If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   After admitting five years of austerity has only made everything worse, UK announces they'll turn it all around by giving taxpayer-backed home loans to anyone that can spell their name   (guardian.co.uk) divider line 85
    More: Fail, marginal seat, mortgages, taxpayers, Ed Miliband, corporation tax, fuel duty, welfare reform, credit rating agencies  
•       •       •

3620 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Mar 2013 at 7:21 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



85 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-21 07:26:42 AM  
How about for each household a solid gold iron statue of Lady Margaret T instead.
 
2013-03-21 07:27:24 AM  
The UK needs a better system for calling a snap election, the current crowd are pants-on-head useless.
 
2013-03-21 07:32:16 AM  
There name.


Do I qualify?
 
2013-03-21 07:32:23 AM  
Massive austerity huh.

What do they teach kids in schools?
 
2013-03-21 07:34:56 AM  
It's the circle of fail.

[sing it]
 
2013-03-21 07:35:38 AM  
Austerity: Making the poor and working classes pay for the excesses, avarice, and crimes of the wealthy elite.
 
2013-03-21 07:37:21 AM  

keylock71: Austerity  Entire of History: Making the poor and working classes pay for the excesses, avarice, and crimes of the wealthy elite.

 
2013-03-21 07:38:06 AM  
I wish I could explain this to my (U.S.) grad school public policy prof who ranted at me during a class exercise that austerity was the only answer.

I tried to explain that the government is the spender of last resort, and that spending had to continue (or even increase, on infrastructure, roads, bridges, rail, etc.). She just kept ranting at me.
 
2013-03-21 07:38:15 AM  
newspaper.li
What massive austerity might look like....
 
2013-03-21 07:40:10 AM  

xria: keylock71: Austerity  Entire of History: Making the poor and working classes pay for the excesses, avarice, and crimes of the wealthy elite.


Touché.
 
2013-03-21 07:41:13 AM  

Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: The UK needs a better system for calling a snap election, the current crowd are pants-on-head useless.


They really are plumbing new depths of utterly farking useless, aren't they?

Thing is, after the last lot of murderously corrupt incompetents, I was very willing to give this lot a fair shake.

But nope, total failure, utterly shiat. I can't even give them points for trying.

I just wish I could think of a more meaningful response than to vote green.
 
2013-03-21 07:46:20 AM  

xria: keylock71: Austerity  Entire of History: Making the poor and working classes pay for the excesses, avarice, and crimes of the wealthy elite.


Obviously, the solution here is more tax cuts.
 
2013-03-21 07:46:26 AM  

Imari: I wish I could explain this to my (U.S.) grad school public policy prof who ranted at me during a class exercise that austerity was the only answer.

I tried to explain that the government is the spender of last resort, and that spending had to continue (or even increase, on infrastructure, roads, bridges, rail, etc.). She just kept ranting at me.


Professors... What do they know?
 
2013-03-21 07:46:36 AM  
The poor are like cattle, if you don't milk them everyday, they don't produce.
 
2013-03-21 07:46:49 AM  

keylock71: Austerity: Making the poor and working classes pay for their  excesses, avarice, and crimes of  faux wanna-be lifestyle of the wealthy elite.

 
2013-03-21 07:48:59 AM  
CARTER!!!11
 
2013-03-21 07:52:04 AM  

Smirky the Wonder Chimp: xria: keylock71: Austerity  Entire of History: Making the poor and working classes pay for the excesses, avarice, and crimes of the wealthy elite.

Obviously, the solution here is more tax cuts.


Well, there really isn't any problem that can't be solved by giving the wealthiest more money and cutting anything that helps the poor and working classes.

When all you have in the tool box is a hammer...
 
2013-03-21 07:58:14 AM  

keylock71: by giving the wealthiest more money


Who is giving them more money?

Oh, you meant allowing them to keep their own money?
 
2013-03-21 07:59:15 AM  
Austerity huh?

Tell me again how its still considered austerity when they're still spending themselves silly.
 
2013-03-21 08:03:41 AM  
Spell it correctly according to whom?  If this means all the Kaedyns, La-As and Seans out there are up shiat creek that's pretty awesome.
 
2013-03-21 08:04:48 AM  

Imari: I wish I could explain this to my (U.S.) grad school public policy prof who ranted at me during a class exercise that austerity was the only answer.

I tried to explain that the government is the spender of last resort, and that spending had to continue (or even increase, on infrastructure, roads, bridges, rail, etc.). She just kept ranting at me.


It is why I am not on board with "small government" entirely (in the economic sense anyway) - I think at least 1/4 to 1/3 of the economy needs to be under government control so that it has enough "volume" to be able to meaningfully offset the swings in the private sector. Especially as all the time the economy grows the amount of the economy that fulfills basic necessities shrinks in comparison to things that people just want or would like to have, but could live without. This means the modern equivalent of "The Great Depression" wouldn't necessarily stop at 15-25% unemployment, you could see 50%+ being easily feasible if the market was left to itself
 
2013-03-21 08:10:35 AM  

internut scholar: keylock71: by giving the wealthiest more money

Who is giving them more money?

