick said:
jagman said:
whyohwhy said:
It was a particularly pointless inclusion in the Queen's Speech to put in law 'the budget will be balanced'... rather than explain how this will be done.
The whole world looks at this one as a stitch up. The only reason for a piece of legislation like that is as a blatant atempt to knobble the next govrnment.

Indeed, force the Conservatives to dish out the bad medicine in large doses and get the economy fixed, then campaign on the ticket of 'those nasty Tories raised your taxes, vote for us and you can have all the jam and double cream you want for free'…

The chav classes will vote them back in and they can start all over again.
Not just the chavs unfortuntely. There are a large number of supposedly intellectual middle class types who consider themselves 'indie' and wouldn't dream of wasting their vote on anything other than Lib Dem or Greens. Unless, perhaps, somebody started an "environmental liberation front".
 
#13
DeltaDog said:
Oil_Slick said:
jagman said:
whyohwhy said:
It was a particularly pointless inclusion in the Queen's Speech to put in law 'the budget will be balanced'... rather than explain how this will be done.
The whole world looks at this one as a stitch up. The only reason for a piece of legislation like that is as a blatant atempt to knobble the next govrnment.

Indeed, force the Conservatives to dish out the bad medicine in large doses and get the economy fixed, then campaign on the ticket of 'those nasty Tories raised your taxes, vote for us and you can have all the jam and double cream you want for free'…

The chav classes will vote them back in and they can start all over again.
Not just the chavs unfortuntely. There are a large number of supposedly intellectual middle class types who consider themselves 'indie' and wouldn't dream of wasting their vote on anything other than Lib Dem or Greens. Unless, perhaps, somebody started an "environmental liberation front".
Ah yes, I'd forgotten about those. Them be the ones you see driving out to my village from the local city in their big Volvos and Range Rovers with a load of bikes on the back and then go for a ride around the area on their pushbikes with the kids in tow being 'sustainable' and green, but only on sunny weekends.
 
#14
jagman said:
By my rough reckoning Brown has put every man, woman and child in this country into £13,600 worth of debt
Seeing as only half the population is economically productive that means her indoors and myself have £27,200 to pay off for Brown's follies. Thays before the idiots sends more of my money I don't fooking have.
Thanks a fooking bunch Brown you cnut.
Do share. How has this figure been calculated?
 
#15
Oil_Slick said:
jagman said:
whyohwhy said:
It was a particularly pointless inclusion in the Queen's Speech to put in law 'the budget will be balanced'... rather than explain how this will be done.
The whole world looks at this one as a stitch up. The only reason for a piece of legislation like that is as a blatant atempt to knobble the next govrnment.

Indeed, force the Conservatives to dish out the bad medicine in large doses and get the economy fixed, then campaign on the ticket of 'those nasty Tories raised your taxes, vote for us and you can have all the jam and double cream you want for free'…

The chav classes will vote them back in and they can start all over again.
So the same cycle of bouncing left and right that we have had for years then?

Honestly, you would think by now we would say enough is enough and find a better way to do it.

In fact all we need to do is get rid of the fcuk wits who happily just continually swallow one party line (no matter how bone it is) and just have floating voters.
 

the_boy_syrup

LE
Book Reviewer
#17
can I have my bank statement back please

No more boom and bust so is this different then?
 
#18
Bazzinho1977 said:
Oil_Slick said:
jagman said:
whyohwhy said:
It was a particularly pointless inclusion in the Queen's Speech to put in law 'the budget will be balanced'... rather than explain how this will be done.
The whole world looks at this one as a stitch up. The only reason for a piece of legislation like that is as a blatant atempt to knobble the next govrnment.

Indeed, force the Conservatives to dish out the bad medicine in large doses and get the economy fixed, then campaign on the ticket of 'those nasty Tories raised your taxes, vote for us and you can have all the jam and double cream you want for free'…

The chav classes will vote them back in and they can start all over again.
So the same cycle of bouncing left and right that we have had for years then?

Honestly, you would think by now we would say enough is enough and find a better way to do it.

In fact all we need to do is get rid of the fcuk wits who happily just continually swallow one party line (no matter how bone it is) and just have floating voters.

The all or nothing, first past the post and away you go system we have is probably the worst system of governance economically. As you say, we get ping-pong politics and zero long term thinking.

The best system? Probably the US system of 3 balanced 'houses' all competeing with each other, encourages middle of the road fiscal thinking and the case is proven with just how sucessful the USA is.

And oddly enough, who came up with that form of governance?

We did, and we didn't adopt it. :(
 
#19
Oil_Slick said:
Bazzinho1977 said:
Oil_Slick said:
jagman said:
whyohwhy said:
It was a particularly pointless inclusion in the Queen's Speech to put in law 'the budget will be balanced'... rather than explain how this will be done.
The whole world looks at this one as a stitch up. The only reason for a piece of legislation like that is as a blatant atempt to knobble the next govrnment.

Indeed, force the Conservatives to dish out the bad medicine in large doses and get the economy fixed, then campaign on the ticket of 'those nasty Tories raised your taxes, vote for us and you can have all the jam and double cream you want for free'…

The chav classes will vote them back in and they can start all over again.
So the same cycle of bouncing left and right that we have had for years then?

Honestly, you would think by now we would say enough is enough and find a better way to do it.

In fact all we need to do is get rid of the fcuk wits who happily just continually swallow one party line (no matter how bone it is) and just have floating voters.

The all or nothing, first past the post and away you go system we have is probably the worst system of governance economically. As you say, we get ping-pong politics and zero long term thinking.

The best system? Probably the US system of 3 balanced 'houses' all competeing with each other, encourages middle of the road fiscal thinking and the case is proven with just how sucessful the USA is.

And oddly enough, who came up with that form of governance?

We did, and we didn't adopt it. :(
Really..? The US Government's deficit was annouced on October 16th to be $1.42 TRILLION. That makes it about £853,910,200,442.00. Not much difference really......

And it's a 3 part system, Congress, Senate and President. Not 3 "houses" (pedant mode off)
 
#20
Bazzinho1977 said:
jagman said:
By my rough reckoning Brown has put every man, woman and child in this country into £13,600 worth of debt
Seeing as only half the population is economically productive that means her indoors and myself have £27,200 to pay off for Brown's follies. Thats before the idiots sends more of my money I don't fooking have.
Thanks a fooking bunch Brown you cnut.
Do share. How has this figure been calculated?
Rough calculation-
National debt devided amongst the working population.
Both of us in this house work and are nett contributors to the economy which leaves our share of Browns debt as the aforementioned figure (unless I got my sums wrong, wouldn't be the 1st time!)

Nothing scientific about it :D
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top