Since all governments run deficits, they were just following the likes of Maggie. Thus you should approve.

Not the Labour government from 1998 to 2001.

They did indeed.
To about the same level that the Major government left them with.


That's also true.
TBF the Conservative government also briefly ran a surplus 1988-89.

But, generally speaking, Mintball was correct.

She had the income from North Sea Oil (to begin with) and then the funds from selling-off British Gas, British Airways, British Aerospace, British Airports, BP, Britoil, Enterprise Oil, British Steel, the Docks, British Telecom, Jaguar Land Rover, Rolls Royce (aero engines), Cable and Wireless, 10 Water Boards, Electricity generating, Electricity distribution and Amersham International ... plus more.

And still ran a deficit.

Well, it took a lot of money to create benefit dependency in entire communities.

On the deficits – taking your point. I also remember Sally C posting some really excellent stuff on how governments in general have run deficits. He also gave (or provided links to) stats etc. Unfortunately, I don't have them.

I do have a PowerPoint presentation by a specialist in local government on data or over a century plus, but I wouldn't have the first clue about how to host it somewhere. If I work it out, I'll post a link.

It's also always worth reminding some people (not you) that when Labour took office, there was a lot of disrepair in schools and hospitals that needed dealing with.

Yes it does. It was introduced by the last Labour government. HTH

What has Lehmann bros got to do with anything? There wasn't a global financial crisis.

The TUC collected information & PROJECTED what they THINK MAY happen. They did not gather then present actual facts.

Just another knee jerk reaction from the left to a cut in public spending.

The spare room subsidy is already in use in private housing, what's the issue with extending it to save taxpayers money?

Brilliant.

Was there no North Sea Oil revenue pre Thatcher? If yes, what was it spent on? How much was it per annum?

What was the deficit pre Thatcher?

All these industries you mention. How profitable were they? What level of subsidy did they require? What were they worth? How much were they sold for? How do they compare now to then?

Unfortunately it doesn't matter what the facts are.

If a biased Sin Binner says something abut the economy it is true no matter what anyone else says. It doesn't matter if the Governor of the Bank of England disagrees, or the British Chamber of Commerce or anyone else that has vastly more knowledge and experience of the economy than said Sin Binner, Sin Binner is always correct.

After years of zero policies by Labour the first policy they come up with is to spend more on Welfare, you really couldn't make it up.

Edited for accuracy.

Thanks, but it's common sense really. Lehmann Bros didn't cause the financial crisis. There wasn't a global crisis either. HTH

Just imagine how simpler it all could have been if, as an example, interest rates had risen as they normally would to dampen borrowing & prevent the market overheating.

Which entire communities saw benefit dependency created? How was this achieved?