All bets are on!

Ana and roses you claim
The last Labour government left us in the doo-doo, the Conservatives and Lib Dems are getting us out of it,it could well take years and I'm sure it will, the Labour complaint is that the mess they created is not being cleared up quickly enough.
But that isn't necessarily so
www.theguardian.com/business/2015/may/03/senior-tory-financial-crash-was-purely-a-banking-crisis-not-labour-overspend

As a Scottish granny living in another part of the UK, I had no say in the Scottish referendum and I was appalled at the way it was conducted. David Cameron almost handed it to the SNP on a plate, by letting them choose the date (Bannockburn anniversary), allowing 16 and 17 year olds to vote and worst of all allowing the SNP to set the question "Do you want Scotland to be independent?" The question should have been "Do you want Scotland to remain part of the UK?" I believe that the result would then have been even more conclusive - not just 55% in favour of staying British but probably 75% or more. It is always easier to campaign for "yes" than "no".

Nicola Sturgeon often mentions her English granny. I had three Scottish grandparents and one who was half English, half Welsh. My grandchildren have Scots, English, Irish and Welsh blood, like so many British families, yet the SNP wants to make us foreigners in our own country.

I live in a marginal constituency where our excellent LibDem MP is retiring and I do not want to see him replaced by a Tory, but that is all the more likely to happen because of the apparent rise of the SNP. Voters down here do not want to see a Labour government propped up by separatists whose sole purpose is to destroy the United Kingdom. What happens in one part of our small island affects everyone else, so, please, if you are a Scottish granny living in Scotland (or a non-Scottish granny living in Scotland) vote for whoever can stop the SNP.

Sigh! the Guardian again, oh well, it must be true then.

I wasn't talking about the financial crash and who or what caused it, Labour's continued reckless spending just made matters worse for the UK.

good post varian, and I agree with you, others here will not.

Splendid letter from Dehlia Smith who supports Labour, talking about the NHS.

Splendid letter from Dehlia Smith who supports Labour about the NHS.

I am not an economist, but there does seem to be a difference of opinion as to how you get out of a recession: spend your way out (i.e. create lots of jobs by investing in infrastructure, NHS and housing and thus giving people money to spend to boost the economy and reduce the benefits bill) or austerity measures, which are unpopular and hit the poorest hardest.

I do not know what the answer is - I am just floating these ideas. Perhaps there is an economist out there with no political axe to grind - I wish!

varianI am in total agreement with you, I have used my postal vote, in the hopes of doing exactly that. Not giving the SNPs any more power than they have

Oh it came up twice sorry folks!

Mishap - no matter how it's presented, economics is not a science. The various economic theories are underpinned by ideologies which are based on values. Keynes v Milton Friedman. There really is not an answer and all economists have 'axes to grind'. I suppose in the end it depends on the sort of society you want. The deregulation of the banks, started by Thatcher ( along with the deregulation of financial institution in general) and Reagan, and accepted fully by the Conservatives along with Labour, all though the Blair/Brown years allowed the banking crisis to happen- it started in the States and spread. The borrowing that then happened did in many people's opinions, prevent the total melt down of Western capitalism. This was simply not a crisis caused solely by Labour - it affected all western economies. Comparisons between us and Greece for eaxample, are fallacious - it's like comparing two people with debts of £100k when one debt is a mortgage and the other is on a credit card. I along with left of centre people in general will be Keynesians because it does less harm to those in greatest need whereas the neo- liberal Friedman school allows the rich unfettered freedom and has ( IMO) a touching, unreasonable belief in the 'trickle down effect'. I wish there were an answer like what is the square root of 16 but there isn't and any economist who says otherwise is basically being at least disingenuous. If economists really had the answers, the global banking crisis would not have happened ( or the Great Depression)

I think that politics has taken over many things, economics included.

Oh soon - I just tried to explain that politics hasn't taken over economics - economics is inherently political

Just talking politics with my DS i didn't realize that we can't use Trident without getting a code from the USA!!! Unbelievable!

Sorry went off piste there.

GT - yes you are right I suppose.
I have always seen it as a seperate subject. But I suppose it has always been political really. I have seen it as being more maths related.

Am I right in saying that say, in the middle of last century, politians listened to the economists? Much nore than they do now[not sure if they listen at all now].

Hear Clegg has been busy doing deals with Cameron behind closed doors - wonder if the rest of the Libs will be Patsys and troop after him?

Where did you hear that, whitewave? All I've been hearing today is tattle about who said what to whom and various versions of 'Ooh, the things he's said to me in private...'

He has agreed to drop the red line with regard to the EU referendum, as DC said that is one thing he simply can't compromise on particularly with the right breathing down his neck.

I am not sure that the Libs can tolerate that as it one of their holy grails or perhaps it is something else they have been lying willing to compromise on without telling the voting public, until a couple of days ago and after 5 years of saying they would not vote for a referendum.

Oh yes, I've just read the article in the Guardian. I won't put a link up because I'm sure most people on this thread have already seen it!

Economics and political theory are indeed inextricably linked. And the latter is what we vote on - very few people have the faintest clue about the detail of the economics, but they vote on the principles behind the political theories they are presented with, and choose that which accords with their feelings, rather than having a full grasp of the economic implications of their vote.

I am very surprised at the campaign the Lib Dems have fought - they knew full well that many of their supporters felt let down by the policies that they had to let go of in any situation where compromise is called for; but they missed the chance to say which policies the DID influence for the better; which opportunities they took to use their power to curb Tory excesses - that is the virtue of a coalition, as the extremes are tempered. Are we to assume that they had no influence at all?

Mind you, Clegg was saying the same thing on 15th April, so it's nothing new.

Oh STB this is one occasion that I'm glad you've become involved in GN!
Your opinions/questions seem naive and disingenuous at times but you really seem to read the explanations offered by those who know what they're talking about and I sincerely hope you find that such answers interesting and illuminating.

Thanks I think!