The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Come and join in the banter: discuss here anything you want, whether bike related or not!
User avatar
TheStone
Posts: 2202
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 12:50 pm

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby TheStone » Wed Dec 05, 2012 15:17 pm

Rick Chasey wrote:I'm always happy for people to make predicitions. I'm even Ok with them being wrong if we look at why a) the prediction was made, b) why the prediction is wrong and c) what we can do to make it better/ not make the mistake again.


What's amazing is that they acknowledge that their and the OBR predictions were wrong, but then use a new set of predictions, from the same people, to announce that everything will be ok again.

The Bank of England inflation predictions are the worst of all, yet they're still allowed to produce that cr*p every month, unchallenged by anyone.

User avatar
Il Principe
Posts: 10401
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 10:37 am

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby Il Principe » Wed Dec 05, 2012 15:18 pm

Rick Chasey wrote:
The main thing is that what Osbourne...


Bzzzzzt!

Osborne.

User avatar
notsoblue
Posts: 5771
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 18:08 pm

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby notsoblue » Wed Dec 05, 2012 15:21 pm

TheStone wrote:
Rick Chasey wrote:I'm always happy for people to make predicitions. I'm even Ok with them being wrong if we look at why a) the prediction was made, b) why the prediction is wrong and c) what we can do to make it better/ not make the mistake again.


What's amazing is that they acknowledge that their and the OBR predictions were wrong, but then use a new set of predictions, from the same people, to announce that everything will be ok again.

The Bank of England inflation predictions are the worst of all, yet they're still allowed to produce that cr*p every month, unchallenged by anyone.

It really is astonishing.

User avatar
TailWindHome
Posts: 10571
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 08:57 am

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby TailWindHome » Wed Dec 05, 2012 15:21 pm

Il Principe wrote:
Rick Chasey wrote:
The main thing is that what Osbourne...


Bzzzzzt!

Osborne.



Ozzy would make a crackin' Chancellor though wouldn't he??
"ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED? IS THIS NOT WHY YOU ARE HERE?"

User avatar
TheStone
Posts: 2202
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 12:50 pm

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby TheStone » Wed Dec 05, 2012 15:24 pm

DonDaddyD wrote:They (we) protested at a time that fuel was costing 80p a litre and would reach a pound. What fools we were, they were glorious days.


Oil (and a whole heap of assets) would be much cheaper if they hadn't printed £375bn.
Their stated aim was to support asset prices, yet again, no-one ever challenged why on earth they would do that????

User avatar
bushu
Posts: 677
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 02:34 am

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby bushu » Wed Dec 05, 2012 15:44 pm

Still deserves a poke in the eye just for being part of the old boys club, whether this offends you depends what side of the fence you sit on.. either way he's a snob, whether he can fix our economy is a joke as this would empower the peasants to be of free will, not struggling to pay bills/feed kids & more importantly not doing the poorly paid jobs that made them rich in the first place..

User avatar
notsoblue
Posts: 5771
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 18:08 pm

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby notsoblue » Wed Dec 05, 2012 15:58 pm

bushu wrote:Still deserves a poke in the eye just for being part of the old boys club, whether this offends you depends what side of the fence you sit on.. either way he's a snob, whether he can fix our economy is a joke as this would empower the peasants to be of free will, not struggling to pay bills/feed kids & more importantly not doing the poorly paid jobs that made them rich in the first place..

I think its a bit silly to be against people like George Osborne because you feel he is only rich because of the poverty of others.

What I do think is relevant is how removed he is demographically from the average Briton. If you're going to usher in a huge period of austerity for the country, you should really be able to empathise with the people who will no doubt suffer as a result.

User avatar
CiB
Posts: 5780
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 08:24 am

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby CiB » Wed Dec 05, 2012 16:35 pm

notsoblue wrote:What I do think is relevant is how removed he is demographically from the average Briton. If you're going to usher in a huge period of austerity for the country, you should really be able to empathise with the people who will no doubt suffer as a result.

Not necessarily. He's there to do a job, one that some people believe he shouldn't be doing, His ability to do that job shouldn't rely on any empathy on his part with those at the sharp end of his reforms and corrections; better that he can distance himself from them and not lose his nerve out of sympathy for them - I mean us obviously. Us honest poor hard-working families [(c) All Parties] must stick together.

