Donate SIGN UP

Uk National Debt Over £2 Trillion

Avatar Image
Gromit | 08:51 Sat 22nd Aug 2020 | News
161 Answers
More than 100% of GDP.

When Labour left office in 2010 the National Debt was less than £1 Trillion, so the Tories have managed to double it. Will the electorate ever forgive the Conservatives again for trouncing the economy?

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/uk-national-debt-tops-2-trillion-first-time-history-2020-8-1029523359



Gravatar

Answers

81 to 100 of 161rss feed

First Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Gromit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I think what Jim is saying is, where a long way off the fat lady singing.
Sorry ‘we’re’.
Just in case you were planning on it, please don't point to the fact that about 40,000-60,000 have died as a result of the Government taking action, when the prediction that you are calling "wrong" was made based on the Government taking no action at all. It shouldn't be difficult to see the fallacy in that argument.

The Ferguson paper predicted:

1. Something in the region of 500,000 deaths over a two-year period (another point worth noting, then: we've had less than six months of this!) if no action was taken;
2. Something in the region of 50,000-120,000 deaths in that same period assuming social distancing, home quarantine etc;

We are very clearly in the second scenario. I don't think there's a case for calling the prediction "very wrong" -- not based on what has actually happened, at any rate.

"... 40,000-60,000 have died as a result of the Government taking action..."

Bad phrasing: "as a result of" implies those people wouldn't have died if the Government did nothing, which is of course not what I was meaning to say.
You don't think so? I do. Carry on around the houses, Jim.
I know it's a novel concept around these parts, but it's usually a good idea to point to evidence as justification of your position. As I say, if you are basing your criticism of Ferguson's paper primarily on the fact that around 50,000 have died in six months, and that 50,000 is less than 500,000, then you need to read the paper again and understand its numbers and scenarios more clearly.
Also -- Science is complicated. Epidemiology is complicated. And, fir that matter, life is complicated. Explaining its intricacies isn't "ducking and diving", or "going round the houses". It's a necessity.

If the prediction was "wrong", you should explain why it was wrong, or why you think it was at least, and we can proceed from there.
Ferguson, in coming up with the worst case figures, actually said:
“We use the latest estimates of severity to show that policy strategies which aim to mitigate the epidemic might halve deaths and reduce peak healthcare demand by two-thirds, but that this will not be enough to prevent health systems being overwhelmed. More intensive, and socially disruptive interventions will therefore be required to suppress transmission to low levels. It is likely such measures – most notably, large scale social distancing – will need to be in place for many months, perhaps until a vaccine becomes available.”

http://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/196234/covid-19-imperial-researchers-model-likely-impact/
This is yet another of your 'democracy' moments, Jim. Tell someone else.
No. You've simply misunderstood the paper you are calling wrong. As it makes clear, its worst prediction was based on a two-year period of the Government not responding. We are six months later, rather than two years, and the Government *has* responded, rather than hasn't.
Debt in the EUSSR as a % of Gdp.
Greece 176%, Italy 133%, Spain 103%, Portugal 129%, Ireland 107%, Belgium 106%, Cyprus 109%. France 96% and rising as are all the debt levels in the EU countries......Except Germany. Whose debt level is at 71% of Gdp and falling fast as it hoover up the other economies via the debt payments being made. Near trick to pull off.

https://www.smava.de/european-debt-clock/
-- answer removed --
well you've got gulliver as a fan gromit!
Perhaps if we didnt give £100,000+ to benefit swindlers and their families in Pakistan the nations finances might be healthier.
naomi- you're not fooling anyone. It is okay to admit you're wrong sometimes
>The BIG question is ... to whom are all these governments in debt ?

To us. And anyone who buys government bonds/gilts. For example if you have a pension fund some of that will be invested in government bonds/gilts.
ff, you’ve more chance of Elvis being found in your local chippy than of Naomi admitting she’s wrong. Even when it’s blindingly obvious To the rest of us.
The next problem that Johnson can see coming, but has failed to do anything about is "Mass Unemployment" . After this exam cock up , etc and all the other mistakes this Clown government have made, and coming towards the end of furlough payments . HE knows that unemployment is going to hit the UK like a sledge hammer. with a good chance it will reach Three and a half million.
Unemployment figures even worse than back in the days of Thatcher. She probably could not see it coming but this clown can.
I wonder if i get paid off i can get the same benefits office employee as £100,000 burqa lady got?
Time for your meds and a nap, ynn.

81 to 100 of 161rss feed

First Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Uk National Debt Over £2 Trillion

Answer Question >>