Austerity - when will it start?

[VX Foxy]

Inspired by this thread:

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

I'm not sure it's even started...all we have seen is desperate political posturing.


Edit: typo

Edited by VX Foxy on Tuesday 28th February 20:37

[MG-FIDO]

I think you're right, I don't think many of the cuts have reached fruition yet and anyone predicting a speedy end to hard times will have to wait a little longer yet!

[Happy82]

MG-FIDO said:

I think you're right, I don't think many of the cuts have reached fruition yet and anyone predicting a speedy end to hard times will have to wait a little longer yet!

I was under the impression that we've not had any cuts, just a reduction in how much extra we were going to spend?

[jules_s]

VX Foxy said:

Inspired by this thread:
I'm not sure it's even started...all we have see is desperated political posturing.

They're all flim flamming about because the conservatives know the st is going to hit the fan before the next election.

The cuts are barely noticeable because budgets set in 2009/2010 are just being expended.

The budgets set in 2011 and this year are nigh on non existent; and let's not fool ourselves here...this isn't money being squandered in LA red tape being cut. It's central Gov money being withdrawn from LA's that was fed to local business.

[don4l]

Happy82 said:

I was under the impression that we've not had any cuts, just a reduction in how much extra we were going to spend?

We have seen a slight reduction in the amount that Labour said that they were planning to spend. In reality, this government is probably spending more Labour would be spending if they had won the election.

The reason for this paradox is that if Labour had won, then the markets would have put up the interest rates on UK GILTS.


The markets have more confidence in the Conservatives, therefore the Conservatives are able to borrow more. Because the current government has very few true Conservatives in it, they are borrowing more - more than Labour would have been able to.

I wouldn't mind so much if they were investing it in our future, but they are not. They are giving it away to countries who don't want, or need it. They are wasting it on useless windmills.

Meanwhile, we are heading for power shortages.


Don
--

Edited by don4l on Tuesday 28th February 12:15

[cymtriks]

jules_s said:

The budgets set in 2011 and this year are nigh on non existent...

What portion of their income are they losing?

[AJS-]

It will start properly when circumstances force their hand.

We could probably rumble on like this for a few more years, but sooner or later something will crop up that knocks the whole house of cards down. It could be an oil shock, a major event like a terrorist attack or practically anything that has a sudden and dramatic negative effect on economic activity that will send tax receipts down, spending demands up and our viability as a borrower falls through the floor. There will simply be nothing left, and bills will go unpaid.

As for who gets paid first - pensioners, veterans, dole scroungers or banks, my guess would be the banks.

[RichardD]

I don't think this country will see true austerity, there will just be more Q.E. in order to fund gubberment spending .....

[bigdog3]

RichardD said:

I don't think this country will see true austerity, there will just be more Q.E. in order to fund gubberment spending .....

Quantitative Easing is the politically correct term for Printing Money. Effective mechanism in the short term but unsustainable, and leads to huge problems like hyper-inflation and even political instability. Weimar Republic was guilty of massive QE, fixed only by rise of the Third Reich

[jules_s]

cymtriks said:

What portion of their income are they losing?

Somewhere between 90% and 100%

[EDLT]

Is this going to be the British version of the "The Euro will collapse tomorrow" thread?

[jules_s]

EDLT said:

Is this going to be the British version of the "The Euro will collapse tomorrow" thread?

Lets hope not.

To me this thread is a viewpoint which indicates that the general public don't really 'get' public spending...how the cycles work and how the cuts will impact on the private sector in the near future when historic budgets are spent.

I met three Private sector directors on Monday, and after some pleasantaries they asked (somewhat anxiously) when the next job would be offered on a PQQ

The answer was 'there are none'

Their reaction didn't seem too happy and that was from the head of the construction industry food chain. I bet their subbies are well over joyed at work prospects.

[cymtriks]

jules_s said:

cymtriks said:

What portion of their income are they losing?

Somewhere between 90% and 100%

Is this:

• a joke
• the total ammount of state money that is being withdrawn (sounds extremely unlikely!)
• the ammount being withdrawn for specific activities (sounds more likely if it isn't a joke)

[jules_s]

cymtriks said:

jules_s said:

cymtriks said:

What portion of their income are they losing?

Somewhere between 90% and 100%

Is this:

• a joke
• the total ammount of state money that is being withdrawn (sounds extremely unlikely!)
• the ammount being withdrawn for specific activities (sounds more likely if it isn't a joke)

Think/post what you want.

It's not a joke, that's the budget cuts.

Oh and it's not ammount...the capital expenditure here has gone down 95%

Amount

[TheEnd]

Private sector = Recession
Public Sector = Austerity measures

[bigdog3]

jules_s said:

The budgets set in 2011 and this year are nigh on non existent...

WTF ???


Total Public Spending UK
2009 £621.5 billion
2010 £660.6 billion
2011 £683.4 billion
2012 £703.4 billion
2013 £722.2 billion
2014 £740.3 billion
2015 £760.5 billion

source: http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/total_spending_2...

[iphonedyou]

bigdog3 said:

WTF ???


Total Public Spending UK
2009 £621.5 billion
2010 £660.6 billion
2011 £683.4 billion
2012 £703.4 billion
2013 £722.2 billion
2014 £740.3 billion
2015 £760.5 billion

source: http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/total_spending_2...

You think you're clever, do you? Coming in here up on your high horse and quoting facts and figures!? If it's not FUD it's not worth posting, pal!

[cymtriks]

jules_s said:

Think/post what you want.

It's not a joke, that's the budget cuts.

the capital expenditure here has gone down 95%

This doesn't look right in the context of the figures of billions increase posted above.

All I'm after is a true value for the "cuts", just stating 95% when total expenditure increases by billions, as posted above, does make your claim look a bit suspect.

So, I repeat, what, if anything, is being cut by your claimed very big percentage?

[pilchardthecat]

cymtriks said:

jules_s said:

Think/post what you want.

It's not a joke, that's the budget cuts.

the capital expenditure here has gone down 95%

This doesn't look right in the context of the figures of billions increase posted above.

All I'm after is a true value for the "cuts", just stating 95% when total expenditure increases by billions, as posted above, does make your claim look a bit suspect.

So, I repeat, what, if anything, is being cut by your claimed very big percentage?

There are some big cuts to service budgets coming in local authorities (for example). But this is mainly because the authorities have chosen to cut services whilst increasing or maintaining their own pay and conditions and vast pension funds. If you want to know where the answer to your "total spend going up/service budgets going down" question is, look no further

[bigdog3]

iphonedyou said:

You think you're clever, do you? Coming in here up on your high horse and quoting facts and figures!? If it's not FUD it's not worth posting, pal!

LMFAO