Living on Borrowed Time
Part time Tory MP Tim Yeo’s latest musings on the state of the economy read more like something out of the Ed Balls textbook of treasury tragedy. Despite yesterday’s worrying borrowing figures, the conflicted MP ludicrously says we should borrow more money:
“If borrowing is for long term infrastructure assets it should be considered, providing a direct economic benefit can be demonstrated. I do not approve of borrowing due to a failure to cut current spending quickly enough. But where the economic benefit is evident borrowing is acceptable.”
Maybe he’s hoping that economic benefit he mentions might apply to one of his own copious outside interests…
They all the same!
Oink! oink!
What yeo on about
Piggy noises from you are strangely apt
Can you imagine the state of his keyboard?
All covered in a sticky substance and no working F5 key
George Osborne made a huge profit of £450,000 by selling his second home which was part paid for by the taxpayer, it was claimed today.
The Chancellor used Commons expenses to pay interest on the mortgage for the farmhouse in his Cheshire constituency.
He sold the property in January this year amid claims he was preparing for the Tatton seat to be abolished under plans to cut the number of MPs.
Mr Osborne bought the house at Harrop Fold Farm near Macclesfield for £445,000 in 2000.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2236790/Osborne-400-000-profit-second-home-claimed-expenses-say-neighbours.html#ixzz2CxgAfrjj
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Problem in, UK borrow and consume. If UK have invested money from north sea oil, council home sale, gold sold, etc UK will not be in the mess it is in.
Only Osborne never borrowed, he was subsidised by taxpayers you twerp. Do you understand anything?
He borrowed and claim max allowed to pay interest. If he hasn’t borrowed and made the investment he would not have made this huge profit.
Jesus you ARE a dunce and not a wind up. I’ll not waste a moment more on you.
Archer Karcher, getting this up set is not good for your health. When he leaves politics he might make even more than Blair due to the service they gave.
Might be why he’s against the “mansion tax”.
Might be why he’s against the Mansion tax.
His and his friend next door’s house are worth more than £2,000,000 each. Some say these they have rented their houses for £6,000 month each and gave them selves 5% tax cut as well.
YEO..YEEEEEEEOOOOO
Barclays Plc (BARC) withdrew today from floor trading on the London Metal Exchange, the world’s biggest metals bourse, as the bank reviews its businesses to cut costs.
The London-based bank became a Category 2 member of the exchange with immediate effect, meaning it will continue to trade electronically and by telephone, the LME said in a notice to members today. Barclays remains “deeply committed” to the metals market, it said in a statement today. from Bloomberg
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-22/barclays-ends-floor-trading-on-world-s-biggest-metals-bourse-1-.html
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-22/barclays-ends-floor-trading-on-world-s-biggest-metals-bourse-1-.html
Borrowing to invest isn’t inherently bad? Companies and individuals do it succesfully all the time.
However, I agree that w’anker politicians usually f’uck it up.
Aided and abetted by civil servants.
“Somehow” all that borrowing and spending seems to be focussed on the whims and post-retirement aspirations of senior civil servants. i.e. GreenScams and PFI.
When the ‘company’ is £1.7 trillion in debt and struggling to pay the interest, borrowing on anything is bad.
No problem if you can print money and pay it off. You can even keep interest rate low by
1) printing money and buying bonds
2) force insurance companies and pension to hold certain % of their assets as government bonds
3) not asking foreigners where the money came from when they deposit it here
Welcome to Zimbabwian economics, with of course, the same end results. A country full of billionaires who cant afford to buy bread.
What I described was UK not ………..
Yeo has ‘form’. Normally when he suggests something it is because a client of his, eg. the Chinese windfarm people or German taxi people are planning something…. follow the money, it will soon be clear what the latest scam is!
So that rules out borrowing to pay the subsidies to the rent-seeking owners of bird-mincers.
The man is so far off the beam I wonder why he still has the Conservative whip, frankly.
The state can’t pick the winners, borrowing to spend where some politician or bureaucrat sees benefit is a recipe for disaster and pork-barrel politics.
Did someone mention pork barrel? Delicious, well for me anyway.
Did someone mention pork or porking?
Hasn’t that cu*t got a secretary to fuck?
Well spotted – that’s his sex face.
Free money for everyone!
Hurray for Tim Yeo!
Hurray for the magic money tree!
Yhe second most expensive scandal in British politics, after warming/windmillery is that government construction projects cost an average of 8 times what they do in the rest of the world or did in previous generations (eg Crossrail which at 50 miles of tunnels in 2 directions should cost under £1 billion rather than 15 if we could match Norway’s £4 million/km tunneling costs.
