UK>EU, Gordon Brown & Labour Haters, you're wrong

[NewGenAdam]

The 2008 Nobel prize for economics winner says UK policies have been
"pretty good" and "intelligent", describing its economy as the
"best in Europe".

He said the "government also deserved more credit for its policies", which "had managed to stabilise the banking system".

I'd say we have Gordon Brown and his party to thank for this, rather than David Cameron and his. Gordon also seems to have achieved a rally of the party, since they realised there is no real competition to him, and he's actually doing a fine job.

BBC article tr.im/orRQ
full original Observer interview tr.im/orT2 (http://tr.im/orT2)

[ajthomason]

This post is about to find its way into the PRSI forum... where I'm sure it'll start a nice debate.

[niuniu]

Where was Mr Nobel peace prize in economics when it came to predicting the recession. But sure, lets hang on his every word after the recession especially with his profound insights such as it looks 'pretty good', and yeah, 'that's intelligent'.

Last I heard intelligent economics didn't equal 100s of 1000s of people losing their jobs.

[Eraserhead]

The 2008 Nobel prize for economics winner says UK policies have been
"pretty good" and "intelligent", describing its economy as the
"best in Europe".

He said the "government also deserved more credit for its policies", which "had managed to stabilise the banking system".

I'd say this was true, but they haven't got everything right and there is stuff they've got wrong.

[remmy]

He may or may not know his economics but as a leader he has been poor.

He came to power without a democratic election.
He may loose power without a democratic election.

Some of his policies as Chancellor are why this country are in this mess, they've been in power since 1997, they can't go on blaming the Tories.

[Eraserhead]

Some of his policies as Chancellor are why this country are in this mess,

This country isn't really in a mess. It could be better but it isn't exactly bad compared even to most other rich nations.

[Peterkro]

The problem is that no matter how bad Brown is the alternatives are worse.

[niuniu]

This country isn't really in a mess. It could be better but it isn't exactly bad compared even to most other rich nations.

Considering the relatively small size of the UK and then the comparative ease of administration and management then the UK really is a mess, and those at the helm are bordering on incompetent.

[Eraserhead]

Considering the relatively small size of the UK

We're the joint second largest country (along with France and Italy) in the EU - only Germany is significantly larger...

And out of the other rich countries only the US, Japan and Germany are significantly larger.

Worldwide we have the 22nd highest population.

[niuniu]

We're the joint second largest country (along with France and Italy) in the EU - only Germany is significantly larger...

And out of the other rich countries only the US, Japan, Germany (and China - if you count it as a rich country) are significantly larger.

Worldwide we have the 22nd highest population.

Yeah, 22nd highest population. You said it yourself. You also fail to mention the massive differences in population gaps between even those 22 countries.

Some countries have populations into the billions, we're in the millions, you can't even imagine what it would be like to govern a country with a billion people. You certainly couldn't do it with UK's policies.

[Eraserhead]

Yeah, 22nd highest population. You said it yourself.

You realise there are 190-odd countries in the world...

[niuniu]

You realise there are 190-odd countries in the world...

I don't care if there are 2 countries in the world, the point is that if the No 1 country has a billion people and the number 2 country has a million people you can't say the no2 country has a comparatively high population just because it's no 2

Bit of a waste of a conversation now tbh..

[Saladinos]

Considering the relatively small size of the UK and then the comparative ease of administration and management then the UK really is a mess, and those at the helm are bordering on incompetent.

What? Have you even been to the UK? Think about how hard it is to manage a welfare system as large as ours, a GDP as large as ours, a healthcare system as large as ours...etc, and being as transparent as we are in the UK (the US doesn't even have an equivalent to PMQs. The government is not as accountable as it is here), and you'll realise governing the UK is no small feat.

As far as populations go, the UK does not have a billion people (nowhere near that). If you look at countries that do (China and India), you'll see how much better we are for that: China doesn't even have elections (the government is a dictatorship), and India's general election take about a month. The standard of living in both countries is much lower than in the UK (if you count freedom as contributing to standard of living). The UK's policies are appropriate for it's size and GDP.

[Eraserhead]

I don't care if there are 2 countries in the world, the point is that if the No 1 country has a billion people and the number 2 country has a million people you can't say the no2 country has a comparatively high population just because it's no 2

Bit of a waste of a conversation now tbh..

