UK Borrowing Costs Now Lower Than Germany

The British Government can now borrow on cheaper terms than the Germans.

It is the first time this has happened since a blip almost three years ago and, discounting that, for more than a decade.

This morning, UK 10-year government debt interest rates dropped to 2.16% - their lowest level since 1898. The equivalent German loan had meanwhile increased to 2.21%.

http://blogs.news.sky.com/therealeconomy/Post:f977b034-e789-42b6-b08b-f9b9e24f170f

Good news and yet more vindication for the Conservatives getting to grips with Labour's debt mountain on our terms, rather than being dictated to by the markets.

More of an indication of Germany being faced with bailing out most of Southern Europe and France tbf.

More of an indication of Germany being faced with bailing out most of Southern Europe and France tbf.

Yes, but don't try to confuse Dune with facts !

From a article on the same site last week : http://blogs.news.sky.com/therealeconomy/Post:bae36632-e8c8-4b86-9688-3f72254b7003

"However, the low rates are also likely to signal that not only do investors have a low expectation for Britain’s likelihood of default – it also suggests they have low expectations for Britain’s future growth prospects."

The reason we have kept our borrowing rates in this ball park is because the markets have seen that we are serious about cutting the deficit. We have a plan and we have a solid coalition that are acting in the national interest.

With the Eurozone heading for the rocks we must stick to our plan. We are heading for another recession once Euroland implodes, but it could have been so much worse had Labour got back in and our national borrowing costs had spiraled.

The next decade is looking bleak. I just hope the Euro collapses sooner rather than later because we can then start rebuilding. And on a personal level I am looking for the stock market to crash so I can reinvest. The FTSE 100 has a long way to drop yet! I'm so pleased I took the window of opportunity to divert into corporate bonds a couple of weeks ago when it had climbed up to 5700. I don't see it hitting these heights again for a long time.

The reason we have kept our borrowing rates in this ball park is because the markets have seen that we are serious about cutting the deficit. We have a plan and we have a solid coalition that are acting in the national interest.

 

With the Eurozone heading for the rocks we must stick to our plan. We are heading for another recession once Euroland implodes, but it could have been so much worse had Labour got back in and our national borrowing costs had spiraled.

 

The next decade is looking bleak. I just hope the Euro collapses sooner rather than later because we can then start rebuilding. And on a personal level I am looking for the stock market to crash so I can reinvest. The FTSE 100 has a long way to drop yet! I'm so pleased I took the window of opportunity to divert into corporate bonds a couple of weeks ago when it had climbed up to 5700. I don't see it hitting these heights again for a long time.

P*ss off George.

Have a look at my avatar, and think about the cost of your defecit cutting...

P*ss off George.

 

Have a look at my avatar, and think about the cost of your defecit cutting...

Good of you to remind us that deficit costs more to service in interest payments than the entire defence budget.... ;-)

The reason we have kept our borrowing rates in this ball park is because the markets have seen that we are serious about cutting the deficit. We have a plan and we have a solid coalition that are acting in the national interest.

 

With the Eurozone heading for the rocks we must stick to our plan. We are heading for another recession once Euroland implodes, but it could have been so much worse had Labour got back in and our national borrowing costs had spiraled.

 

The next decade is looking bleak. I just hope the Euro collapses sooner rather than later because we can then start rebuilding. And on a personal level I am looking for the stock market to crash so I can reinvest. The FTSE 100 has a long way to drop yet! I'm so pleased I took the window of opportunity to divert into corporate bonds a couple of weeks ago when it had climbed up to 5700. I don't see it hitting these heights again for a long time.

It's about time you caught your bus to pick up your job seekers allowance .

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk

how are all the foreign wars helping the "debt mountain?"

other than by adding to it?

its a blip

More irony missed by Dune, this Tory led coalition is hell bent on reducing the borrowing requirement and reducing spending hence the levle of interest becomes purley academic

Yet more good news for the UK economy: http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/pm-welcomes-toyotas-100m-investment-in-uk-manufacturing/

Investment will create up to 1,500 additional jobs in the next two years

Today, the Prime Minister visited Toyota in Derbyshire to welcome significant investment.