While politicians of all parties are understandably reticent to discuss this it seems to be a combination of regulatory parasitism and giving contracts to companies that spend a lot on consultancies by people with backgrounds similar to Tim Yeo.
So long as that is the case any “stimulus” benefit from such projects is limited to the 1/8th they actually cost.
Francre’s TGV Sud-Est cost $4 million/km. Our equivalent, the Channel Tunnel Rail Link, cost $80 million/km. The geography of France is more challenging than ours. Somebody is extracting the urine.
I was hoping nobody would bring this up.
Now it’s a long time since I did my economics o level and the teacher was an arse but he explained this way back then and I’m sure it applies today and to the above.
In the UK there were only 3 firms capable of building a motorway, company 1,2,3 we will call them
No company could undertake all the work available, and all work was made by tender to the ‘average bid’ (it works as well with lowest bid) so they act together in their own interest.
A project comes up for tender, normal cost £100 million, company 2 & 3 had won the previous tenders so this time it’s company 1′s turn.
Company 1 bids £400 mliion
Company 2 bids £200 million
Company 3 bids £600 million
Company 1 gets the contract and makes an extra £300 million
Easy money.
I’m unsure how Mr Yeo proposes to separate the nice borrowing from the nasty borrowing. He’s got a point, though. One of Osborne’s crassest move was to cut infrastructure spending sharply. Only foreign aid was protected!
I love this MP lark. Every day’s like Christmas.
When it comes to energy production we like a ‘mix’.
Things that work and things that don’t work.
‘Why don’t we just invest in things that work’ I hear you say.
To which I would reply,
‘Fuck off you climate change denying hoon’
Odd criticism.
I’d be quite happy if the government borrowed £100bn off the markets to buy £200bn worth of gold.
If the infrastructure built with borrowed money can be shown to be of higher value than the amount of borrowing what is not to like?
That would make up for the fact I sold £200bn worth of gold for £10bn
I think the objection is that it would anger the Gods of Voodoo Economics or something like that. You have to remember that tories are basically a primitive tribe for whom economics stopped in the 19th century. So Yeo is now pro growth as well as pro science. A posse of torch wielding villagers is gathering at his door as we speak.
A posse of illegitimate baby wielding mum’s more like.
Tim Yeo, introducing more women to the pain of Labour than Ed Milliband.
Global warming chicanery, based on utterly dubious, predictive climate ‘models’ is now science? Since when? You’ll be telling us all you can predict when the ‘drought’ will end next, using the same models I presume?
It became “science” when the UEA started to deliver the results requested by the climate-freaks.
Our resident economic-creationist speaks…
Yeeeeaaaah boy RYAN SEACRESS JACK SWOOP BARDEN
A little more sedative I would have thought old boy.
Could you just go and lie down in a darkened room?
I see no problem borrowing to spend on improving my secretary’s assets.
D cup?
Get yer baps out for t’lads.
What I’ve read about this geez up to now, points to a definite wotsinnitforme situation!
Do we think that it would be dangerous to introduce Mr Yeo to the services of Wonga.com? They love marks, sorry, discerning punters who are ready to borrow to invest.
Yesh… lets build more half power half arsed windmills
Just in case it don’t work I want Pre nup before I settle down with my windmill.
Despite yesterday’s worrying borrowing figures, the conflicted MP ludicrously says we should borrow more money.
He doesn’t say any such thing. Did you fail basic reading comprehension, Guido?
He says that spending should not be considered for anything other than long-term infrastructure projects delivering a clear economic benefit and that borrowing should never be allowed simply to make up shortfall in a failure to cut deeply enough.
This comment about borrowing to invest has more shades of Gordon Brown rather than Ed Balls. It was Brown’s “Golden Rule” that lead to Britain entering the downturn with a structural deficit at 4% of GDP. The reductions in the deficit through tax increases and spending cuts are to eliminate this part of the deficit – the cyclical upturn (when it happens) will take care of the rest.
http://manicbeancounter.com/2010/03/24/the-golden-rule-has-lead-to-economic-ruin/
Anthing that Tim Yeo ‘brings up’ usually reveals itself to be a pile of vomit emanating from his total indulgence in overtroughing.
I’ve seen better vomit from the family labrador.
Yes, always better to borrow to keep people on the dole – or throw away the oil wealth to do it, as Thatcher did. Do you people want to save capitalism or not?