Yeah, but the majority of rich countries have smaller populations than the UK.

And they are the only ones (plus a few extras like China, Malaysia and Chile) who you can really compare the UK in terms of how well they are governed.

[niuniu]

What? Have you even been to the UK? Think about how hard it is to manage a welfare system as large as ours, a GDP as large as ours, a healthcare system as large as ours...etc, and being as transparent as we are in the UK (the US doesn't even have an equivalent to PMQs. The government is not as accountable as it is here), and you'll realise governing the UK is no small feat.

Have I been to the UK? I mean, it's not as though it says Location: UK under my name or anything.

I'm not sure what your point is, sounds like you're ranting random bits of thought..

And for you to say that the Govt in America isn't as accountable as it is in the UK you have got to be joking. You think PMQs - which are scripted btw makes our govt accountable? On what planet.

It's a strong separation of powers, (Montesqieu anyone?), that ensures accountability, and the US has a more distinct legislature and executive than we do in the UK, and obviously then have greater accountability.

The NHS is awfully managed - it's a money sink and no matter how many millions we pour in it it's plagued by lazy administration staff who milk sick day out of it like there was no tomorrow.

[Jaffa Cake]

Brown ought to publicly lay the blame on whoever was Chancellor before he became PM, that'll take the heat off him.

[niuniu]

Brown ought to publicly lay the blame on whoever was Chancellor before he became PM, that'll take the heat off him.

lol touche :D

[Eraserhead]

And for you to say that the Govt in America isn't as accountable as it is in the UK you have got to be joking.

Reliable citation please.

You think PMQs - which are scripted btw

Reliable citation please.

It's a strong separation of powers, (Montesqieu anyone?), that ensures accountability, and the US has a more distinct legislature and executive than we do in the UK, and obviously then have greater accountability.

Reliable citation please.

The NHS is awfully managed

Reliable citation please.

it's a money sink

Even though (according to the 2009 Economist world factbook) we spend less as a percentage of GDP than the French, Swiss, Germans, Americans, Canadians, Italians, Dutch, Belgians, Swedish...

[niuniu]

Reliable citation please.



Reliable citation please.



Reliable citation please.



Reliable citation please.



Even though (according to the 2009 Economist world factbook) we aren't even in the top 30 nations with regards to health spending as a percentage of GDP?

What nonsense is this reliable citation stuff? If you really aren't aware at least of the political innards of our comparative Constitutions and the theory behind them, why would even be in here?

*bows out of the white van man politics thread*

[Eraserhead]

What nonsense is this reliable citation stuff?

You can't just state stuff and expect us to accept it, I'd like to see some sources for your information.

[Peterkro]

*bows out of the white van man politics thread*

Stereotypes much?

[Saladinos]

Have I been to the UK? I mean, it's not as though it says Location: UK under my name or anything.

I'm not sure what your point is, sounds like you're ranting random bits of thought..

And for you to say that the Govt in America isn't as accountable as it is in the UK you have got to be joking. You think PMQs - which are scripted btw makes our govt accountable? On what planet.

It's a strong separation of powers, (Montesqieu anyone?), that ensures accountability, and the US has a more distinct legislature and executive than we do in the UK, and obviously then have greater accountability.

The NHS is awfully managed - it's a money sink and no matter how many millions we pour in it it's plagued by lazy administration staff who milk sick day out of it like there was no tomorrow.

Ha! You obviously know little about the UK. The UK government has lots to manage. The NHS is a gigantic organisation (the 3rd largest employer in the world), takes the majority of the DoH's £100Bn budget, and is used by 92% of people in this country. Managing it and sorting out health policy is no mean feat. I could spin off the list of NHS improvements under Labour (such as the dramatically cut waiting times), but it gets rattled out too often.

Also, despite being relatively small, we are variously 5th or 6th on charts of countries by GDP (about the same as France, which has a similar population, and close to Germany, with a significantly higher population). That's a lot of money to manage. In fact, I seem to remember the UK was the largest single contributor to the World Bank last year (due to the 2:1 £:$ exchange rate), more than even the US.

The UK also subsidises education, unlike the US. Students going to university get a world-class education (4 of the top 7 universities in the world are British, according to The Times), and pay comparatively little for them. In fact, all students are entitled to a tuition-fee loan with fairly low rate of interest and write-off after 25 years (or you turn 50, whichever first).

The accountability in the UK comes from the fact that the executive isn't well distinct from the legislative. Back-benchers have more say, bills can be passed fairly and quickly, and people can act through their MPs to petition the prime minister directly and for scrutiny by the whole Commons.

The UK is a fantastic place to live. I've also lived in Germany, and whilst I prefer many of their policies (e.g. policies on the environment and recycling. You must separate your rubbish by German law and get fined for not doing so), these factors make the UK a much better country, IMO, than comparative countries.

[CalBoy]

If you really aren't aware at least of the political innards of our comparative Constitutions and the theory behind them, why would even be in here?

Funny you should say that because:

It's a strong separation of powers, (Montesqieu anyone?), that ensures accountability, and the US has a more distinct legislature and executive than we do in the UK, and obviously then have greater accountability.

If you were paying attention when you learned about the American Constitution, you would remember that it is written specifically to make it less accountable to the people.

At its core, the US Constitution strives to reduce the public's ability to sway government. At the onset, only one half of the three branches was elected directly by the people (senators were chosen by state legislatures). In addition, with the exception of tax bills, the Senate has more de jure authority. It confirms justices, cabinet members, other public ministers, convicts (or not) those who are impeached, ratifies treaties, and most important of all, the Senate's elections are staggered so as to prevent a wave of public sentiment from taking over.

Even beyond that, one must see from a practical perspective that having an executive who stands independently of the legislature can cause its own problems. Who is to blame for a bad situation? Lawmakers or the law's enforcers? It can be difficult at times to pinpoint a singular entity that is responsible for a bad situation as each branch will attempt to shift blame to another actor.


The NHS is awfully managed - it's a money sink and no matter how many millions we pour in it it's plagued by lazy administration staff who milk sick day out of it like there was no tomorrow.

It may be awfully managed, but the fact that it prevents a sizable portion of the population from going without health insurance has to be a positive no? Would you really rather have the American situation of over 17% (likely more now since many have lost their jobs) being uninsured? With those odds, you might do better by playing craps since a 7 is just as likely to come up as one is to be uninsured in America.

[Eraserhead]

^^ Unfortunately once he was asked to show some evidence of his claims he ran off.

[CalBoy]

^^ Unfortunately once he was asked to show some evidence of his claims he ran off.

Indeed, I noticed that too. However, this (apparently) well responded-to American wanted to set the record straight. ;):p

[peskaa]

The NHS is awfully managed - it's a money sink and no matter how many millions we pour in it it's plagued by lazy administration staff who milk sick day out of it like there was no tomorrow.

As somebody who works in the NHS I'd kindly ask you to shut the hell up about things you aren't involved in. If the NHS was taken away from you, you'd be crying pretty quickly about it - either when the bill for private insurance comes through, or when you get ill and there's nothing there for you.

As for milking sick days, that is frankly insulting and downright rude. There are hundreds of thousands of NHS staff who put far more effort into their jobs than anybody else, and genuinely care. Plus, perhaps you might not have noticed, but working in a hospital or healthcare setting puts the staff at a greater risk of exposure to illness - so no wonder more people are off sick.

[neiltc13]

What? You're arguing that because there is no suitable alternative to Gordon Brown that means that he is doing a good job? Doesn't that just show how incompetent the Labour Party really is - from top to bottom?

[Peterkro]

What? You're arguing that because there is no suitable alternative to Gordon Brown that means that he is doing a good job? Doesn't that just show how incompetent the Labour Party really is - from top to bottom?

Personally I think he's doing a bad job but as I said in a previous post look at the alternatives,now that's scary. I think Cameron for instance could cause huge damage in a very short time.

[edesignuk]

Doesn't that just show how incompetent the Labour Party really is all our options really are - from top to bottom?:(

I don't like Brown or Labour at the moment. Equally, perhaps even slightly more so, I worry a lot what Cameron and crew would do, since they never seem to tell us, and mainly just bitch about the situation we find ourselves in.

[BoyBach]

Can't we just give Vince Cable a bash at running the country?