Toyota announced investment of more than £100 million to manufacture their new generation hatchbacks at their Burnaston factory, creating up to 1,500 additional jobs in the next two years.

Mr Cameron said:

Toyota is to build all its new generation C-segment family sized hatchback models at its Burnaston car plant in Derbyshire.

Yet more good news for the UK economy: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/11/24/uk-britain-nestle-jobs-idUKTRE7AN04R20111124

Thu Nov 24, 2011 2:14am GMT

LONDON (Reuters) - Nestle is creating 300 jobs with a 110 million pound expansion of a coffee production plant in Derbyshire, the food group said on Thursday.

The expansion will treble the capacity of the its Tutbury factory in central England which makes coffee sold under the NESCAFÉ Dolce Gusto brand. The workforce will grow to 800 from its current 500 over the next two years.

Prime Minister David Cameron, battling rising unemployment, welcomed the announcement.

"Manufacturing is crucial to the new economy we are building - an economy where we're making and selling the products the world wants to buy," he said in a statement.

"This investment shows the confidence that there is in the UK, it is clear that we have got a great manufacturing future."

Yet more good news for the UK economy: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/11/24/uk-britain-nestle-jobs-idUKTRE7AN04R20111124

 

Thu Nov 24, 2011 2:14am GMT

LONDON (Reuters) - Nestle is creating 300 jobs with a 110 million pound expansion of a coffee production plant in Derbyshire, the food group said on Thursday.

The expansion will treble the capacity of the its Tutbury factory in central England which makes coffee sold under the NESCAFÉ Dolce Gusto brand. The workforce will grow to 800 from its current 500 over the next two years.

Prime Minister David Cameron, battling rising unemployment, welcomed the announcement.

 

"Manufacturing is crucial to the new economy we are building - an economy where we're making and selling the products the world wants to buy," he said in a statement.

 

"This investment shows the confidence that there is in the UK, it is clear that we have got a great manufacturing future."

Agreed its a pity that 80s saw the destruction of our manufactureing base and now the country can be built based on solid foundations and be broader based rather than just a service sector.

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk

Agreed its a pity that 80s saw the destruction of our manufactureing base

The "destruction" of our manufacturing base started in the 70s...

The "destruction" of our manufacturing base started in the 70s...

And was accelerated by Thatcher.

And was accelerated by Thatcher.

In an attempt to keep Britain in the global race towards unbridled international capitalism....

Knock capitalism as much as you like (I don't like its excesses) but don't blame Thatcher for somehow creating the phenomenon

http://spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/5841

Myth No.2: Thatcher invented ‘Thatcherism’

That Thatcherism was a ruthless response to economic crisis rather than a one-woman ideology is clear from the fact that Margaret Thatcher did not invent it.

Many of the measures described today as ‘Thatcherism’ were first pursued by Ted Heath’s Conservative government in the early 1970s. With the onset of economic decline, Heath also attempted to bring to an end the postwar politics of consensus in favour of top-down crisis management.

Heath, too, elected in 1970, sought to cut state assistance to failing industries, reduce public spending, impose a fixed income policy, and dent – if not smash – the power of trade unions. However, Heath failed. A seven-week strike by the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) helped to bring down Heath’s government: he called a General Election in February 1974 to bolster confidence in his government, but lost to Labour.

One of the key reasons why Heath failed where Thatcher later succeeded is because, during his rule, the working classes in Britain were generally well-organised and unwilling to have wage cuts or fixed income policies imposed upon them from above. It is striking that where the NUM brought down Heath’s ‘Thatcherite’ policies in 1974, the same union was defeated by Thatcher’s ‘Thatcherite’ policies 10 years later in 1984/1985.