User avatar
DaxPlusPlus
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 12:24 pm

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby DaxPlusPlus » Wed Dec 05, 2012 16:37 pm

TheStone wrote:
DonDaddyD wrote:They (we) protested at a time that fuel was costing 80p a litre and would reach a pound. What fools we were, they were glorious days.


Oil (and a whole heap of assets) would be much cheaper if they hadn't printed £375bn.
Their stated aim was to support asset prices, yet again, no-one ever challenged why on earth they would do that????


No one challenged the problem with abolishing the 10% lower tax bands when Gordon announced that in his 07(?) budget (the problem being that it would hit the poorest the hardest - like duhh!). It took a year (more?) before people started to realise what was going to happen. So what chance anything as complicated as the above being challenged :evil:

.. and it's stuff like the above that means that a budget can have a bloody massive impact on people's lives.
Sometimes you're the hammer, sometimes you're the nail

strava profile

User avatar
CiB
Posts: 5780
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 08:24 am

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby CiB » Wed Dec 05, 2012 16:42 pm

DaxPlusPlus wrote:No one challenged the problem with abolishing the 10% lower tax bands when Gordon announced that in his 07(?) budget (the problem being that it would hit the poorest the hardest - like duhh!). It took a year (more?) before people started to realise what was going to happen. So what chance anything as complicated as the above being challenged :evil

Not true. Within hours of the announcement, commentators from across the sepctrum had picked up on it and pointed out the effect of that change. The [then] opposition were all over him in Parliament the following day once they'd verified the figures and realised that not only was GB a fraud, he was also a crooked piece of work and a waste of oxygen.

It took a year to correct it; that's down to process, not apathy by opposition parties.

User avatar
TailWindHome
Posts: 10571
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 08:57 am

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby TailWindHome » Wed Dec 05, 2012 16:46 pm

CiB wrote:Us honest poor hard-working families [(c) All Parties] must stick together.



What happens when 'right thinking people' and 'honest hard working families' collide?
"ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED? IS THIS NOT WHY YOU ARE HERE?"

User avatar
vermin
Posts: 1698
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 12:43 pm

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby vermin » Wed Dec 05, 2012 16:50 pm

notsoblue wrote:
bushu wrote:Still deserves a poke in the eye just for being part of the old boys club, whether this offends you depends what side of the fence you sit on.. either way he's a snob, whether he can fix our economy is a joke as this would empower the peasants to be of free will, not struggling to pay bills/feed kids & more importantly not doing the poorly paid jobs that made them rich in the first place..

I think its a bit silly to be against people like George Osborne because you feel he is only rich because of the poverty of others.

What I do think is relevant is how removed he is demographically from the average Briton. If you're going to usher in a huge period of austerity for the country, you should really be able to empathise with the people who will no doubt suffer as a result.


Empathy can be a very damaging emotion in this sort of situation; it's often better to have leaders who are well educated and socially aware yet somewhat detached. Osborne is both.

User avatar
notsoblue
Posts: 5771
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 18:08 pm

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby notsoblue » Wed Dec 05, 2012 17:00 pm

CiB wrote:Not necessarily. He's there to do a job, one that some people believe he shouldn't be doing, His ability to do that job shouldn't rely on any empathy on his part with those at the sharp end of his reforms and corrections; better that he can distance himself from them and not lose his nerve out of sympathy for them - I mean us obviously. Us honest poor hard-working families [(c) All Parties] must stick together.

Well its a PR thing mainly isn't it. Unpopular reforms have to be made, and whoever pushes those reforms through will prioritise according to whats best for their own world view. It would be crazy to presume that reforms are being made that are objectively the best for everyone, and that hardship is being doled out equally.

If there was a hypothetical situation in which the new budget involved cuts and reforms that had a huge effect on people in the 20-30k income bracket, it would be more convincing if the chancellor responsible for the cuts and reforms *wasn't* a millionaire.

jamesco
Posts: 607
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 14:08 pm

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby jamesco » Wed Dec 05, 2012 17:03 pm

vermin wrote:Empathy can be a very damaging emotion in this sort of situation; it's often better to have leaders who are well educated and socially aware yet somewhat detached. Osborne is both.

That makes Osborne sound like a technocrat, rather than the utterly incompetent idealogue that he is. Take the UK Border Agency, for example: Osborne's cuts of 1/3rd of the staff has resulted in the agency turning into an utter shambles, hurting the UK economy and treating tens of thousands of people with cruel disregard.

