How safe will our economy be in the candidate’s hands?

Me too. Arguing with each other and not answering the questions….

Our 6th form debating society was better mannered!

I have gone to bed early with a painful eye and the remnants of a migraine. The last thing I want to do is watch two people who are absolutely unsuitable to be PM. Why would I watch anyway? I don’t have a vote.

It is not the size of the national debt that matters, but what interest rate we are paying. Currently interest rates ar low so the cost of borrowing is quite low and we can sustain a large national debt.

The problem is when interest rates start rising, they are creeping up at present, but if they reach 5% or more - and many of us can remember interest rates at 10% or more. then the cost of servicing debt gets expensive.

I haven't checked this out, but I seem to remember that the debt takes the form of government bonds, with a fixed interest and a fixed term. a bit like a fixed rate mortgage and when they expire they need to be renegotiated for a new term and new interest rate. Thats when the flak can hit the fan. However, I think, the government has issued some bonds with very long dates.. I have checked it out and it is all explained on this site www.dmo.gov.uk/responsibilities/gilt-market/about-gilts]]/ In fact the whole Debt Management Office site is worth looking at.

RichmondPark1 Mon 25-Jul-22 20:12:50

Thank you RichmondPark and apologies to Dempsie if I misunderstood.

Casdon

I’m listening to the BBC now, good grief.

I do think this is the best put-together debate. The contestants are what they are but the BBC has done well.

growstuff

It's possible to have growth without producing more tangible goods. A significant percentage of the UK's GDP is made up of services. I agree with you that the country needs a more equitable distribution of wealth/resources.

We also have the problem of global warming and high energy costs. Labour are promising £28billion pa to be invested in green technologies and green energy.

There are areas, such as retro fitting insulation and double glazing to old housing, where there could be a place for traditional materials, such as wool and wood to replace synthetic materials. The demand for fleece for textiles is dropping rapidly, using it for insulation seems like a good use of available resources. Double glazing doesn't have to be made of plastic; we have wooden framed double glazing which is still fine after 20+ years.

We could be more inventive in our use of renewable materials. And in recycling materials like plastic instead of putting them in landfill or shipping them off to other countries. It all needs investment and it creates jobs.

It seems to me that 'green investment' can lead to growth, but sustainable growth which doesn't exhaust finite resources.

I agree with MOnica, we can't go on mindlessly consuming and wasting resources, but we can surely consume more cleverly? We can't just turn of the tap, so to speak. The population still has to be housed and clothed to a decent standard.

I gave up after 30 minutes because Rishi was talking over Liz most of the time, not giving her a chance to talk. I do not want either of them but we are lumbered with one and we have no say in the matter.

Has that partying buffoon moved out yet?

I'm convinced that the unedifying sight of these candidates bickering and the general playground mud slinging amongst the party will do more to turn people away from actively engaging in politics than every aspect of the political debacle we've already had to endure from this incompetent government.

It's a shameful demonstration of the unproductive, self centred, insular infighting going on within the party. Worst of all it's something which most of us have no way of contributing to or resolving until the next general election.

Maizie We could also increase GDP without exhausting resources, by increasing the provision of "caring" services. This would keep money flowing and, as ever, most of it would find its way back to the Treasury through taxation for the government to direct as it wishes. GDP doesn't have to be about producing physical goods.

PS. I know you know this.

WWMk2, your opening to this thread sums everything up eloquently and accurately. I am greatly disturbed that people are now talking about Thatcherite economics as a positive, just how short are people's memories? It was her hand on the tiller that sold off housing stock with the results that we all see now, it was her that started the north/south divide, it was her that said there is no such thing as society and her that started the myth that a country had to be run like the housekeeping budget of a working class wife. I use 'her' repeatedly because I do not think I owe 'her' any courtesy or regard.

Ha ha! What economy?