Baffling. How can a proper discussion be had with someone who appears unable to understand simple English?

If you want to go on believing there is no recovery and that those who disagree with you (such as the Governor and the BCC) are 'economically illiterate' that is your prerogative but you will look even more ridiculous when the Q.3 figures are published.

But one suspects two quarters of contraction would constitute recession under a Tory Government?

Yep you don't understand the terms.

You appear to have missed half my post, so I'll ask the questions again. Lets see if you can answer them and defy popular belief.

1. Which facts that I initially posted did you dispute?

2. Why won't you answer LeagueFan's points?

Indeed. As they would under any government. But then recession and recovery are different things and have very different meanings and implications.
As I said to dear old Ajw, the Tories are to be blamed for the lack of growth in recent years due to their policies. The Lib Dems share the blame for letting them. Labour are to be blamed for allowing and encouraging some of the excesses that contributed toward either the crash or economic imbalance pre and post crash.

I'll answer your questions....just as soon as you admit either 1) or 2) in my post of 20:22 set out below for ease of reference:



But I've toyed with you enough tonight so I will be back tomorrow to respond to more of your flawed postings.

Thanks for further confirmation that you don't know what you're on about, disputed official statistics that didnt back you up and made up and distorted quotes. All because you don't understand what you're on about.
You can't answer those questions can you? You've had plenty of time and opportunity to yet won't. Because you can't. Just like you couldn't answer the questions over your Thatcher "poll" or your "football supporter politics".


Of course you will

you'll do like you always do and disappear when asked questions you can't answer, usually just after you've looked something up on Wikipedia, got it wrong, made something up, then backed yourself into a corner. Just like now.

Just do yourself a favour, bin this identity and move on to the next. Because this one's done.

Let this thread (and others before it), be a lesson to any of our younger forum members: if you are ever offered batteries to lick or shower water to drink....


[size=150Just say[/size [size=200NO![/size

Did you miss this bit above from Mark Carney about why the UK should not be patting itself on the back?
“[iGermany has grown by 2%, the US by 5%, Australia by 13% and China by more than 50%. Meanwhile the UK economy still produces 3% [uless[/u than it did five years ago.[/i”.
The US used stimulus to "prime the pump" and now have enjoyed [uyears[/u of continuous growth (i.e. with no negative quarters) since the crash, whereas the UK government did precisely nothing to encourage growth.
Indeed, the coalition inherited a rising economy sparked by Darling's stimuli and quickly turned it into a double dip and, since then, the UK economy has bumped along the bottom, stagnating and never exceeding +1%.

You are cock-a-hoop about two consecutive +ve quarters.
Bear in mind that we had [uthree[/u consecutive +ve quarters in 2011 ... you'd have been cheering from the rooftops about "the good news about the economy" but you'd have looked stupid a quarter later because they were followed by a -ve, then a zero and then another -ve.

You still think that two tiny +ves in succession constitutes recovery?
You still think that HM Gov deserves congratulation for this?

The plan was to eliminate all of the deficit and resume growth in one full parliamentary term.
Epic fail on both counts.

It's OK, Ajw71 [u[ibelieves[/i[/u the economy is recovering. If you [u[ibelieve[/i[/u, truth and statistics are irrelevant...

How it pans out?
I think 14 (fourteen) consecutive quarters of growth in US GDP so far (of which none have been as low as our highest) is panning out quite well for them so far.
How long a period of measurement do you want?

Of course, if the rednecks of the Republican party had had their way, the banks would have been allowed to fail (which I seem to recall you advocated), taking most of the economy with it, Chrysler and GM would have gone bust taking a million jobs down with them and the US economy would be absolutely flat on its back right now.
The car makers have almost paid back their government TARP loans now and have completely restructured.
Amazing what well-placed intervention (aka Keynesian stimulus) can do.

We're now in the position where big businesses are moaning about the poor returns on the capital that they have on deposit in the banks.

Well here's a suggestion: don't sit on the fecking capital then, put it to work.

Invest in something innovative, if not in your own business, then invest in other fledgling businesses, you know the kind of business you used to be. Such enterprises are struggling because the banks with whom you have entrusted your deposits, will not loan to such "risky" businesses. They would rather take advantage of QE and borrow money on the cheap off the government and then "invest" it in lower-return but equally lower-risk business.

Instead we have a clueless chancellor who is crowing about his schemes to stimulate the housing market, conveniently forgetting that the people who need to get on the housing ladder can't do so because the fecking banks won't lend them money and the c[in[/iuts who employ them won't give them an employment contract that a bank would recognise as a good risk. All Osborne's housing stimulus will do is fuel yet another property bubble with the consequent inevitable burst to follow.