This isn't austerity, it's self-mutilation.

User avatar
notsoblue
Posts: 5771
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 18:08 pm

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby notsoblue » Wed Dec 05, 2012 17:04 pm

vermin wrote:Empathy can be a very damaging emotion in this sort of situation; it's often better to have leaders who are well educated and socially aware yet somewhat detached. Osborne is both.

I think its quite difficult to be both socially aware (in a meaningful way) and detached. If you've only ever used private hospitals, why bother to reform the NHS?

User avatar
DaxPlusPlus
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 12:24 pm

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby DaxPlusPlus » Wed Dec 05, 2012 17:08 pm

CiB wrote:
DaxPlusPlus wrote:No one challenged the problem with abolishing the 10% lower tax bands when Gordon announced that in his 07(?) budget (the problem being that it would hit the poorest the hardest - like duhh!). It took a year (more?) before people started to realise what was going to happen. So what chance anything as complicated as the above being challenged :evil

Not true. Within hours of the announcement, commentators from across the sepctrum had picked up on it and pointed out the effect of that change. The [then] opposition were all over him in Parliament the following day once they'd verified the figures and realised that not only was GB a fraud, he was also a crooked piece of work and a waste of oxygen.

It took a year to correct it; that's down to process, not apathy by opposition parties.


Sorry that's not how I remembered it .. also what I meant, although didn't state, by challenged was "brought to the public's attention via the media (TV really)"

Reading back through the thread I can see that challenged in Parliament makes a lot more sense :oops:
Sometimes you're the hammer, sometimes you're the nail

strava profile

User avatar
rjsterry
Posts: 8506
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 18:26 pm

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby rjsterry » Wed Dec 05, 2012 17:09 pm

notsoblue wrote:
vermin wrote:Empathy can be a very damaging emotion in this sort of situation; it's often better to have leaders who are well educated and socially aware yet somewhat detached. Osborne is both.

I think its quite difficult to be both socially aware (in a meaningful way) and detached. If you've only ever used private hospitals, why bother to reform the NHS?


Because, for one, if you get run over, or have a heart attack in the street, the ambulance will take you to an NHS hospital. This whole inverse snobbery thing - he's wealthy, therefore cannot possibly have any understanding of anything outside this section of society - is one step away from the bilge over the pond that suggested that you shouldn't vote for Obama because he was an intellectual (read: too clever).

I swore I wasn't going to get involved, and now look what you've made me do.
1997 Giant Peloton 7200 - FCN 4 (5 if it looks like rain)
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
1980s BSA 10sp

"Be there, eat sausages, gain ultimate respect"

User avatar
notsoblue
Posts: 5771
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 18:08 pm

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby notsoblue » Wed Dec 05, 2012 17:22 pm

rjsterry wrote:Because, for one, if you get run over, or have a heart attack in the street, the ambulance will take you to an NHS hospital. This whole inverse snobbery thing - he's wealthy, therefore cannot possibly have any understanding of anything outside this section of society - is one step away from the bilge over the pond that suggested that you shouldn't vote for Obama because he was an intellectual (read: too clever).

I swore I wasn't going to get involved, and now look what you've made me do.


Sorry ;)

I was oversimplifying things, and as I said, its mainly a PR thing. Its easier to get sh!tty news if its coming from someone you can identify with. But I also think that there isn't one objectively correct route forward for the country, so political philosophy makes a difference. Its not a matter of inverse snobbery, or anti-intellectualism. There are intellectuals on both sides of the political spectrum.

User avatar
Rick Chasey
Lives Here
Posts: 28560
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 15:34 pm

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby Rick Chasey » Wed Dec 05, 2012 17:24 pm

It's more his CV to me doesn't lend himself to being a necessarily good treasurer.

Nowhere untill Micheal Howard nominated him as shadow chief sectary to the treasurer does he have any credentials to suggest he's suited to the role.

If I was involved in a headhunting search for the next treasurer of the UK, he wouldn't have been on my short-list.

NFA - not enough relevant experience.

confused@BR
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 15:52 pm

Re: The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

Postby confused@BR » Wed Dec 05, 2012 20:48 pm

Is that a mnemonic for (k)Nows F*ck All? If so, you're right :wink:
'fool'


Return to “Commuting Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests