George Osborne's speech.
Discussion
DJRC said:
No its not. Its going to depend entirely and utterly on the global economy, not on Britain's individual economy as we are locked into it. The neccessary cuts can only come when the economy is moving again because only then can come breathing space needed. You make anything like the cuts you are advocating now and you will rip Britain to shreds. This isnt a political ideology thing, this is just brute reality. Politics is the art of what is and is not possible, not what you want or wish for or what you think is right. What you are advocating at the moment is simply not possible. Not right or wrong, desirable or advantageous, it is simply not possible and retain a functioning coherent country.
Not to mention that the picture is never as dark as it seems nor ever as sunny as it seems.
Bang on, it's disturbing to note that for the first 5 quarters of the coalition our economy grew, as it takes time for policies to feed through to data it can sensibly be aassumed that this was a result of Darling's policies to stimulate growth, in Q6 we saw a contraction as the coalition policy policy started to bite. Whatever people's political persuasions, it has to be recognised that cuts alone will not get us out of the sh*t and there has to some sort of meaningful strategy to get us moving (in line with cuts), at the moment the coalition looks clueless and there was no crumb of comfort yesterday.Not to mention that the picture is never as dark as it seems nor ever as sunny as it seems.
DJRC said:
No its not. Its going to depend entirely and utterly on the global economy, not on Britain's individual economy as we are locked into it. The neccessary cuts can only come when the economy is moving again because only then can come breathing space needed. You make anything like the cuts you are advocating now and you will rip Britain to shreds. This isnt a political ideology thing, this is just brute reality. Politics is the art of what is and is not possible, not what you want or wish for or what you think is right. What you are advocating at the moment is simply not possible. Not right or wrong, desirable or advantageous, it is simply not possible and retain a functioning coherent country.
Not to mention that the picture is never as dark as it seems nor ever as sunny as it seems.
So you really think the coalition are cutting back as far as politically possible? I agree if we just scrapped pensions tomorrow it would be unpopular, and rightly so, but I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about scrapping some useless departments, cutting foreign aid to zero etc.Not to mention that the picture is never as dark as it seems nor ever as sunny as it seems.
We're facing a budget deficit of £126bn next year according to some forecasts. That's just insance. It's nearly 8% of GDP. Even if it isn't politically possible, it's just financially impossible to sustain this for another 5 years with a flat lining economy.
What would really happen if the Department of Culture, Media and Sports was closed down tomorrow? What would we be missing? Would there really be riots in the streets? That's "only" £1.4 bn, but so long as we have these departments sucking up resources, I can't see that they are making adequate cuts.
RichardD said:
Blue62 said:
... growth...
To stir it up a bit. Growth can be achieved by printing money and giving it to people to buy shiny things from China because then GDP can go up 
.But how sustainable and the consequence for the currency.... is another matter!
It's all very well to get "growth" in GDP numbers this year but it's not the same as getting lasting, contributing growth of productive, private sector economic activity.
It would actually be healthier for the economy as a whole to contract if the private sector was still growing, and this won't happen so long as it's lumbered with crippling taxes.
RichardD said:
o stir it up a bit. Growth can be achieved by printing money and giving it to people to buy shiny things from China because then GDP can go up .
But how sustainable and the consequence for the currency.... is another matter!
Quantatitive easing aint the answer, I think that's been proved, as has the fact that Mervyn King is pretty incapable, failed to spot two recessions and missed the LIBOR scandal, wrong man for the job. If we're going to keep cutting we've got to find a way to invest in creating meaningful jobs and attract investment from overseas..But how sustainable and the consequence for the currency.... is another matter!
AJS- said:
DJRC said:
No its not. Its going to depend entirely and utterly on the global economy, not on Britain's individual economy as we are locked into it. The neccessary cuts can only come when the economy is moving again because only then can come breathing space needed. You make anything like the cuts you are advocating now and you will rip Britain to shreds. This isnt a political ideology thing, this is just brute reality. Politics is the art of what is and is not possible, not what you want or wish for or what you think is right. What you are advocating at the moment is simply not possible. Not right or wrong, desirable or advantageous, it is simply not possible and retain a functioning coherent country.
Not to mention that the picture is never as dark as it seems nor ever as sunny as it seems.
So you really think the coalition are cutting back as far as politically possible? I agree if we just scrapped pensions tomorrow it would be unpopular, and rightly so, but I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about scrapping some useless departments, cutting foreign aid to zero etc.Not to mention that the picture is never as dark as it seems nor ever as sunny as it seems.
We're facing a budget deficit of £126bn next year according to some forecasts. That's just insance. It's nearly 8% of GDP. Even if it isn't politically possible, it's just financially impossible to sustain this for another 5 years with a flat lining economy.
What would really happen if the Department of Culture, Media and Sports was closed down tomorrow? What would we be missing? Would there really be riots in the streets? That's "only" £1.4 bn, but so long as we have these departments sucking up resources, I can't see that they are making adequate cuts.
DJRC said:
You mean the dept responsibly for allocating the funding out to Britain's cultural institutions and sporting institutions? Take a minute to think about that one.
No, I mean the government department responsible for donating some of the funding to some of these institutions. We had cluture, media and sport long before we had a massive state directed bureaucracy to give it money.Talk to anyone inside HMRC and a huge inefficiency stares us in the face on EVERY payslip; PAYE here, NI there, this, that the other allowance/credit etc.
Rationalise tax and rationalise HMRC. It is a hugely inefficient and siloed organisation. Reduce the complexity of tax and you can, in a sweep, reduce the complexity of the collectors, as well as providing huge administrative savings for business.
Rationalise tax and rationalise HMRC. It is a hugely inefficient and siloed organisation. Reduce the complexity of tax and you can, in a sweep, reduce the complexity of the collectors, as well as providing huge administrative savings for business.
Capitalism eh... tsk.
Money is a means of exchange, it's a method of storing value and quality.
It has no inherent value in and of itself.
Printing more money does not devalue anything, it merely creates more means of storing the value within our culture, and this can only be a good thing.
Modern politics greatest trick (al la the devil) was convincing people it didn't exists. Both labour and tories colluded to do this.
The conservative partys raison d'etre is to support the ideology of limiting the supply of money, money being defined above. By limiting and reducing the amount of money in society you allow money to gain value in and of itself due to the necessary truth of supply and demand. It ceases to become a medium of storing and exchanging value and begins to hold value itself.
This leads to the situation where power and influence follow money, it's obvious.
What you have to ask yourself is - is that what you want?
Money is a means of exchange, it's a method of storing value and quality.
It has no inherent value in and of itself.
Printing more money does not devalue anything, it merely creates more means of storing the value within our culture, and this can only be a good thing.
Modern politics greatest trick (al la the devil) was convincing people it didn't exists. Both labour and tories colluded to do this.
The conservative partys raison d'etre is to support the ideology of limiting the supply of money, money being defined above. By limiting and reducing the amount of money in society you allow money to gain value in and of itself due to the necessary truth of supply and demand. It ceases to become a medium of storing and exchanging value and begins to hold value itself.
This leads to the situation where power and influence follow money, it's obvious.
What you have to ask yourself is - is that what you want?
Blue62 said:
Quantatitive easing aint the answer, I think that's been proved, as has the fact that Mervyn King is pretty incapable, failed to spot two recessions and missed the LIBOR scandal, wrong man for the job. If we're going to keep cutting we've got to find a way to invest in creating meaningful jobs and attract investment from overseas.
While I wasn't exactly serious and was instead highlighting the daftness of this "growth" (the numbers must get bigger) thing, destroying the currency to reduce the affordability of imports and improve competitiveness of exports is one option. QE is only the gubberment borrowing money from itself instead of investors and so reducing the interest burden a bit.If you wanted someone to stop said bubble a German or Chinese person should have had the job at the BofE ! As am sure Tonker would enjoy explaining, how independant really are they and how much can they be influenced by short termist election cycle politicians...?
How about smartphone assembly in the UK? It could be do-able at £2 per hour, we just need to sort cheap accomodation. A pack of noodles from Aldi is 18p so there should be no problem with the workers being able to feed themselves
What we need is small Govt.
However, this is something that cannot be achieved in five minutes because of the massive juggernaught created by Blair and Brown. It would also be political suicide for the Coalition - perhaps. It may be too late to get shot of all the useless Public Sector in time to save the economy before the next election, but it is something that should have happened on day 1 of the Coalition.
However, this is something that cannot be achieved in five minutes because of the massive juggernaught created by Blair and Brown. It would also be political suicide for the Coalition - perhaps. It may be too late to get shot of all the useless Public Sector in time to save the economy before the next election, but it is something that should have happened on day 1 of the Coalition.
AJS- said:
mattnunn said:
Printing more money does not devalue anything, it merely creates more means of storing the value within our culture, and this can only be a good thing.
Well that's easy then, let's just print everyone millions, then we can all drive Ferraris and retire to the Alps.It will.
Inflation is also called growth.
Hyperinflation is a disaster but controlled inflation is growth.
Printing more money is controlled growth.
Tyre Smoke said:
However, this is something that cannot be achieved in five minutes because of the massive juggernaught created by Blair and Brown...
I think, prehaps, we're deep enough into the s
t to ditch the party politics here. Watch "Yes Minister" and tell me, even back then, that the tail of Whitehall wasn't wagging the government dog.anonymous said:
[redacted]
We are all in this together! You voted for Dave so stop mbeing so greedy,anyone would think your losing faith! You got it to spare & George wants it simple...Oh & don't forget your sub's to Dave or George will will have to send Mitchell & pickles round to have a word in your shell like ...Digga said:
Tyre Smoke said:
However, this is something that cannot be achieved in five minutes because of the massive juggernaught created by Blair and Brown...
I think, prehaps, we're deep enough into the st to ditch the party politics here. Watch "Yes Minister" and tell me, even back then, that the tail of Whitehall wasn't wagging the government dog.groak said:
AJS- said:
Well that's easy then, let's just print everyone millions, then we can all drive Ferraris and retire to the Alps.
NOW you're talking! I see you've a PhD in groakanomics!ralphrj said:
markcoznottz said:
especially when tax receipts are tanking like now.
Exactly how are they "tanking"?Central Government Current Receipts:
2009-10 £476.1bn
2010-11 £511.2bn
2011-12 £532.8bn
The first 5 months of this year are up on last year.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff