You mean Reined back surely?

Hammond gave a good account of himself this morning on R4 Today programme.

Suggest you and others listen to it before bigging up Corbyn.

I don't think you can read. I posted that Hammond's plans that I'd heard on the today programme should be welcomed.

Christ on a bike!

BTW autocorroct got me on the reined.

Do you honestly believe this? Or are you making these comments tongue-in-cheek?

In that case I don't think you listened to the same interview that I listened to.....

Shame they where sent there in the first Place, now which smarmy two faced lying fcuker with a sh1t eating grin opened up that particular can of worms ?

Answers on a post card to:

Tony Blairs a cnut.
Lying fckuer street
Teflon Town.
wnakersvill.

Population 1.

"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"

Blaxploitation on top of the anti-semitism.

Optimistic as ever

We don't need to take any advice from the leader of a party that has just announced a gargantuan borrowing/spending spree which would bankrupt this great nation of ours.Incredulous.

That'as much as I will say on this thread.Not wasting my time and energy on Corbyn and his discredited Labour party.

Edited by Willo (03 Oct 2016 12.59pm)

They're all s*** terms.

Fellow c***s they should go with, as a cover all.

Optimistic as ever

The good old put our services out to market tender is the best option argument fails again. If you vote for labour this sort of thing wouldn't happen.

I do mate, had we started investing in housing and the infrastructure that goes with it it would have created a lot more jobs which would in turn increased tax revenue and put money into the economy when people spent their hard earned.

A hypothetical scenario...

Interest rates are incredibly low. 3 or 4 years ago the government were paying around 2.3 percent on 15 year loans. A loan (based on these interest rates ) of £1billion would cost £24.3 million a year on repayments.

If the loan were invested in building social housing, which in the north west would cost somewhere in the region of £120k per house, the money could be spent on 8300 houses. If they were then let out at an affordable rent-somewhere between social housing and market rent) the average return would be around £5.5k per house per year. That's a return of £46 million a year roughly. That covers the interest payments on the initial loan leaves a surplus of around £21.5m per year which over 15 years is a surplus of £322.5 million.
Add in inflation, say a conservative 2% a year, in 15 years time the £1 billion will be worth about 30% less than it is today.

If people are coming off benefits to take up jobs building the housesthere is additional benefit. If we take an average yearly benefit payment of £5,200 a year (£100 a week)is saved. If the average wage is around £22 k the same person would pay around 33.5k in tax and NI, giving a benefit to the public of £8.7k a year (benefit savings + tax and NI income)

If 500 people were used to build the houses, using the rough figures above it brings in savings and tax incomes of £4.35 million a year. As I've said these people would also spend their hard earned on goods and services, the supplers of which will also benefit, perhaps expand taking on more people, make more money so pay more tax.

Also, the suppliers of the materials to build the houses would benefit, and again this increases their profits and leads to more tax paid.

The initial billion borrowed for investment would actually be worth a lot more to the economy in the long run.

If this were to be repeated around the country, obviously the costs of building the houses and land would differ, but it would create a boon for local economies around our green and pleasant.

Because of recent cuts to services and therefore jobs, instead of an increased tax income, revenue remains flat and the national defecit doesn't get lower.