So what changed between Heath and Thatcher’s eras to make what is now known as ‘Thatcherism’ – the shaking out of industry and the creation of mass unemployment – seemingly more successful? This is where the intervening Labour government of 1974 to 1979 comes in. Labour PMs Harold Wilson and James Callaghan played a key role in building on ‘Heathism’ and preparing the ground for ‘Thatcherism’.

As economic decline worsened in the late 1970s, the Labour governments called on the unions to face up to the need for austerity and sacrifice. They argued that there would have to be a reduction in public expenditure in favour of ‘prudent housekeeping’, and oversaw the rise of mass unemployment on the basis that ‘protecting the economy’ was more important than ensuring everyone had a job and a livelihood.

Unemployment doubled between 1975 and 1976; by 1977 more than 1.5million people were out of work. When the working classes stood up to this Labour-led attack on their living standards, with the strikes that made up the ‘winter of discontent’ in 1979, Labour launched an anti-union offensive, with Callaghan accusing strikers of engaging in ‘free collective vandalism’ and unions of ‘abus[ing] their great strength’ . This anti-union sentiment was taken up with vigour by Thatcher when she was elected in 1979.

The defining event between the Heath government of 1970 to 1974 and the Thatcher government of 1979 to 1990 was the Labour administration’s demoralisation of the working classes. In educating the workers about the need for austerity in order to prop up the capitalist system, and in introducing mass unemployment and further demonising ‘union power’, Labour paved the way for ‘Thatcherism’. This is the dirty secret of Thatcherite economics: it sprung from a deep-rooted capitalist crisis at least 10 years before Thatcher actually took power, and its fermentation was assisted by Labour.

I never said Thatcher created the "phenomenom" that destroyed much of our manufacturing base.

And was accelerated by Thatcher.

Agreed a major policy mistake of a overvalued pound which destroyed a lot of good manafactureing businesss for no good reason and ecnomists of history have pointed out.

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk

Yet more good news for the UK economy: http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/pm-welcomes-toyotas-100m-investment-in-uk-manufacturing/

 

Investment will create up to 1,500 additional jobs in the next two years

Today, the Prime Minister visited Toyota in Derbyshire to welcome significant investment.

Toyota announced investment of more than £100 million to manufacture their new generation hatchbacks at their Burnaston factory, creating up to 1,500 additional jobs in the next two years.

Mr Cameron said:

“This major announcement from Toyota is fantastic news and a massive vote of confidence for UK manufacturing.

“This investment and the jobs it will create provide a terrific boost not just to the local economy but to the whole country, and is a tribute to the great skill, hard work and sheer professionalism shown by the Toyota workforce. Toyota’s commitment to the UK shows the growing strength of the UK car industry – it is our great British success story.

 

“It is vital that we build a more balanced economy, one with manufacturing, innovation and exports at its heart. The automotive sector is leading the way in helping us achieve this – it is an extraordinary success story and one that we are very proud of.”

Toyota is to build all its new generation C-segment family sized hatchback models at its Burnaston car plant in Derbyshire.

Good news for Derbyshire. Are these new jobs more than the number lost by the Government in the Bombardier fiasco?

Nestle is creating 300 jobs with a 110 million pound expansion of a coffee production plant in Derbyshire, The workforce will grow to 800 from its current 500 over the next two years.

Two years? surely it should be instant?

The defining event between the Heath government of 1970 to 1974 and the Thatcher government of 1979 to 1990 was the Labour administration’s demoralisation of the working classes. In educating the workers about the need for austerity in order to prop up the capitalist system, and in introducing mass unemployment and further demonising ‘union power’, Labour paved the way for ‘Thatcherism’. This is the dirty secret of Thatcherite economics: it sprung from a deep-rooted capitalist crisis at least 10 years before Thatcher actually took power, and its fermentation was assisted by Labour.

Labour introducced mass unemployment? 1.5 million. Thatcher skilfully doubled this. I think the Tories are happy with a bit of unemployment, because their businesses can get away with paying their staff less.

Good news for Derbyshire. Are these new jobs more than the number lost by the Government in the Bombardier fiasco?

The very samne "Bombardier fiasco" that was instigated by the hand-tieing legislation introduced by the last Labour government?

Labour introducced mass unemployment? 1.5 million. Thatcher skilfully doubled this. I think the Tories are happy with a bit of unemployment, because their businesses can get away with paying their staff less.

That "Myths of Thatcherism" piece is written by a staunch anti-capitalist. It's not my handy work. I just follow the SWF law of quoting articles that suit my argument.... ;-)

Nestle is creating 300 jobs with a 110 million pound expansion of a coffee production plant in Derbyshire, the food group said on Thursday.

The workforce will grow to 800 from its current 500 over the next two years

 

Two years?, surely it should be instant?

Boom. Tish.

:-)

I never said Thatcher created the "phenomenom" that destroyed much of our manufacturing base.

Yeah, sorry, I saw that I'd made that slightly skewed logical leap when I read it back. It's an assumption that a lot of people make though...

The very samne "Bombardier fiasco" that was instigated by the hand-tieing legislation introduced by the last Labour government?

It wasn't 'hand-tieing' legislation.

It wasn't 'hand-tieing' legislation.

Link?

It wasn't 'hand-tieing' legislation.

Ah, my bad (partially)....found this... http://www.thisisderbyshire.co.uk/Labour-Euro-chief-backing-changes-EU-rules-wake/story-13686978-detail/story.html

My recall was that the tendering process that Labour put in place had hand-tied the coalition government to see it through to it's natural conclusion, along the path that Labour had already set it down, but it would appear they would have been within their rights to start the tender process all over again.

That said, as the above article states, the government argued that to u-turn on Labour's original tender document would have cost money and time and would not have been in the long term interests of the UK tax payer (in their judgement).

So, yes, I agree that the coalition could, and maybe should, have u-turned the process Labour started but I would call that more a "judgement call" than a "fiasco". Although I accept that the word "fiasco" is much more sensaltionalist and thus more suited to stoking up the debate....

IMHO of course

Our manufacturing economy will never recover until the banks start lending again and despite what politicians say, it's just not happening.

We are actually well placed to recover faster than the Euro zone but our model of capitalism is so flawed, and so geared towards The City that we will miss the opportunity.

Dune, do you really think the government is cutting expenditure fast enough?

Over this parliament the real, inflation adjusted, amount of spending will actually increase. They aren't cutting diddly-squat. All their figures are based on the ludicrous assumption that we will enjoy steady growth of over 3.5% per year out until 2025. This is nonsense! All the signs are that the country will be back in recession next year. Now, I am not saying it is the government's fault. Personally I do not believe that the country should be borrowing to stimulate. But the facts are still as apparent as ever: the deficit hasn't got a monkey's chance of being cut. The UK is still on the path to utter ruin. It is just that other countries are so much worse off.

The entire Western world has been engaged in the biggest ponzi scheme in history. We are addicted to growth. The fiat debt-based monetary system we have is mathematically dependent on infinite exponential growth. This system was kick started in 1971 in the US. Really it is only the last 40 years that the world has been using this monetary system. At first, all appears wonderful. But very quickly it blows up. That is where we are now. There is literally no way out except a complete repudiation of the debt. That is politically impossible. There will be conflict and/or totalitarianism before it is resolved.

Just look at the US. They are currently running annual deficits of $1.5 trillion. A bi-partisan commission was established to find ways to cut (or increase taxes) $1.2 trillion over 10 years. They were unable to agree anything. That is only $120 billion out of a deficit of $1.5 trillion. And they couldn't agree. The US is on the road to ruin. Every single western nation is utterly screwed. It is the end of the game. The mathematics don't lie. And these are only the actual spending of today, not including the promises made to the citizens about health, pensions etc. Nor do they take into account private and corporate debt. There is too much debt everywhere, and not enough production to support it.

