Friday, 12 August 2011

Oh God! Not More. Please no more...

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2011/08/brian-binley-monetarism-and-this-weeks-low-growth-figures.html#comment-6a00d83451b31c69e2015390a4f112970b

My latest blogpost: Oh God! Not More. Please no more...Tweet this! Posted by Lola at 21:29

Labels:

9 comments:

View from the Solent said...

The intro was good, though.

12 August 2011 at 22:36
Steven_L said...

you're wasting your breathe with some of these people.

Over the last two days I've been revealing to people that a CDA71 arson charge carries a mandatory life sentence.

Out of an estimated 70 people only one knew this and he was a firefighter. About 20% were interested and 80% politely told me to f*** off.

13 August 2011 at 00:49
TheFatBigot said...

Major and Clarke got it right when things went tits-up in 1989. Interest rates were set reactively not presciptively, they reflected what the market demanded to flush out bad debts, let the loss lie where it fell, allow balance sheets to reflect reality and reward sound budgeting.

Now the unsustainable debt in the system is far greater but no one is being made to take a loss, instead we have a foolish MP suggest a further way in which debt can be hidden for a few more years. It's completely nuts.

Incidentally, arson carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment but it is not mandatory.

13 August 2011 at 01:19
Steven_L said...

S4 Criminal Damage Act 1971? If it has been ammended please let me know.

13 August 2011 at 02:26
TheFatBigot said...

No amendment as far as I am aware, but the wording is not mandatory.

I believe the wording is: "shall ... be liable to imprisonment for life" but the greater includes the lesser.

So, "liable to imprisonment for life" means "liable to imprisonment for any term the court considers just including, if justice so demands, life".

This is a common form of drafting in criminal statutes. A life term is only mandatory where a statute expressly states no other sentence is open to the court.

13 August 2011 at 03:53
Bozo said...

In international treaty terms, the word "shall" denotes "binding" (and thus by implication mandatory); the word "will" denotes voluntary and non-binding.

Is this different in domestic law?

13 August 2011 at 07:03
Mark Wadsworth said...

In statutes "shall" means "will" and "may" means "may". For sure "imprisonment for life" doesn't mean you'll never be released, separate issue.

The wording is:

"4 Punishment of offences.

(1) A person guilty of arson under section 1 above or of an offence under section 1(2) above (whether arson or not) shall on conviction on indictment be liable to imprisonment for life.

(2) A person guilty of any other offence under this Act shall on conviction on indictment be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years."

More sentencing hilarity here

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/arson_-_reckless/

13 August 2011 at 12:01
Mark Wadsworth said...

As a separate issue, Major and Clarke got it absolutely right, but this was just a brief period of "UK governments getting it right" following by another boom/bust.

13 August 2011 at 12:02
Charlie B. said...

All Con, Lib Dem and Labour policy is and has been: GDP has fallen, there has been reduced output, costs have risen, asset values have fallen. So we must use inflation and debt to prevent anyone from knowing this, keep unemployment down, and prevent mortgage foreclosure. Nobody must be any worse off. Then use every conceivable fiddle in the book to deal with the consequences, in the hope that some time people who are no worse off (they think) will resume normal spending and production and as output rises the debts will be able to be paid off. Somewhere in all this there are about 1000 errors and idiocies. It is almost impossible to talk sense oneself because not all can be addressed simultaneously.

14 August 2011 at 19:10

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)