60 Economists support delaying cuts.....

winged_avenger

Would these be the 60 economists that warned us all that we were going to enter a huge recession? To get the UKs sorry backside out of this horrendous mess that it is in, manufacturing needs to be ramped up by a huge amount. The elephant in the corner is China. Anyone who has visited China will realise that these guys mean serious business and how does anyone propose that we increase manufacturing when we are making expensive goods that there are finite markets for and said markets are being swamped by the Chinese?

It is about time that the Government and the public got real and looked at what is actually happening and what the competition (of which there is plenty) is up to rather than enduring the whine of that reptile Mandelson bleating that Steel Foundries are being mothballed to await the 'new', mythical purchaser.:p

Of course I am confident that the Government will back industry as much as they have backed the banks.:rotfl:

Kohoutek

Whatever everyone thinks of these economists, it's difficult to argue with the logic of this statement:

"Alistair Darling also surprised many analysts by forecasting that the UK Economy would grow by 1.25% in 2010 and 3.5% in 2011. However we need to consider the following in that 1.25% growth on the annual GDP of £1.2 trillion equates to growth of just £15 billion and for 2011; 3.5% growth equates to just £42 billion. Therefore the government is borrowing a net £175 billion for 2009 and £175 billion for 2010 to generate £15 billion of growth, and then a further £140 billion for 2011 for £42 billion of growth. Thus total net borrowing of £490 billion to grow the economy by just £67 billion, (£595 billion [in borrowing] my forecast)...."

The conclusion, which is obviously more debatable:

"This shows the magnitude of the scorched earth economic policy now implemented that literally aims to hand the next Conservative government a bankrupted economy that will be lumbered with the consequences of continuing huge budget deficits throughout the life time of the next parliament and therefore sow the seeds for a strong Labour victory at the 2014-2015 General Election."

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article10990.html

lemonjelly

moggylover wrote: »

If you truly believe that they did that alone and without the assistance of all those at the bottom who worked and skivvied and toiled and sweated to actually dig the coal, hew the rock, make the bricks and engineer the products that the rich got rich from then you are not only a blind fool but one not worth attempting to discuss the matter with.

Indeed, I consider it the fault of every blind right wing fool that spouts EXACTLY what the uber-rich wants them to believe without actually giving it deep and intelligent thought, that our Country is once again upon its knees despite the fact that vast majority do not want too much in return for their hard labour, and would be more than happy with a steady and solid life without the boom and bust that comes from the greed of those with too much money and far too few morals.

I have never seen slash and burn work in the UK! It was the method used in a recession by the Tories, and they sold EVERYTHING that was not theirs to sell, they neglected the schools, the hospitals and the roads that had been built not by the rich but by the taxes of those that work and the toil of those that actually get their hands dirty. The sold our social housing and neglected those properties that remained in council ownership and took the profits that many councils were making from their stock of council houses and refused to allow them to improve or repair the stock that they had.

By the time they were kicked out the infrastructure of the Country was near ruined and yet they had had unprecedented amounts of money coming into the coffers and the best use they could find for it was minor tax cuts which made little difference to the pockets of the masses (who were suffering the effects of huge numbers of unemployed and therefore rapidly reducing wage rates).


I had given a lot of thought this afternoon to how to abridge what is a complex explanation of the "ripple effect" in such a way as to make a post that did not take several pages! I fear I was wasting my time as your comments make it clear that your understanding of economics are limited and the ripple effect would not concern you so long as you felt that you were safe from its radius;)

If you would like to actually see the ripple effect still carrying on 30 years after the last and harshest part of the slash and burn then I suggest you take a weeks holiday in one of the Welsh valleys that remain destitute and depressed and tell them that slash and burn works! Look their kids in the eye and tell them that they are the acceptable collateral damage of keeping the rich in their castles in the air.

Absolutely first class analysis of events!

Wholly true too. Impacts/shockwave effects are still being experienced as we speak.

moggylover wrote: »

Well, the rich have got appreciably richer during the last 20 years or so! The mean average looks good as well, and certainly the higher paid jobs have got higher and the niche jobs for those tricky little IT workers skews the situation further!

However, the minimum wage equates to very little more in REAL terms than I could earn as a temporary waitress in the 70's:D I earned £1.75 an hour then for waitressing, when I moved to Wales 20 years ago I could get £4.00 an hour for the same job. Now I would get £5.80 for the same job! Yes those rates have risen, but in REAL terms they have not! During that time the flat I bought for £27,500 has gone up to £150K, the house I bought in Wales has gone from £42K to £195K and the rents have gone up in the same drastic fashion before we even come to the leap in rates that came about with the Poll Tax and remained following its demise!

The rich have definitely got VERY much richer, please do not kid yourself that this has "trickled down" very far! For the vast majority of the country some kind of benefits (paid for by the middle classes not the super rich btw) are necessary even to have a very basic standard of living and no amount of cheap imported electronic rubbish will make up for the lack of decent, well-paid jobs and the total lack of inward investment from the super-rich that marks the last 2 or 3 decades!

BTW, I can clearly remember Mrs T pontificating about how much more willing industry would be to invest in providing those jobs once the unions were broken. I have never been able to make my mind up whether she purposely lied or whether that comment was made from the depths of complete stupidity! Whichever, she has most definitely been proved wrong;)

Again absolutely spot on. The pre-existing rich have used this time frame to expand control of assets which they've had, & purchased much of the public sector on the cheap as it was privatised. These profit based companies have then steamrollered ahead with their focus being on profits brought in, paid to their shareholders, and reduced focus on infrastructure, product & quality of service.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Kohoutek wrote: »

Whatever everyone thinks of these economists, it's difficult to argue with the logic of this statement:

Difficult, but not impossible.....:D

AFAIK, the recession has cost the government 80 Billion a year in lost tax revenue.

The structural deficit is 180 billion per year.

If we can focus on growing the economy, and tax revenue, to pre recession levels, we avoid the need for 80 billion a year in cuts.

As the economy has only shrunk by around 6% in this recession, if we can grow by another 6% or 8% after that, whilst keeping spending frozen, we avoid the need for any cuts at all.

Kohoutek

moggylover wrote: »

I have never seen slash and burn work in the UK! It was the method used in a recession by the Tories, and they sold EVERYTHING that was not theirs to sell, they neglected the schools, the hospitals and the roads that had been built not by the rich but by the taxes of those that work and the toil of those that actually get their hands dirty. The sold our social housing and neglected those properties that remained in council ownership and took the profits that many councils were making from their stock of council houses and refused to allow them to improve or repair the stock that they had.

Have you ever seen spend/print your way out of a budget deficit work either? It didn't work for Argentina, it didn't work for Zimbabwe, why are we so special?

If you've been awake for the last 13 years, you'll have noticed that privatisation has continued under New Labour, not to mention PFI projects that will cost the taxpayer tens of billions. Labour has been enthusiastic about globalisation (i.e. the loss of tens of thousands of British jobs). We've become a more unequal society than under Thatcher's Britain as a result of this period.

Privatisation, deficit spending and a bubble economy built on expanding consumer debt is what created the 'prosperity' under New Labour, just like North Sea oil and the original round of privatisation made our terrible economy look good under Thatcher.

Labour has already laid out plans for slash and burn – local authorities are announcing thousands of job cuts, higher education budget cuts will cost 15,000 jobs. It's a reflection of the seriousness of our current situation – continuing to deficit spend £200 billion a year would be utterly insane.

Kohoutek

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Difficult, but not impossible.....:D

AFAIK, the recession has cost the government 80 Billion a year in lost tax revenue.

The structural deficit is 180 billion per year.

If we can focus on growing the economy, and tax revenue, to pre recession levels, we avoid the need for 80 billion a year in cuts.

As the economy has only shrunk by around 6% in this recession, if we can grow by another 6% or 8% after that, whilst keeping spending frozen, we avoid the need for any cuts at all.

But where's that growth going to come from, when 70% of the economy is based on services, taxes are soon going up, and consumers need to save more, not spend more? Last time I looked, our financial sector wasn't doing too well either.

I don't think manufacturing can take over as the engine of the economy for several years if it ever does.

peterg1965

StevieJ wrote: »

Are you another Tory lapdog

But of course, the Tories 'had' me from when I joined the Young Conservatives back in 1983

peterg1965

moggylover wrote: »

No I'm not. I am a socialist and Nu-labour have very, very little to do with socialism and just a slightly better formed conscience than the Tories;).

IF I were to be apologising (which I am not) it would be for the dreadful mess that monetarism has made of our economy: but then I always said it would because you really cannot allow a fat cat loose with a mouse and expect the mouse to survive;)

Perhaps the Union leaders and their 'brothers' would have made a better go of it then?

aelitaman

peterg1965 wrote: »

Perhaps the Union leaders and their 'brothers' would have made a better go of it then?

You mean all those union leaders that earn 300K per year and live in mansions.

ManAtHome

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Difficult, but not impossible.....:D

AFAIK, the recession has cost the government 80 Billion a year in lost tax revenue.

The structural deficit is 180 billion per year.

If we can focus on growing the economy, and tax revenue, to pre recession levels, we avoid the need for 80 billion a year in cuts.

As the economy has only shrunk by around 6% in this recession, if we can grow by another 6% or 8% after that, whilst keeping spending frozen, we avoid the need for any cuts at all.

Apart from having to pay the interest bill which the Treasury have estimated at 40-60 billion a year for the next 3 or 4 years.