And we are all praying for growth, growth, growth! And not just any growth, but turbo-charged infinite growth! Well, just where does this growth come from when real wages are falling and there is no one technological revolution (like the internet, or motor car) to kick start it? Answer: it doesn't come.

We are so stuffed it is funny! They only way out of this mess is a complete debt repudiation. Followed by living within our means. The government - no government - will ever even think about this. That is why it is going to fail.

The UK is still on the path to utter ruin. It is just that other countries are so much worse off.

 

Im not as downbeat as you about the future however the total level of UK indebtedness is scary. If you total government, private and corporate debt it come to over 400% of GDP, far worse than the total for 'basket cases' like Italy, Japan and US.

Good news for Derbyshire. Are these new jobs more than the number lost by the Government in the Bombardier fiasco?

Exactly. That was a disgrace.

Exactly. That was a disgrace.

It was a complete disgrace. If it had happened in France no way would they shaft their own people by placing an order in a competing country.

There is potentially enough demand for new rolling stock to have kept Bombardier production lines humming for a decade. But our government - too strongly wedded to the belief in 'free markets' shafted their own people.

Dune, do you really think the government is cutting expenditure fast enough?

No. If it was me running the show i'd have put VAT up to 25% and really cut back much harder on the public sector. I'd have been like Thatcher and not given a flying fook what anyone said, and would have dealt out a little short term pain for a pro-longed period of gain thereafter.

It was a complete disgrace. If it had happened in France no way would they shaft their own people by placing an order in a competing country.

 

There is potentially enough demand for new rolling stock to have kept Bombardier production lines humming for a decade. But our government - too strongly wedded to the belief in 'free markets' shafted their own people.

Perhaps the product wasn't all that great.Air France buy Boeings.

Ah, my bad (partially)....found this... http://www.thisisderbyshire.co.uk/Labour-Euro-chief-backing-changes-EU-rules-wake/story-13686978-detail/story.html

 

My recall was that the tendering process that Labour put in place had hand-tied the coalition government to see it through to it's natural conclusion, along the path that Labour had already set it down, but it would appear they would have been within their rights to start the tender process all over again.

 

That said, as the above article states, the government argued that to u-turn on Labour's original tender document would have cost money and time and would not have been in the long term interests of the UK tax payer (in their judgement).

 

So, yes, I agree that the coalition could, and maybe should, have u-turned the process Labour started but I would call that more a "judgement call" than a "fiasco". Although I accept that the word "fiasco" is much more sensaltionalist and thus more suited to stoking up the debate....

 

IMHO of course

I would imagine that the workers about to be thrown on the scrapheap at Bombardier would say it was more than a judgement call or a fiasco.

Why they didn't restart the tendering process I will never know. But then its only a few more northerners out of work.

Dune, do you really think the government is cutting expenditure fast enough?

 

Over this parliament the real, inflation adjusted, amount of spending will actually increase. They aren't cutting diddly-squat. All their figures are based on the ludicrous assumption that we will enjoy steady growth of over 3.5% per year out until 2025. This is nonsense! All the signs are that the country will be back in recession next year. Now, I am not saying it is the government's fault. Personally I do not believe that the country should be borrowing to stimulate. But the facts are still as apparent as ever: the deficit hasn't got a monkey's chance of being cut. The UK is still on the path to utter ruin. It is just that other countries are so much worse off.

 

The entire Western world has been engaged in the biggest ponzi scheme in history. We are addicted to growth. The fiat debt-based monetary system we have is mathematically dependent on infinite exponential growth. This system was kick started in 1971 in the US. Really it is only the last 40 years that the world has been using this monetary system. At first, all appears wonderful. But very quickly it blows up. That is where we are now. There is literally no way out except a complete repudiation of the debt. That is politically impossible. There will be conflict and/or totalitarianism before it is resolved.

