Barossa come to Cameron's aid?

[Guest]

In a rather striking move, EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has said that the EU will allow some EU member states to slow their pace of austerity cuts, amid concerns over growth.

France, Spain, Poland, Portugal, the Netherlands and Slovenia are all being given more time to complete their austerity plans.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22704729

As BBC's Europe Editor Gavin Hewitt says "Today in Brussels a bugle sounded. It marked the retreat from austerity”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/correspondents/gavinhewitt/

Presumably this may well play nicely into Cameron's stated plan to renegotiate UK's relationship with EU, demonstrating to the Tory Eurosceptics, UKIP and Scottish Nationalists that the situation is not as fixed as they fear/hope, and that deals may be possible.

But will the awkward squad buy it and cut Cameron some slack?

And I wonder what Boris will say? :winkeye::whistle:

Isn't it funny how Tory leaders so often have problems with stroppy blondes over Europe :laugh:

[Flosshilde]

In a rather striking move, EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has said that the EU will allow some EU member states to slow their pace of austerity cuts, amid concerns over growth.

France, Spain, Poland, Portugal, the Netherlands and Slovenia are all being given more time to complete their austerity plans.

But they still have to have them :erm:

As BBC's Europe Editor Gavin Hewitt says "Today in Brussels a bugle sounded. It marked the retreat from austerity”

I don't think so (see above)

But will the awkward squad buy it and cut Cameron some slack?

I doubt it, as their aim is to leave the EU completely.

Isn't it funny how Tory leaders so often have problems with stroppy blondes over Europe :laugh:

But wasn't it Europe that had problems with a stroppy blonde Tory leader(ene)?
http://thelincolnite.co.uk/wp-conten...t_thatcher.jpg

[aeolium]

A less sanguine reaction here.

[MrGongGong]

But they still have to have them :erm:




I don't think so (see above)




I doubt it, as their aim is to leave the EU completely.




But wasn't it Europe that had problems with a stroppy blonde Tory leader(ene)?

please don't post offensive images
I thought we had enough of those with Beefs Kipper King photos

i'm feeling more than a little queasy :sadface:

[scottycelt]

How naive. It's not the politicians who have the real power in any of this it's the speculators in the world's currency and bond markets.

The UK can't change anything apart from indulging in political tinkering at the edges. If the government's 'austerity programme' of cuts was loosened the pound would plummet, interest rates would rise, leaving us further in debt and there would no German fairy godmother to bale us out.

Frying pans and fires come swiftly to mind ... :erm:

[amateur51]

How naive. It's not the politicians who have the real power in any of this it's the speculators in the world's currency and bond markets.

The UK can't change anything apart from indulging in political tinkering at the edges. If the government's 'austerity programme' of cuts was loosened the pound would plummet, interest rates would rise, leaving us further in debt and there would no German fairy godmother to bale us out.

Frying pans and fires come swiftly to mind ... :erm:

Just to be clear about the target of your world-weary scorn, scotty - is it me, President Barossa or Gavin Hewitt? Or any combination thereof? :erm:

[Beef Oven]

please don't post offensive images
I thought we had enough of those with Beefs Kipper King photos

i'm feeling more than a little queasy :sadface:

Keep my name out of this please MRGG.

And Nigel's.



http://i.imgur.com/g9peiz0.jpg

[teamsaint]

well Scotty is right, in part , about who is calling the shots, even if his analysis isn't.....

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

please don't post offensive images
i'm feeling more than a little queasy :sadface:

:ok: :ok:

[Serial_Apologist]

How naive. It's not the politicians who have the real power in any of this it's the speculators in the world's currency and bond markets.

The UK can't change anything apart from indulging in political tinkering at the edges. If the government's 'austerity programme' of cuts was loosened the pound would plummet, interest rates would rise, leaving us further in debt and there would no German fairy godmother to bale us out.

Frying pans and fires come swiftly to mind ... :erm:

Scotty's definition of political moderation...

[Flosshilde]

please don't post offensive images

I thought I'd give BO & Pee a little treat.

[scottycelt]

Just to be clear about the target of your world-weary scorn, scotty - is it me, President Barossa or Gavin Hewitt? Or any combination thereof? :erm:

Certainly not President Barossa, amsey. Politicians have their own agendas, and say many silly things, but are rarely discovered to be quite that naive. I have no particular targets for scorn or anything else, and I'm certainly not weary of this fascinating world in which we all find ourselves.

