As opposed to handing the economy to someone who only managed a 2.1 in Modern History and whose sum of economic achievement is a 'D' in GCSE maths?

I thought Cameron got a 1st?

Cameron got a 1st in PPE, still lagged behind Ed Balls though.

Last time I looked, Osborne was charged with running (or ruining) the economy.

And Balls made such a good job of his last government post!! Perhaps his qualifications weren't of much use?

Let us reiterate.

When this government took office, employment had stabilised and there was economic growth.

Those are facts. Whether some people like them or not. Whether some people like Ed Balls or not. They remain facts.

Equally, you will not eradicate the deficit (a problem caused by the banks' behaviour) via austerity (for some) and without growth.

This is not rocket science.

The Labour Party ought to be thanking Ajw71 for his highlighting of the way that Labour has dealt with those miscreants and alleged miscreants.
Would that Cameron would follow that example.

Mintball wrote:Let us reiterate. When this government took office, employment had stabilised and there was economic growth. Those are facts. Whether some people like them or not. Whether some people like Ed Balls or not. Equally, you will not eradicate the deficit (a problem caused by the banks' behaviour) via austerity (for some) measures and without growth. This is not rocket science. New Statesman recently ran an article about the 20 economists who wrote a letter to The Sunday Times backing Osborne's austerity plan. They asked them, two and a half years after that letter, whether they still backed his view. Whilst only a slight majority replied to The Staggers, it does seem that even the tide of tory-slanted economists' opinion has either turned or is turning. http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/polit ... s-turn-him Osborne is becoming more and more isolated as more and more people wake up to the realisation that this vindictive and snotty little emperor has no clothes.

Mintball wrote:Let us reiterate. When this government took office, employment had stabilised and there was economic growth. Those are facts. Whether some people like them or not. Whether some people like Ed Balls or not. Equally, you will not eradicate the deficit (a problem caused by the banks' behaviour) via austerity (for some) measures and without growth. This is not rocket science. New Statesman recently ran an article about the 20 economists who wrote a letter to The Sunday Times backing Osborne's austerity plan. They asked them, two and a half years after that letter, whether they still backed his view. Whilst only a slight majority replied to The Staggers, it does seem that even the tide of tory-slanted economists' opinion has either turned or is turning. http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/polit ... s-turn-him Osborne is becoming more and more isolated as more and more people wake up to the realisation that this vindictive and snotty little emperor has no clothes.

That's an interesting read.

Vince Cable's announcement of a bank for small business the other week was effectively an admission that QE has been a waste of time, simply giving the banks more money, but with them failing to actually do with it what was intended – ie lend it to small businesses.

In other words, you can't do stimulus via the banks.

As I said at the time: if they'd shared all the QE money around equally among the general population, that would have caused a far greater stimulus than anything the BofE managed.

Growth has to come from the private sector you will not eradicate a deficit by increasing public spending. Pumping money into the public sector - Balls' preferred method - is not going to stimulate growth. Even Balls admitted Labour would need to reduce the level of borrowing if they retained power. Balls never offered a solution to driving growth.

Growth was less than 1% in 2010 so to say we had growth is stretching a definition and 2009 the last full year under Labour saw a significant downturn in the economy, unemployment has been growing since 2008 - to say Labour had it under control is a not supported by the figures!!