Norfolk born James Dyson, a generous man

[shefcanary 2,435]

3 hours ago, Herman said:

It's amazing how this bit of misinformation has stuck after all these years. Anybody using it now should be banned from voting. 

No sense of humour, these Tories. 

[By Hook or Ian crook 917]

12 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Deficit and debt are two different things. You can see the rate of increase rose dramatically in 2008… then was slowing up to 2020 as the deficit reduced when the pandemic hit and the transition out of the EU ended.

When was the last time the UK ran a surplus?

Debt in relation to % of gdp also rose over that time at a similar rate. And it would depend on what your definition of surplus is. Most likely the answer would be somewhere in the late 60’s early 70’s powered by post war industrialism and a large scale manufacturing and mining industry's. That all came to an end with Thatcher in the 80’s. 

[Herman 9,796]

3 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

 

Irrelevant may be fair enough, although I'm not sure it is given there seems to be a strong sentiment of the rich not paying enough tax in this thread, but it definitely isn't fake news. The note was left by Liam Byrne at the treasury for his successor.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/09/liam-byrne-apology-letter-there-is-no-money-labour-general-election

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/commons-confidential/2023/07/liam-byrne-labour-apology-no-money-note

[Corbs1 90]

When did Octogenarian become a slur. Dyson is 76 himself. It’s quite reassuring that the same posters who I disagree with about football/our club also appear to be those who want to avoid taxes etc. Society and football have become more unequal in the UK, since the 70s, which impoverishes us all. 

[Worthy Nigelton 1,058]

14 hours ago, shefcanary said:

FFS no-one can take a joke can they? Keep bringing this up as if it was gospel. Now if Hunt says the same thing next year in similar circumstances at least then we know he meant it and he wasn't joking. 😉

I know. Its impossible to 'spend all the money' when you are a country that can print some more. It was clearly a joke.

[Worthy Nigelton 1,058]

13 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Deficit and debt are two different things. You can see the rate of increase rose dramatically in 2008… then was slowing up to 2020 as the deficit reduced when the pandemic hit and the transition out of the EU ended.

When was the last time the UK ran a surplus?

You don't want a surplus. It doesn't work like a household budget.

[duke63 543]

23 hours ago, Naturalcynic said:

I see the usual suspects are out in force to shower their bile and spittle at Dyson.  Presumably it’s a kinder gentler form of hate.

However you might put it, the reason the UK is broke is partly down to the very wealthy avoiding UK tax by sticking their wealth in offshore tax havens. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,562]

1 hour ago, Herman said:

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/commons-confidential/2023/07/liam-byrne-labour-apology-no-money-note

It was an apology for politicking with it. It's still not fake news.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,562]

2 hours ago, shefcanary said:

No sense of humour, these Tories. 

People treating tongue in cheek comments like they're meant seriously has been normal behaviour looking for a bit of one-upmanship for years. It's part of the game they play, Labour included.

Jokes in private conversation were a mainstay in the campaign to remove Johnson.

[Robert N. LiM 4,427]

12 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

He did try to give money to his local primary school, but typically it got caught up in red tape

In Singapore?

[Midlands Yellow 4,013]

Is James a hero of Norfolk? Time to let the dust settle.

[Big Vince 318]

16 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

Oh Vince, you should stick to being pompously wrong about football. Which at bottom is a trivial subject. Transferring that ignorance to something that actually matters just makes you look idiotic.

Ah, but I am not wrong about football and also not wrong about politics because what I have said has not been proven to be empirically untrue. I have expressed opinions, which has nothing to do with right and wrong. It just so happens that you fail to agree with those opinions.

[Big Vince 318]

3 hours ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

Debt in relation to % of gdp also rose over that time at a similar rate. And it would depend on what your definition of surplus is. Most likely the answer would be somewhere in the late 60’s early 70’s powered by post war industrialism and a large scale manufacturing and mining industry's. That all came to an end with Thatcher in the 80’s. 

The late 60s and early 70s was no golden age. It was characterized by high inflation, high unemployment, unions running the country, a three day working week, no electricity, rubbish in the streets and vast inefficiencies in state owned enterprises that were losing money hand over fist. Britain was correctly regarded as the sick man of Europe. It took the balls of Thatcher to sort out this mess and put the Great back into Britain. The electorate agreed with her analysis of the problems and the methods in rectifying them because she was voted in three times.

[The Real Buh 3,446]

[Big Vince 318]

16 hours ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

This is probably wasting my time typing this as i‘m sure nothing will change in your mind. However you do understand that over the past 13 years of Tory leadership our debt had increased year on year not only in total debt but in debt as a % of GDP. 

