Happy Face

Again, your numbers only go up to Q3 2012. I pointedly said small business borrowing had been tougher, and referred to where the reports says this improved over the last quarter of 2012. Not sure why you're so keen to highlight the bad side of private lending to business though....surely that's an argument for government taking the reins and financing some programs that will benefit small business.

From 4 months before the Bank of Englands January report.

I don't base my view on perception as you do CT. Though I find it strange given your "I'm alright Jack" attitude earlier in the thread that you do perceive this drought of lending exists. Look at the Bank of England report... http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/other/monetary/ccs/creditconditionssurvey130103.pdf That's what the telegraph report I quoted is based on. "The availability of secured credit to households rose significantly in the final three months of 2012 – setting a new high since the survey began in 2007." Small business lending has been bad, but the "report showed that lending to businesses is improving, with the first increase in credit availability for a year." Corporations can borrow from banks more cheaply than banks will lend to each other at the moment.

Sad thing is, I think that misguided old trope is what you base your entire view upon. They're not handling the economy sensibly at all. They're just watching it die. An analogy would be that they own an empty house and the roof leaks, it's gonna cost £3k to replace, but they've decided they can't afford it. They could rent it for £1k a month if they sorted the roof and be back in profit after a short while, but they're claiming fiscal responsibility by not borrowing £3k in the first place and letting it sit unused.

I just linked you to the bank of England report that says there is not a current credit crunch. Lending is at pre-crash levels of availibility. The other way is the American way...and then some. They have not embraced austerity like we have and have seen a much better recovery. their stimulus was smaller than many economists argued in favour of, but it's still evidence of another way. If there's lots of experts you will be able to quote one of them. I think your notion of Gideon sitting with economic experts, poring over the numbers and the justifications for doing the right thing are highly misguided. Tory policy is what it is despite what the experts tell them, not because of it.

With his degree in modern History and week spent folding towels at Selfridges. I'm sure the Nobel committee have him on their radar.

You're still wrong of course. Try to find an economist who goes along with the austerity measures... Krugman posits "overwhelming confirmation of the proposition that austerity has large negative impacts" Stiglitz says "Excessive austerity has had the predictable (and predicted) effect of inducing depressions and recessions" Bernanke has consistently said Austerity ain't no good "I don't think that sharp, immediate cuts in the deficit would create more jobs. I think in the short run that we're seeing already a certain amount of fiscal drag coming from state and local governments from the withdrawal of previous federal stimulus, so I think in the short run, you know, the fiscal tightening is at best neutral and probably somewhat negative for job creation." Peter Temin and David Vines have a new book where they recommend "putting austerity on hold (temporarily), expanding government spending and managing debt." There's countless examples. Can you come up with a credible expert who thinks your way?

I got to my seat as their goal was going in so missed "France Day". Was it any good?

I thought when I posted it, "hang on, what am I actually arguing here?" Considered editing but couldn't be arsed. Hung over and all over the shop here.

That throw was immense. Krul's never thrown a ball like that in all his years. I thought there were some dodgy clearances from him like, but very positive otherwise.

I thought that was the Tory view in a nutshell. We've been overspending and can't afford things like an NHS or Disability living allowance and they need to cut costs so we can pay the debts accrued on paying for them in the past.

The availability of secured credit to households rose significantly in the final three months of 2012 – setting a new high since the survey began in 2007. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/9777765/UK-banks-significantly-increase-lending-for-mortgages-and-business-says-Bank-of-England-credit-survey.html Not sure why someone who blames the public and their unaffordable levels of borrowing for the crash would want to get back to pre-crunch levels of lending, but there we are.

Very happy to see West Ham where they are in that form table too by the way. Upcoming fixtures for them are Spurs, Stoke (away) and Man U. I would be delighted to see them drop into the relegation mire.

Just another 3 points.

Despite both their sucker punch early goals I never thought victory was ever in doubt yesterday. Just the way Tiote and Sissoko were committing to everything filled me with belief. That was only improved when Colo was injured and we had a French international to replace him. Imagine the nerves that would have spread around the stadium like a virus if it was Williamson that came on. I wouldn't have envisioned 3 points in that scenario. That's what a good window like January does, and it didn't cost the world. Just what QPR spent on Samba. If only we'd done it in the summer.

The credit crunch still there? What does that even mean? What is still there are the banks and bankers and the lack of regulation our government and that of the US have allowed to ride roughshod over the economy. No prison for any of the criminal behaviour that led to the collapse.

Absolutely. Important to win. Not must win.

Not sure what you're referring to. "Japan is the world's largest creditor nation, generally running an annual trade surplus and having a considerable net international investment surplus. As of 2010, Japan possesses 13.7% of the world's private financial assets (the 2nd largest in the world) at an estimated $14.6 trillion."

Like Reading.... http://www.toontastic.net/board/topic/33861-newcastle-united-v-reading/#entry1161608 and Norwich before that... http://www.toontastic.net/board/topic/33841-norwich-newcastle/#entry1158354 Neither of which we got 3 points from and neither of which were particularly massive in the grand scheme of our season. If we lose today are we nailed on for relegation or summat? Are we bollocks. Am I the only one this over-hyping bugs?

Happy birthday CM

@accidentalP is possibly the funniest twitter account yet.

If you don't like the numbers, here's a less mathsy version.... http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/23/little-statesmen-and-philosophers/

Its hard because you ignore the evidence that economists have provided from the last 4 years. Here's some information... http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/23/austerity-europe-2/ Debate that. I know it seems anathema to spend your way to prosperity. Especially for anyone only taking a view from the headlines, who compares an economy to their household and doesn't delve any deeper. But if you can't get your head around the fact that is ultimately what has to happen, and has happened following previous collapses, then you're the blinkered one.