Oh, you meant allowing them to keep their own money?


No, by allowing them to get away with not paying their fair share.  They use all the benefits and pay very little for the privilege.
 
2013-03-21 08:11:27 AM  
Austerity.  Now there's one word which has lost ALL meaning.
 
2013-03-21 08:11:35 AM  
After living in the UK for over a decade, I can say this with absolute confidence:  ANYTHING that happens in the government of the UK  - be it local,county, or national, that even vaguely involves land or housing, is done SOLELY for the benefit of existing landowners, the larger the better.  It's quite possibly the largest and most powerful 'special interest' in britain, as it cuts across parties perfectly, with only the LibDems being slightly less obvious about it.
 
2013-03-21 08:14:50 AM  
 
2013-03-21 08:15:34 AM  
The only positive element is that they've even lost the support of the right wing press. I have very little time for the Eds, but Osborne is catastrophic.

internut scholar: Who is giving them more money?


When banks are 'rescued' via QE? Everybody.
 
2013-03-21 08:15:39 AM  

Mrbogey: Professors... What do they know?


Serious answer?  It has nothing to do with the profession and everything to do with how close they are to the subject they study.  Most science professors are active researchers in their fields; it's safe to assume they know quite a bit.  English professors are hit-or-miss, but honestly it's not that hard to be actively involved in a language.  In contrast, most economics and business professors aren't remotely involved in the very subjects they teach.  To make matters worse, most businesses are structured for specialists, so few people get a complete picture of how even a medium-size business is run.  There's some professor-executive overlap but there's no guarantee these people haven't insulated themselves from the responsibilities of both.  When a CFO announces a layoff it's not like there's any sort of peer review.
 
2013-03-21 08:15:53 AM  
Austerity in the UK was increased taxes while spending continued to grow...

Which economic plan does that sound like... hmm...
 
2013-03-21 08:19:09 AM  

xria: Imari: I wish I could explain this to my (U.S.) grad school public policy prof who ranted at me during a class exercise that austerity was the only answer.

I tried to explain that the government is the spender of last resort, and that spending had to continue (or even increase, on infrastructure, roads, bridges, rail, etc.). She just kept ranting at me.

It is why I am not on board with "small government" entirely (in the economic sense anyway) - I think at least 1/4 to 1/3 of the economy needs to be under government control so that it has enough "volume" to be able to meaningfully offset the swings in the private sector. Especially as all the time the economy grows the amount of the economy that fulfills basic necessities shrinks in comparison to things that people just want or would like to have, but could live without. This means the modern equivalent of "The Great Depression" wouldn't necessarily stop at 15-25% unemployment, you could see 50%+ being easily feasible if the market was left to itself


25-33%.. that's your view of government control? Combining all levels if government, they spent 39.8% of GDP in the US last year. Glad to see you are for spending cuts.
 
2013-03-21 08:21:13 AM  

Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: internut scholar: keylock71: by giving the wealthiest more money

Who is giving them more money?

Oh, you meant allowing them to keep their own money?

No, by allowing them to get away with not paying their fair share.  They use all the benefits and pay very little for the privilege.


The top 5% are paying a larger share of taxes than at any time the last 60 years. Define fair share. Hint, the US top 5% pay more of a share than any european country.
 
2013-03-21 08:22:40 AM  

Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: by allowing them to get away with not paying their fair share


What % is their fair share?

keylock71: internut scholar: Who is giving them more money?

We are...

Living off handouts: it's not just the poor

Trickle-down economics has failed to create jobs

Government Spends More on Corporate Welfare Subsidies than Social Welfare Programs


Mortgage deduction is a government program? Why because they are so graciously allowing you to keep your money?


FarkinNortherner: When banks are 'rescued' via QE? Everybody.


Not every rich person is a banker.
 
2013-03-21 08:23:59 AM  
OMG   THE HORROR!!!!!
WILL NOBODY THINK OF ICELAND?!?!?
 
2013-03-21 08:36:52 AM  

MyRandomName: Austerity in the UK was increased taxes while spending continued to grow...

Which economic plan does that sound like... hmm...


"Austerity" is defined as "any economic plan that ends up failing." Like "conservative" is "any revolutionary leader that decides to become a dictator."

/thus, The Great Leap Forward was "austerity," The Five Year Plans were "austerity," Lenin's Hanging Order was "austerity..."
//Fidel Castro is a conservative, Hugo Chavez was a conservative, Robert Mugabe is a conservative...
///someday OWS will be "conservative" AND "austerity"
 
2013-03-21 08:43:53 AM  

BumpInTheNight: Seans


wut?
 
2013-03-21 08:50:58 AM  
Embattled chancellor delivered help for homebuyers, motorists and beer drinkers as he aims to temper economic gloom

Only in the UK would the interests of beer drinkers be a highlight of a national budget.
 
2013-03-21 08:54:58 AM  
They should give more luxury apartments to single teenage mothers.
 
2013-03-21 08:56:22 AM  

The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: Embattled chancellor delivered help for homebuyers, motorists and beer drinkers as he aims to temper economic gloom

Only in the UK would the interests of beer drinkers be a highlight of a national budget.