However, if anyone really thinks that borrowing more money to spend more is the way to reduce debt, that person is either being incredibly naive or needs to take an intense refresher course in simple arithmetic. There would be no growth, just soaring interest rates resulting in mortgage arrears and home re-possessions which, in turn, would cause another full-blown recession/depression.

Of course, I'm sure many who insist that is the way to a debt-free nirvana don't actually believe a word of it themselves but are, surprise surprise, simply "playing politics".

Naturally, I would never dream of being so outrageous as to actually accuse any member here of such an unworthy practice ... :ok:

[scottycelt]

well Scotty is right, in part , about who is calling the shots, even if his analysis isn't.....

Scotty's definition of political moderation...

The clear difference between a proper reply and a non-reply ... ?

[aeolium]

However, if anyone really thinks that borrowing more money to spend more is the way to reduce debt, that person is either being incredibly naive or needs to take an intense refresher course in simple arithmetic. There would be no growth, just soaring interest rates resulting in mortgage arrears and home re-possessions which, in turn, would cause another full-blown recession/depression.

But strangely, borrowing more money when states were virtually bankrupt was exactly what happened at the end of the second world war, as the main creditor nation - America - realised that simply employing the failed conventional austerity policies of the pre-war period would never allow the countries devastated by war to recover. The result was three decades of continually improving living standards and growth across most of the nations of the world, with full or high levels of employment and comparatively low levels of inequality. The policy was helped by having a much more regulated environment under the Bretton-Woods agreement than was the case either before the war or in the period from the late 1970s until the recent crash.

Policymakers in the EU and elsewhere have a very clear example of what happens when austerity policies are implemented following a severe crash (and in some respects the crash of 2008 was worse than that in 1929). There is no, or very little growth, high unemployment, riots and political instability and the rise of extremist parties. This happened after the 1929 Depression and it has been repeated following 2008. What's more, austerity does not work on its own terms: it does not generate enough growth to enable deficits to be reduced and debt to be repaid. Some economists, including some in the IMF, realise this and have been advocating a change in policy. The OECD has noted that countries which are spending more, like America, are recovering more quickly. Unless Europe (and the UK) change their policy then we are likely to have recession for a generation with all the social and political instability that will create.

[scottycelt]

But strangely, borrowing more money when states were virtually bankrupt was exactly what happened at the end of the second world war, as the main creditor nation - America - realised that simply employing the failed conventional austerity policies of the pre-war period would never allow the countries devastated by war to recover. The result was three decades of continually improving living standards and growth across most of the nations of the world, with full or high levels of employment and comparatively low levels of inequality. The policy was helped by having a much more regulated environment under the Bretton-Woods agreement than was the case either before the war or in the period from the late 1970s until the recent crash.

Policymakers in the EU and elsewhere have a very clear example of what happens when austerity policies are implemented following a severe crash (and in some respects the crash of 2008 was worse than that in 1929). There is no, or very little growth, high unemployment, riots and political instability and the rise of extremist parties. This happened after the 1929 Depression and it has been repeated following 2008. What's more, austerity does not work on its own terms: it does not generate enough growth to enable deficits to be reduced and debt to be repaid. Some economists, including some in the IMF, realise this and have been advocating a change in policy. The OECD has noted that countries which are spending more, like America, are recovering more quickly. Unless Europe (and the UK) change their policy then we are likely to have recession for a generation with all the social and political instability that will create.

.

Yes, but the whole point here is that it was US money which allowed post-war Europe to recover and similar extraordinary aid is no longer available. The US has her own severe budget problems. We have to borrow at the rates decided upon by the international creditors and they dictate the terms and significant national budget cuts are the main part of these terms. Even within the EU Germany will not dole out money to countries like Greece without a reasonable expectation of getting that money back with interest!

I agree with those who say it is going to be a long, hard slog out of this. Apparently personal debt in the UK has hardly changed since 2008 which is frightening when you consider how much lower mortgage rates are compared to pre-crisis levels. Years of excess mean a period of belt-tightening which paves the way for non-consumption led growth by companies investing for the future at the bottom of the economic cycle. The UK unemployment rate is not as high as the in Thatcher era, yet growth then gradually returned. Borrowing and spending more money at increasingly higher interest rates will only plunge us deeper into the mire. It is the equivalent of an ultimately ruinous 'payday loan'?

However, I agree with you that we should have more international regulation to control what is now an inter-connected global economy.

Thatcher/Reagan-style 'deregulation' turned out to be the usual over-hyped Fools Paradise, simply old-style laissez-faire capitalism by another name.