Are you in the “anti growth coalition”?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Citizen's Nephew

Where's the fun in that? :hehe:

..........:thumbup:

---

My lips are sealed. I think I've said enough already 😀

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by delmbox

Yes, this. I disagree with most of his views but I think JamesWales is probably a decent guy to have a beer with, and to give him credit he never (or very rarely) resorts to abuse in reply to some of the pelters he gets.

That said James you do have this slightly skewed view of yourself in that you're totally unbiased which you clearly aren't, and have a tendency to come into threads with this "guys guys guys, it's cute that you've been discussing it but the reality is actually this" vibe which, although I'm sure not deliberate, is f**king irritating :hehe:

---

....I'm taking antihistamines just to cope and slathering my emotions in corticosteroids.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by delmbox

Yes, this. I disagree with most of his views but I think JamesWales is probably a decent guy to have a beer with, and to give him credit he never (or very rarely) resorts to abuse in reply to some of the pelters he gets.

That said James you do have this slightly skewed view of yourself in that you're totally unbiased which you clearly aren't, and have a tendency to come into threads with this "guys guys guys, it's cute that you've been discussing it but the reality is actually this" vibe which, although I'm sure not deliberate, is f**king irritating :hehe:

---

Cheers Delmbox, and thanks to Dorcus too. I am happy to take most criticism on the chin - none of us are perfect but what isn't on is the wild personal insults unrelated to anything anyone has posted. I really do think things have gone too far of late. It's not pleasant.

What frustrates me on here, is the lack of illustration of points, which I always think is important to back up opinions, but there we go. We all have different perspectives.

I do also think that the median opinion on here, most oft expressed when creating posts especially is one way to the left of centre..thats absolutely fine, but it is the case that to push back against that does usually mean challenging the left - I maintain that I would do the same if the CCMB political compass was disproportionally skewed in a rightward direction.

Irritating is not a good word mind, and I will try harder. And yes, always up for a beer..just name the wetherspoons.

Anywaaay, hope everyone had a lovely weekend. Thats what counts.:ayatollah:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

I think a balance is to be made, yes you need to attract wealthy business people who create business and jobs , equally that must not be at the expense of those at the lower end of earning scale as they will buy what the wealthy businesses create .

And you can't be a society that simply gives money away crisis after alleged crisis.

What I like to see from the anti growth, inflation busting hand outs coalition is their plan ( that delivers ) stimulus to the economy which we all know props up our services like health , security, education and transport infrastructure.

If I was Truss I'd agree all the demands , hand out inflation busting increases to benefits and see what the anti everything brigade do then ..

Please don't say green renewables it's not going to fix this debt alone or there is any proof it will as most of the stuff is made in polluting China , in fact it's adding to the debt and global warming ..

---

If we are in crisis then those affected at the front end .....the poor , the sick , the elderly ....need protection and if that puts us in debt ......then bollocks to it .....it must be done

We are a rich country and over time things will even out

You don't talk about getting the country to grow by cutting taxes ......yet cut public services ......then call everyone who doesn't agree with your Potty plan .....growth deniers ff sake

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

If we are in crisis then those affected at the front end .....the poor , the sick , the elderly ....need protection and if that puts us in debt ......then bollocks to it .....it must be done

We are a rich country and over time things will even out

You don't talk about getting the country to grow by cutting taxes ......yet cut public services ......then call everyone who doesn't agree with your Potty plan .....growth deniers ff sake

---

:thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

If we are in crisis then those affected at the front end .....the poor , the sick , the elderly ....need protection and if that puts us in debt ......then bollocks to it .....it must be done

We are a rich country and over time things will even out

You don't talk about getting the country to grow by cutting taxes ......yet cut public services ......then call everyone who doesn't agree with your Potty plan .....growth deniers ff sake

---

That is exactly what has happened in the last two years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

That is exactly what has happened in the last two years.

---

They had no choice but they hated spending any more on the vulnerable

Now it's round two

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

They had no choice but they hated spending any more on the vulnerable

Now it's round two

---

It's one thing to criticise them for not doing something..

..it's quite another to then criticise them for doing exactly what you wanted but just saying "oh well they hated doing it"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

It's one thing to criticise them for not doing something..

..it's quite another to then criticise them for doing exactly what you wanted but just saying "oh well they hated doing it"

---

No it isn't

The Tories hated helping out the poor and disadvantaged

It's how they operate

They spent much of this summer poncing about electing a new leader and refusing to act on the energy crisis until the last minute

Rotten gits

Stories this morning about how the number of care workers has dropped for the first time in ten years;-

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63177547

I suppose anyone arguing for a better deal for another group of workers we were all applauding two and a half years ago is in the anti growth coalition as well.

The Tories really have cocked up in picking their culture war opponent this time because I'd guess about three quarters of the country qualify for the anti growth coalition as defined by Truss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Stories this morning about how the number of care workers has dropped for the first time in ten years;-

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63177547

I suppose anyone arguing for a better deal for another group of workers we were all applauding two and a half years ago is in the anti growth coalition as well.

The Tories really have cocked up in picking their culture war opponent this time because I'd guess about three quarters of the country qualify for the anti growth coalition as defined by Truss.

---

This is pure speculation on my part, but maybe the number dropping is due to the UK coming out of Covid19 restrictions. Looking at the graph, and without seeing the data, it does appear its still the second or third highest year on record. Time will tell if its the start of a trend or not.

If today's news is correct, this board is going to descend into apoplexy when they see the OBRs mid term report, that's for sure.

Apologies, I meant autumn budget, not OBR report

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DryCleaning

This is pure speculation on my part, but maybe the number dropping is due to the UK coming out of Covid19 restrictions. Looking at the graph, and without seeing the data, it does appear its still the second or third highest year on record. Time will tell if its the start of a trend or not.

If today's news is correct, this board is going to descend into apoplexy when they see the OBRs mid term report, that's for sure.

---

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63211743

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63211743

---

The Pro growth coalition are doing a sterling job. Or is that they're doing a job on sterling

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfeathers

The Pro growth coalition are doing a sterling job. Or is that they're doing a job on sterling

---

The analysis at 9.30 in this piece suggests it’s the latter, but then I suppose the Bank of England could be in the anti growth coalition.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-63212398

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

The analysis at 9.30 in this piece suggests it’s the latter, but then I suppose the Bank of England could be in the anti growth coalition.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-63212398

---

Damn these anti growthers!!

Word on the street is that Liz Truss might be joining the anti growth coalition today.

It's weird how certain players within the currency markets seem to know exactly when to long and short the pound.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

Word on the street is that Liz Truss might be joining the anti growth coalition today.

It's weird how certain players within the currency markets seem to know exactly when to long and short the pound.

---

Didn't expect George Osborne to throw his hat into the ring as a full member of the AGC today
"Given the pain being caused to the real economy by the financial turbulence, it’s not clear why it is in anyone’s interests to wait 18 more days before the inevitable u-turn on the mini budget"

Down with the Anti Growth Coalition! Hail the Anti Growth People's Front !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canton Kev

Down with the Anti Growth Coalition! Hail the Anti Growth People's Front !

---

:hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canton Kev

Down with the Anti Growth Coalition! Hail the Anti Growth People's Front !

---

Splitters. The Anti Growth Popular People's front will be taking real action

I'm for growing the private sector not the public sector , as one makes money and the other is propped up by that revenue ...... what is need is better public sector efficiencies , productivity and modernisation ....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

I'm for growing the private sector not the public sector , as one makes money and the other is propped up by that revenue ...... what is need is better public sector efficiencies , productivity and modernisation ....

---

LOM you still haven't let me know what size t shirt to get you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

I'm for growing the private sector not the public sector , as one makes money and the other is propped up by that revenue ...... what is need is better public sector efficiencies , productivity and modernisation ....

---

The public sector can and does make money - for the public.

This false argument used to be a Feedy favourite back in the day. I remember a tortuously long thread that for a while looked at Council public works departments and the effect of privatisation (outsourcing). The same job was being done by the same people and paid from the same source - local tax, council tenant rents and an element of national government subsidy. Magically it changed from being a drain on public funds one day, to an exciting example of enterprise and profit the next (for executives and shareholders at least).

Nothing changed except a % of the funding was syphoned off and was not available to repair homes or roads.

It was presented as a case of public = bad; private = good. Maybe now that LOM has re-invented himself as the board's top economist (courtesy of mainly unacknowledged lifts from the Telegraph, FT or Economist) he could explain why this is so?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

The public sector can and does make money - for the public.

This false argument used to be a Feedy favourite back in the day. I remember a tortuously long thread that for a while looked at Council public works departments and the effect of privatisation (outsourcing). The same job was being done by the same people and paid from the same source - local tax, council tenant rents and an element of national government subsidy. Magically it changed from being a drain on public funds one day, to an exciting example of enterprise and profit the next (for executives and shareholders at least).

Nothing changed except a % of the funding was syphoned off and was not available to repair homes or roads.

It was presented as a case of public = bad; private = good. Maybe now that LOM has re-invented himself as the board's top economist (courtesy of mainly unacknowledged lifts from the Telegraph, FT or Economist) he could explain why this is so?

---

I remember those threads well, interminable length with Feedback always having the last word as he bored other posters to death!

I particularly recall a certain "Archibald Leitch" who certainly gave him a run for his money.