Posted: May 17, 2015 in Chat

This is just a Uk Election ramble. It is as tiresome to me now as it probably is to everyone else.

It happens every time.
People cannot imagine other people being so…. Stupid? Deluded?
What they don’t realise is that the ‘other’ people feel as strongly about their beliefs, as the first lot do about theirs.
But they are right! It’s so obvious! How can the others not see it?

And so the election wave washes on and drains away into muddy trickles.
I don’t think I am stretching things by saying that every new government for, say the last the past 40 years at least, has inherited a deficit from the previous one.
The difference this time was the Crash compounded matters.

So, did the blue party (Conservative Party) use this, and tell everyone – because they know about finance and, let’s be honest, not many others do – that is was a big scary monster? Did they turn a regular deficit into The Deficit? Because if they did, they could guarantee they were onto a winner.
It was the blue party’s chums the Banks who provided the big scary shadow.

It is possible that the people voted Against the deficit, and Not For the Conservative Party. It is just that the Conservative Party had sold themselves as the only ones who could understand and so deal with the assumed problem.

But no one stood up and said, either, This monster has no clothes on! Or Hey, there’s just a little tiny guy behind here all the time! No great big wizard!
And I swear I remember the previous government out on the backroads of America selling sub-prime mortgages, and also just when they should have been in Parliament too!

So, the blue party whipped up this monster of fluff, and made sure people bought into it. And they did. Then they re-sold it to the people, who by this time believed it was real. So much so they would put up with anything, anything, if someone would take away the scary monster. And here we are.

And no one said: There’s always been a deficit! says ‘in only 18 of the 63 years ….  was there a budget surplus’.

And no one said: Reducing the Deficit is good – getting rid of it completely is completely impossible.
The deficit is, after all, the interest to be paid on the overall debt.
Oh, and no one said that That debt has been there since since before Waterloo. It is, as you expect, increasing all the time. And so we come across statements like:  ‘In 1997 the Labour Government ’ – the red party ‘ –  of Tony Blair had inherited a PSNCR’ (ie deficit) ‘of approximately £5 billion per annum’.
Yes, that was ‘per annum’. And that was also Before the financial crisis.

I am not saying that the election results were wrong, obtained by fraud, or manipulated in any way.
I am saying that they came as a shock to many, media pundits included.
We are still trying to understand what the rest of the English population did, and why.

  1. Daedalus Lex says:

    Sounds similar to a debate that seems to have fizzled in the last year of so in the U.S. (because, we must assume, it has lost its political expediency for whatever reason, at least for the time being) – in an economic downturn, should we tighten the belt and reduce the deficit or should the government spend and stimulate the economy until the private sector can pick back up? But if you think the UK election talk is tiresome, here in the U.S. the November 2016 campaigns are already in full swing, with unlimited dollars flowing in. (One curiosity is that the guys who hate the government most would rail against the debt, since the debt is nothing more than the transfer of public money into the hands of the government’s private creditors.)

  2. Thanks for this!
    Is this the song of the times, do you think?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s