When did I ever say that the Tories were not just as socialist as Labour? They are. We live in a socialist hegemony that is both red and blue.

[Big Vince 318]

6 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

 

Irrelevant may be fair enough, although I'm not sure it is given there seems to be a strong sentiment of the rich not paying enough tax in this thread, but it definitely isn't fake news. The note was left by Liam Byrne at the treasury for his successor.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/09/liam-byrne-apology-letter-there-is-no-money-labour-general-election

The rich are paying plenty of tax. Far more than they should given that they create jobs for people who also then pay tax. What do people on here actually want? No jobs and less money to fund public services that are already awful by unanimous agreement? Dysons do what Dysons do because in a socialist hegemony even the slightest wealth is frowned upon. Now Singapore has a completely different mindset to both wealth and drug dealers. The former is encouraged and the latter are hanged at dawn.

[Big Vince 318]

9 hours ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

anyone reckon we’ll get a point against QPR? 

Not with Delia in the stand.

[essex canary 497]

44 minutes ago, Big Vince said:

The rich are paying plenty of tax. Far more than they should given that they create jobs for people who also then pay tax. What do people on here actually want? No jobs and less money to fund public services that are already awful by unanimous agreement? Dysons do what Dysons do because in a socialist hegemony even the slightest wealth is frowned upon. Now Singapore has a completely different mindset to both wealth and drug dealers. The former is encouraged and the latter are hanged at dawn.

How do Scandinavian countries rate?

[Herman 9,796]

10 minutes ago, essex canary said:

How do Scandinavian countries rate?

5 of the top 10 in the World Happiness Report are the Scandinavian countries (I include Iceland). So a high tax society doesn't necessarily mean an unhappy one.

https://wellbeing.hmc.ox.ac.uk/world-happiness-report-2023/

[littleyellowbirdie 2,562]

24 minutes ago, Herman said:

5 of the top 10 in the World Happiness Report are the Scandinavian countries (I include Iceland). So a high tax society doesn't necessarily mean an unhappy one.

https://wellbeing.hmc.ox.ac.uk/world-happiness-report-2023/

I had a really good chat to a Norwegian customer the other day who explained their sovereign wealth fund to me in detail. Absolutely brilliant model. I really wish this nonsense that states shouldn't be part of the market was knocked on the head. Even without the oil revenue, with the rates government can borrow at, it would be worth borrowing to invest on the public's behalf on the same premise. Even during the pandemic, drawings from the sovereign wealth fund covered the entire Norwegian defitcit, and it was still only 30% of the profit.

Edited November 19, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[By Hook or Ian crook 917]

2 hours ago, Big Vince said:

When did I ever say that the Tories were not just as socialist as Labour? They are. We live in a socialist hegemony that is both red and blue.

I just meant it was probably a waste of time cause I don’t think anything I type would change your opinions. Of which you’re perfectly entitled to hold. I do happen to agree with you that most politicians now are all cut from the same cloth. 

[By Hook or Ian crook 917]

3 hours ago, Big Vince said:

The late 60s and early 70s was no golden age. It was characterized by high inflation, high unemployment, unions running the country, a three day working week, no electricity, rubbish in the streets and vast inefficiencies in state owned enterprises that were losing money hand over fist. Britain was correctly regarded as the sick man of Europe. It took the balls of Thatcher to sort out this mess and put the Great back into Britain. The electorate agreed with her analysis of the problems and the methods in rectifying them because she was voted in three times.

The question was simply when was the last time we were in the black and not the red so the figures tell you that debt as a % of GDP declined steadily year on year from the early 60’s to 1990. After which it began to climb again. So from 1960 to 1990 we were able to lower national debt through having an excess of money in government coffers combined with the boom in industrial production and economic growth. Thatcher wanted to move the uk away from an industrial nation and into a services economy. Many many communities have not recovered from the actions she took. 

[Yellow Wal 314]

Too many people on here do not realise the enormity of some people's wealth.

The words 'millions' and 'billions' are now used so often that their differnce is not fully realised by some.

To help with this just understand a million seconds is about eleven and a half days.

A billion seconds is more than thirty one and a half years.

Sir James Dyson counts his wealth in billions, so to him thirty five million isn't that much!

[chicken 2,637]

9 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

 

Irrelevant may be fair enough, although I'm not sure it is given there seems to be a strong sentiment of the rich not paying enough tax in this thread, but it definitely isn't fake news. The note was left by Liam Byrne at the treasury for his successor.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/09/liam-byrne-apology-letter-there-is-no-money-labour-general-election

t's fake news as in it was, I believe, a joke, and not only that, it has been spun to mean that that particular labour government had sold off all of the gold reserve. It hadn't and also, the previous conservative government had sold off a fair amount too. Which is the message Vince would like to be putting out there.

[essex canary 497]

1 hour ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

The question was simply when was the last time we were in the black and not the red so the figures tell you that debt as a % of GDP declined steadily year on year from the early 60’s to 1990. After which it began to climb again. So from 1960 to 1990 we were able to lower national debt through having an excess of money in government coffers combined with the boom in industrial production and economic growth. Thatcher wanted to move the uk away from an industrial nation and into a services economy. Many many communities have not recovered from the actions she took. 

Our Football Club was £28 million in the black in it's P&L Account 5 years ago now £31 million in the red.

[By Hook or Ian crook 917]

7 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Our Football Club was £28 million in the black in its P&L Account 5 years ago now £31 million in the red.

I haven’t fact checked that but I’ll take your word for it and it does show how badly we’ve been run for a while. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,562]

It was not fake news. The economy was a mess at the time and the deficit had jumped on the back of 2008. The consensus everywhere was austerity was needed to put public finances back in order. That's not a commentary on what happened next, simply the general outlook at the time backed by the manifestos of all the main national parties. In a very simplistic view, there was a general view that there was 'no more money'.

To summarize. He said it and the economy was in the merde. It was not 'fake news' as Donald Trump and yourself might put it.

39 minutes ago, chicken said:

t's fake news as in it was, I believe, a joke, and not only that, it has been spun to mean that that particular labour government had sold off all of the gold reserve. It hadn't and also, the previous conservative government had sold off a fair amount too. Which is the message Vince would like to be putting out ther

 

Edited November 19, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[Big Vince 318]

1 hour ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

The question was simply when was the last time we were in the black and not the red so the figures tell you that debt as a % of GDP declined steadily year on year from the early 60’s to 1990. After which it began to climb again. So from 1960 to 1990 we were able to lower national debt through having an excess of money in government coffers combined with the boom in industrial production and economic growth. Thatcher wanted to move the uk away from an industrial nation and into a services economy. Many many communities have not recovered from the actions she took. 

Britain was no longer able to compete as a manufacturing nation because there were emerging economies able to manufacture much more cheaply due to being unburdened by the costs of workers' rights in the workplace. The same thing happened in the US where it became too expensive to do business there because of employment legislation. These winds of change were blowing irrespective of Thatcher or Reagan. Economic power was shifting east. What Thatcher did was to grasp the nettle to transform the economy instead of continuing with the path of decline chosen by her predecessors.

Edited November 19, 2023 by Big Vince

[chicken 2,637]

33 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

It was not fake news. The economy was a mess at the time and the deficit had jumped on the back of 2008. The consensus everywhere was austerity was needed to put public finances back in order. That's not a commentary on what happened next, simply the general outlook at the time backed by the manifestos of all the main national parties. In a very simplistic view, there was a general view that there was 'no more money'.

To summarize. He said it and the economy was in the merde. It was not 'fake news' as Donald Trump and yourself might put it.

 

Right, lets spell this out properly because you're not.

The government didn't leave "no money", Vince is suggesting that the money was squandered. Yet the "general consensus" as you put it, was that it was necessary to prevent the impact of the 2008 crash from being catastrophic. Therefore it wasn't really by choice but necessity.

The article also suggests that there was a way to half deficit in four years. Something that hasn't happened. You can say it isn't a commentary on what happened next but it absolutely is. Because we have had austerity for 15yrs and the deficit hasn't been halved.

Again, ALL relevant in relation to Vince.

So yes, absolutely fake news because the news that is fake is the way it is "spun".

Trump isn't the only person to use the term, it is used regularly now to describe actual falsified news. So rather than assume someone is using his language, stick to what you know.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,562]

6 minutes ago, chicken said:

Right, lets spell this out properly because you're not.

The government didn't leave "no money", Vince is suggesting that the money was squandered. Yet the "general consensus" as you put it, was that it was necessary to prevent the impact of the 2008 crash from being catastrophic. Therefore it wasn't really by choice but necessity.

The article also suggests that there was a way to half deficit in four years. Something that hasn't happened. You can say it isn't a commentary on what happened next but it absolutely is. Because we have had austerity for 15yrs and the deficit hasn't been halved.

Again, ALL relevant in relation to Vince.

So yes, absolutely fake news because the news that is fake is the way it is "spun".

Trump isn't the only person to use the term, it is used regularly now to describe actual falsified news. So rather than assume someone is using his language, stick to what you know.

Not fake news. He said it. Period. It was news.

Edited November 19, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie