Borrowing on the never, never is what got us to where we are now.
Hell, we've just had 10 years of austerity to try and reduce the nations debt and now you are advocating borrowing more, interesting.

What we will find out is that despite all of the Brexit rhetoric, all of those EU immigrants weren't actually the problem but, that they were a handy scapegoat.

Despite all of the "strong and stable", "get Brexit done" tag lines, our ecconomy is not strong or stable and Brexit is just a smokescreen.

Can I just ask where have I advocated spending more?, I assume it may have been my comment "it would be rude not to" with regards to the low interest rates, theses were the comments of a A financial expert in answer to what Johnsons views may be on future spending.

When the interest rate at which government can borrow is lower than the rate at which the private sector is borrowing, and the private sector is not investing, it makes sense for government to fill the gap.

If the investment is used on infrastructure projects that improve the UK's production capacity then you can get a higher return (through future taxes) than the repayments of the debt, so it isn't necessarily "burdening future generations", any more than a private company borrowing to finance productive investment burdens future shareholders.

If the money is squandered...well thats a different matter.

Also where government debt is held by UK institutions, when the government repays the debt it isn't money lost to the economy, it gets paid in to the private sector.

My son works for a prominent merchant bank in the US and their view is before long the UK will be getting paid to borrow money

And yet Jeremy Corbyn was going to "crash the economy" through borrowing....

The UK is seen as a safe bet because it has a reasonably stable economy with a good balance between public and private ownership and borrowing levels that are credible - perhaps under Labour these factors would have been significantly negatively impacted which would have changed the outside world's view of lending to the UK

From the Torygraph, 2 days ago...

This is nothing that the Tories didn't say wouldn't happen. Maybe I missed it but was there an announcement of mass re-nationalisation of utilities, trains, mail, the broadband service, national bank, repealing of union legislation - socialism in action - the state/Len controls your life!!

No, you havent seen all of this yet but, it's spend, spend, spend on the never, never and they have taken back control of part of the rail network - thin end of the wedge eh ?
Looks like the Coronavirus will be the ultimate test and despite looking like they were in control, notably lining up to scapegoat the chief medical officer, their "open chequebook" to businesses and the wider public to cover any shortfall, is classic left wing comment and it isn't going to happen.

The government wont be the insurance policy for the nation but, so full of schmidt is Johnson, that he has made some promises that wont and cant be kept.
He's the most left wing Troy leader that we've had for a very long time and the cracks are now starting to appear.

Cracks appearing in your wishful thinking mind.

The Conservatives made this argument during the 2010 election campaign.
It was later while Osborne was in charge and doing austerity, that the UK's credit rating got downgraded.

Also if you want the UK to be seen as a safe bet with a stable economy, why would you even consider no-deal Brexit!

The OBR described it as the biggest Budget giveaway since 1992.

1992 was when Norman Lamont was Chancellor, that was the Tories pre-1992 election spending splurge.

Now you might have been led to believe that Labour were the big spenders, so its interesting to see that no Budget from Gordon Brown or Alastair Darling was as generous as either this one from Rishi Sunak or that Norman Lamont one.

The austerity argument was always that it was reckless for Labour to have 'bankrupt the country' by spending too much just before a recession hit. Rishi's spending decisions look odd when judged by the same standards.

Because we live in a democracy, and the electorate voted leave...?

you must be ho from still remoaning?

Your response was to a point about a no deal exit. The elecorate did not, and would never, vote for no deal Brexit. It's of interest only to the very rich, the super-stupid or the very xenophobic.

It is a democracy people voted to leave - to say they didn't know a no-deal was a possibility is not true - this was all the MPs discussed for 3 years prior to the last GE and the Tories on the back of Brexit got a huge majority.

We were downgraded because of the government yielding to pressure to increase spending on health and social care - so the likes of Moodys prefer austerity!!

Are you seriously suggesting the UK electorate didn't realise there was the possibility of a No deal exit at the last GE? Even for you that is an idiotic comment

You really haven't got a clue, have you.
The Corona virus could do us all and COULD certainly see governments fall if thy dont come up with the correct response.

The comments by Johnson on "nobody losing out", sounded great at the time but, were ill measured.
There is some serious, serious cack to happen around the world and while any government has to and will protect essential services, the offers of help to small and large business, wont go further than allowing a small delay in paying over tax receipts and possibly help with loans. However, this wont save any business in serious strife.
The 1000's of cafes, coffee shops, nail bars, which are the only functioning parts of the high street, will disappear like ice cubes in a teapot.
Travel companies are screwed and major manufacturing too, will be affected.

Unfortunately, you dont appear to have seem to have considered this before making yet another of your usual, ill thought out quip's

History will look back on the recent giveaway budget bonanza, with no meaningful provision for the impact of this crisis on business or workers, and wonder what the actual f**k BJ and his insane clown posse were thinking - or indeed if they were thinking at all.

I wonder how many out of the 20,000 new police officers have been trained - we could need them when the rioting starts

I thought they provided £30bn - or was I mistaken? If you listen to labour the government should increase SSP so nobody is financially impacted by being off sick - where is that money going to come from - McDonald when asked simply said well the government will have to find it!!

We have the lowest SSP in the EU27 - if you get 95 quid a week, and your rent is 200 quid a week - where do you go from there?

My original point was that we are in an unprecedented world crisis; in the middle of that, the Govt announced a 600 billion spending spree, and did nothing beyond a bit of tinkering to support the economic and social fallout of the virus. They will be judged harshly for that - given that they've demonstrated that they can very easily find money for other things.

As the government throws unfunded spending around like plates at a Greek wedding, Sal is somehow with (presumably) a straight face still demanding that other parties explain how they would pay for their priorities.
You couldn't make it up - does no-one else get to shake that fabled Tory magic money tree?

What are you talking about - the Tories said they would balance the books on operational spending and borrow for capital spending - which is what the budget suggested. If we are to follow the French model then we need to put upwards of £250bn into the economy just for the corona which seems like a good idea - not keen on the likes of Branson who every time he gets into difficulty he wants a hand out - time he stuck his hand in his pocket too.

Whilst the virus is not a great thing in the short term I do think it will re-define how we work - property assets might not be quite the asset they are cracked up to be?

I am not disagreeing with you - if commerce/industry is to survive this then the government will have to input some monies - but it can't only be the government that does it - companies also have to do their bit - use some of their cash reserves to support the long term outlook of their business. BA have 9bn in cash - should the government be putting money into a business such as that. In the end like the banking crisis it will be ordinary people who pay through further austerity. That isn't equitable if companies simply come out of the other end with same cash piles?

BA has already said it doesn't need a bail-out - unlike our friend Mr Branson, who is begging for £7.5bn, whilst forcing his staff to take 8 weeks unpaid leave.