 

Just look at the US. They are currently running annual deficits of $1.5 trillion. A bi-partisan commission was established to find ways to cut (or increase taxes) $1.2 trillion over 10 years. They were unable to agree anything. That is only $120 billion out of a deficit of $1.5 trillion. And they couldn't agree. The US is on the road to ruin. Every single western nation is utterly screwed. It is the end of the game. The mathematics don't lie. And these are only the actual spending of today, not including the promises made to the citizens about health, pensions etc. Nor do they take into account private and corporate debt. There is too much debt everywhere, and not enough production to support it.

 

And we are all praying for growth, growth, growth! And not just any growth, but turbo-charged infinite growth! Well, just where does this growth come from when real wages are falling and there is no one technological revolution (like the internet, or motor car) to kick start it? Answer: it doesn't come.

 

We are so stuffed it is funny! They only way out of this mess is a complete debt repudiation. Followed by living within our means. The government - no government - will ever even think about this. That is why it is going to fail.

Look, until you cut spongeing you're never going to cut deficits,it's as easy as that.

No country can tackle it's economic problems until everybody contributes (as it always was) If you have an economy where

half the people are spongeing on the other half (ie the civilised world) you just cannot compete with countries where if you don't work you get absolutely sweet FA.So all talk of cutting deficits is subservient to that fact. No elected government is ever going to just say "right that's it no more handouts" so the economies of the civilised world will continue to go down the pan at

various rates.Look at the model societies of Northern Europe, the taxation levels are astronomical and there aren't too many hand-outs for non-contributors.

No. If it was me running the show i'd have put VAT up to 25% and really cut back much harder on the public sector. I'd have been like Thatcher and not given a flying fook what anyone said, and would have dealt out a little short term pain for a pro-longed period of gain thereafter.

The trouble is VAT rises proportionately affect the low-earners more than the high earners.

The trouble with Cameron's government is that they are hell bent on following their ideologies and are blind to other options. They have handled reducing the public purse clumsily, have done nothing yet to cut off money to the spongers and won't works, and haven't seen the increase in tax-revenue because there is no growth.

The banks are the key to the economy growing, but they are not lending, and Osborne doesn't know what to do.

I'd like to see a reduction in corporation tax. It might decrease our revenues short term, but long term we would get more businesses growing and less to pay in dole handouts.

No. If it was me running the show i'd have put VAT up to 25% and really cut back much harder on the public sector. I'd have been like Thatcher and not given a flying fook what anyone said, and would have dealt out a little short term pain for a pro-longed period of gain thereafter.

Exactly VAT the tax that everybody pays.You earn a £1000 a month you pay a smidgeon of income tax and some NI contribution. You get £1000 benefits you pay f*ck all until you spend it.

No. If it was me running the show i'd have put VAT up to 25% and really cut back much harder on the public sector. I'd have been like Thatcher and not given a flying fook what anyone said, and would have dealt out a little short term pain for a pro-longed period of gain thereafter.

And they would have been out of office for another generation or more.

No. If it was me running the show i'd have put VAT up to 25% and really cut back much harder on the public sector. I'd have been like Thatcher and not given a flying fook what anyone said, and would have dealt out a little short term pain for a pro-longed period of gain thereafter.

If you had been like Thatcher you'd have INCREASED public spending. Read a book once in while.

No. If it was me running the show i'd have put VAT up to 25% and really cut back much harder on the public sector. I'd have been like Thatcher and not given a flying fook what anyone said, and would have dealt out a little short term pain for a pro-longed period of gain thereafter.

But then everyone would think of the word '****' when they heard your name...oh.

If you had been like Thatcher you'd have INCREASED public spending. Read a book once in while.

Indeed. Another myth about Thatcher. People naturally assume she cut the State savagely when in fact she grew it for a significant part of her tenure.

The trouble is VAT rises proportionately affect the low-earners more than the high earners..

Not true - zero rating on food and kids cloths etc. High earners spend more so end up paying more tax. Abolish inocme tax and just have a spending tax. It would also encourage more saving, which we desperately need to happen.

The banks are the key to the economy growing, but they are not lending

I don't expect anyone to feel sorry for the banks, but on the one hand they're being told to improve their Tier 1 capital rations, and on the other being told to increase lending. They can't raise capital on the markets in the current climate, and so reducing the asset book to bring Tier 1 capital into line is the only real option. Thems the facts.

Not true - zero rating on food and kids cloths etc. High earners spend more so end up paying more tax. Abolish inocme tax and just have a spending tax. It would also encourage more saving, which we desperately need to happen.

 

 

 

I don't expect anyone to feel sorry for the banks, but on the one hand they're being told to improve their Tier 1 capital rations, and on the other being told to increase lending. They can't raise capital on the markets in the current climate, and so reducing the asset book to bring Tier 1 capital into line is the only real option. Thems the facts.

The facts are that the banks were happy to take billions of our money to cover for their reckless ways, but they don't then fulfil their part of the bargain by lending to get the wheels of the economy turning. In the meantime, like pigs at the trough, they continue to pay themselves an exhorbitant amount.

The mafia have got nothing on the banks.

But then everyone would think of the word '****' when they heard your name...oh.

Everyone thinks of the word mong when they read your name. Thorpe le mong.

Everyone thinks of the word mong when they read your name. Thorpe le mong.

No, they don't.

The trouble is VAT rises proportionately affect the low-earners more than the high earners.

 

The trouble with Cameron's government is that they are hell bent on following their ideologies and are blind to other options. They have handled reducing the public purse clumsily, have done nothing yet to cut off money to the spongers and won't works, and haven't seen the increase in tax-revenue because there is no growth.

 

The banks are the key to the economy growing, but they are not lending, and Osborne doesn't know what to do.

 

I'd like to see a reduction in corporation tax. It might decrease our revenues short term, but long term we would get more businesses growing and less to pay in dole handouts.

They are lending, just not to SME's who need it most.

QE helped them repair their balance sheets, but uncertainty and exposure in the eurozone restricts long term plans. Mix that with draconian lending criteria and there is little hope for moving forward. But this really only applies to the "high st" banks. There are others who are freeing up a bit, so it's not all bad, but seeking out the best deals is still very tough.

Profits are falling anyway, so a reduction in CT wouldn't really work, only serve to strengthen the market share of those who ride roughshod over the competition anyway (i.e multinationals) not a good move as it would force SME's further into the ****, decreasing competition.

They are lending, just not to SME's who need it most.

 

QE helped them repair their balance sheets, but uncertainty and exposure in the eurozone restricts long term plans. Mix that with draconian lending criteria and there is little hope for moving forward. But this really only applies to the "high st" banks. There are others who are freeing up a bit, so it's not all bad, but seeking out the best deals is still very tough.

 

Profits are falling anyway, so a reduction in CT wouldn't really work, only serve to strengthen the market share of those who ride roughshod over the competition anyway (i.e multinationals) not a good move as it would force SME's further into the ****, decreasing competition.

It would level the playing field a bit. Lots of multi-nationals don't actually pay the full rate of CT, so giving the same levels of tax to SME's would give them cash to expand.

The manufacturing decline in Britain, tha nation that gave the world the Industrial Revolution, was caused by successive Labour governments in cahoots with greedy power hungry Trade Unionist the like of which seems to be reappearing in the guises of Serwotka and Crow. All Thatcher did was try to put the crippled dog out of its misery with a 12-bore.

Look at the aircraft industry. In the early 60s, we led the world and the Americans were playing catch-up. Then Wilson, Healey and Jenkins murdered it by cancelling and in an unprecdented move, utterly destroying the R & D work behind the TSR2. Probably to make sure the Americans supported an IMF bailout, since they bankrupted the country in a similar way to which Blair and Brown have.

All those famous names - Blackburn, Supermarine, English Electric, Hawker, Avro, Vickers...gone, forever.