Carney to put growth top of list

The new Governor of the Bank of England has signalled that he will put growth at the heart of his approach to the job and is willing to see higher inflation for longer in order to support the economy.

Mark Carney was making some of his most detailed comments since he was announced as the surprise choice for the post in November.

stephenthegreat: So after having our savings stolen from us by effectively zero interest rates we're now going to have them reduced in value by 20% a year just like happened to our parents in the 70's.

1stearlofliberty:  An inevitable consequence of Labour's decade of debt.

stephenthegreat: Except that Carney has been appointed by the Coalition.

marknewdarkage: 1stearlofliberty: The Tories are in power now. This is their doing.

twizzle:  And your solution is…?

idmurray: Osborne pledged to match Labour's spending as of September 2007 - he saw no problem at that point.

$20363534: Of course.  Standard thing politicians say these days.  The previous government has a spending review, budgets are allocated a few years into the future.  So it isn't as if Osborne would have been able to change things all that much in any case.

Cashflo:  The conservatives had very few policys. That`s why they couldn`t win the election. Love Thatcher or hate her, at least in she had policies. At first they believed in monitarism, then they dumped it.

justareindeer: stupid -  such as Conservatives haven´t contributed their share to debts.  Really primitive.

paulweighell: justa, Their share historically is indeed less and they decrease it toward the end of their term whereas as Labour increase it toward the end of their term. Look at the curves… http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/oct/18/deficit-debt-government-borrowing-data#zoomed-picture

noimspartacus: Who cares a fig for Tory or Whig. Not I, not I, not I.

epidavros: No. This is all Tory. 100%. Banking crisis due to Thatcher's reduction of bank reserves from 16% to 3%. Fact. And now Osborne's choice to protect asset prices by deflating savings. Evil. Pure Tory evil.

nicknuts: Thatcher's 'system' was working well but relied on honourable regulation, something Labour through out the window.

epidavros: Your a stand up comic, right? Because absolutely no sane person believes that. Thatcher's system was a parody of itself almost from the outset, with endless satires of the culture of excess it produced. The wonder is that it took so long to end so badly - perhaps if the implosion had happened in 1987 or 1997 rather than 2007 the damage would have been less because the excess and utter lack of honour would have gone on for a shorter time. As it is the City has become Britain's biggest and most intractable liability rather than an asset. It is like a toxic nuclear waste dump - it will be spewing toxicity for decades.

paulweighell: epi, Ideological piffle.   It dropped from 20.5 in 1968 to 3.1 in 1998. There were several Labour and Tory governments over that period. Your myopic cherry picking of the data invalidates your entire argument. Look over data since 79 and see which government increases debt by the end of their term and which decreases it. Hint. Labour do not decrease debt… http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/oct/18/deficit-debt-government-borrowing-data

$20363534: So the 12 years with Labour in charge is completely wiped from your memory, or they were so incompetent they had little to zero affect on absolutely anything? Yes, that is indeed what you're suggesting.

epidavros: No, it is not. The hubris of Brown was breathtaking. And he should have fixed the economic vandalism of Thatcher, but did not, with the consequences we now see. But I am fed up of the repeated misdiagnosis of our economic situation. Public debt does not really matter. It is not why we are in a mess. Private debt is. Banks quadrupled their debt after 1987 (http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/09/daily-chart-10). This is worse than in any other country in the entire world. Banks remain the source of our problems, and are not being tackled at all. This is not about banker bashing – hopefully all the “bad bankers” are gone. It is about the toxic waste dump that the city remains.

CurtainsClosed: Brown was a chancellor for the most part, Thatcher was Prime Minister. Please don't forget the hand Blair had in all of this.

gordongeckomoscow: hahahaha theres always some nut job socliaist who can blame everything on thatcher, why stop there maybe u can drag churchill into it 

epidavros: All I did was point out historic fact, backed up by actual figures. But there is the problem for the right – you can take it to the truth, but you cannot get it to think. We are now repeating the errors of the past because we will not learn from it. And the irony is that the economy is not led by an economist but an historian – clearly not a very good one. I presume the problem is that he is trying to appeal to nut jobs like you.

sneakyjudas: errors of the past did not give a free ticket to banks did it?

horesecallederic:   You and your extend family who have recommend your comments are clearly mentally ill. While the Tory's are only slightly less incompetent that the Labour Party, they are clearly not evil. The closest to evil is the policy of Blair and Brown to permanently alter the demographic make up of the UK and in doing so destroy a 1000 years of history. 

epidavros: I wrote nothing about the incompetent Labour government, so it is stupid beyond belief for you to draw any conclusions about my thinking on them. But on banking and the financial crisis history is absolutely clear, and what I wrote was indisputable fact. The trouble with ultra right wingers like yourself is you can take them to the truth, but nothing can make them think.

Partners