And Farkistan.
 
2013-03-21 08:59:06 AM  

Tatterdemalian: "Austerity" is defined as "any economic plan that ends up failing."


I honestly can't relate to political attention whores.  They still scare me though, in the sense that democracy gives people who deliberately disassociate from reality their own little slice of political power.
 
2013-03-21 09:09:09 AM  
Don't you think David Cameron looks tired?
 
2013-03-21 09:09:46 AM  

Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: The UK needs a better system for calling a snap election, the current crowd are pants-on-head useless.


Did you know that one of the first actions of the current crowd was to institute fixed-term parliaments? Snap elections are a thing of the past.

Anyway, what's the alternative? Labour as just as much a bunch of incompetent crooks as the Tories.
 
2013-03-21 09:10:54 AM  

internut scholar: Oh, you meant allowing them to keep their own money?


Their own money? Are they printing it?
 
2013-03-21 09:12:48 AM  

FarkinNortherner: Osborne is catastrophic.


Osborne is an idiot who only has his jobs because he's an old mate of Dave's from Oxford. He exemplifies everything that is wrong with the UK political system.
 
2013-03-21 09:17:27 AM  

prjindigo: OMG   THE HORROR!!!!!
WILL NOBODY THINK OF ICELAND?!?!?


Indeed...

Fighting Recession the Icelandic Way
 
2013-03-21 09:22:57 AM  

dragonchild: Tatterdemalian: "Austerity" is defined as "any economic plan that ends up failing."

I honestly can't relate to political attention whores.  They still scare me though, in the sense that democracy gives people who deliberately disassociate from reality their own little slice of political power.


Maybe you should move to an authoritarian state, where people who deliberately disassociate from the leader's "reality" are buried in mass graves.

/and stop trying to make the USA into one
//strange how a "democracy" where the poor people are fatter than the rich and the biggest attention whore gets to hold executive power somehow manages to become the "sole superpower"
 
2013-03-21 09:23:27 AM  

MyRandomName: Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: internut scholar: keylock71: by giving the wealthiest more money

Who is giving them more money?

Oh, you meant allowing them to keep their own money?

No, by allowing them to get away with not paying their fair share.  They use all the benefits and pay very little for the privilege.

The top 5% are paying a larger share of taxes than at any time the last 60 years. Define fair share. Hint, the US top 5% pay more of a share than any european country.


Hah.  The 5% pay almost nothing, they have accountants to avoid taxes.  And they buy lobbyists to put loopholes in the tax code just for their pet projects.  Romney paid about 18%, if he was actually honest about what he paid.  A secretary on $35k a year pays almost double that.
 
2013-03-21 09:23:32 AM  

MyRandomName: Austerity in the UK was increased taxes while spending continued to grow...

Which economic plan does that sound like... hmm...


Exactly, because there were some cuts in the rate of spending combined with the tax increases, leftards are chanting "AUSTERITY DOESN'T WORK!"

UK's problem is not that austerity doesn't work, its that the welfare state doesn't work.

If you allow govt spending to grow unchecked, it will become a drag on economic growth, a combination of money lost for investment with disincentives to productivity.

Then you can pick your poison to bring back growth: massive govt spending cuts, a financial crash, or devaluation of currency.

Germany seems to be the only country in Europe that has at least made a serious effort to rein in the spending some years ago, but it too is at risk.
 
2013-03-21 09:27:46 AM  

orbister: Their own money? Are they printing it?


No, but the "ownership" the printers supposedly transfer to the people is what gives it value beyond toilet paper.

/sure, the ones responsible for printing it can renege on that deal
//it will not have the results you think it will, though
 
2013-03-21 09:29:59 AM  
If you look at who austerity benefits the most, it's pretty clear that it is not a way out of hardship. It is a way into more loot, at least for a chosen few. And those who push these plans know that full well. There needs to be a full-on class war, in Europe as well as the USA, though in the latter's case half of the populist sentiment for such a thing has been hijacked and suckered by the very people who would otherwise be targeted. Masterful, really.
 
2013-03-21 09:32:04 AM  

keylock71: prjindigo: OMG   THE HORROR!!!!!
WILL NOBODY THINK OF ICELAND?!?!?

Indeed...

Fighting Recession the Icelandic Way


The "Iceland Way" is massive defaulting on debts.

That's not an option in the U.S., cutting govt spending now is a much better idea.
 
2013-03-21 09:35:01 AM  

Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: internut scholar: keylock71: by giving the wealthiest more money

Who is giving them more money?

Oh, you meant allowing them to keep their own money?

No, by allowing them to get away with not paying their fair share.  They use all the benefits and pay very little for the privilege.


How stupid are you? They pay the bast majority of taxes. They use almost none of the services. Ever seen a rich person on food stamps, get Pell grants, subsidized housing, or Medicaid? Obviously US programs. But so goddamn stupid liberals think the rich don't pay their fair share.

Poor people pay almost nothing. They get almost all the benefits. How is that for fair share?
 
Displayed 50 of 85 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report