60 Economists support delaying cuts.....

jetta_wales

I think sharp slashing cuts right now would be bad but there's no reason why they can't make a gentle start even if it was just 2 or 3% here and there it would at least have a small affect on how much worse things get before they get better.

But no Brown cares more about votes than what's actualy best for the country in my opinion.

Also since we're all tightening our belts already why wait untill we're all doing better to just kick us in the guts again with taxes and spending cuts? Make a gradual start now while we're still used to it.

HammerSmashedFace

It's a catch 22, cut now and things will be bad, cut later and things don't turn bad straight away but when they do, it will be worse. The 'can' will continue to be kicked further down the road until it cannot be kicked anymore.

At this point we will see the true scale of the hole we are in.

JP45

It seems perfectly sensible to argue that the extent and timing of public spending cuts should be dependent on the state of the economy.

The problem is that there seems to me little immediate prospect of the economy recovering (in any meaningful sense). Until recently, many commentators had been pinning their hopes on an export-led recovery, but as the editorial in the FT points out:

At a time when most of the world wants to export its way out of trouble, who is going to buy all those British goods?

blueboy43

I'd tend to agree with the second bunch - however what remains unsaid is that I just can't see Gordon Brown having the political capital or will to make the cuts that are required.

I can't see how at least some of the cuts won't affect the "deserving poor" that he genuinely has tried to help. Too many of his pet projects need scrapping or severe cut backs.

I also find it impossible to believe that there won't need to be at least some cuts to both health and education.

lostinrates

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

There's been much talk on this board of late that most economists support deep cuts immediately, after the letter by 20 of them last week. Clearly, that is false.

Clearly, it remains unclear! There must be more than 80 economists in the country?

lemonjelly

Couple of things,

firstly, I find it quite suprising that the current government have been pillioried throughout this downturn, with a borderline witch hunt on Brown & Darling.
Now I am not of any 1 particular political persuasion, however some of what has gone on is borderline shameful. In general, when the crunch first became apparent, the main viable option for major economies that was generally agreed to be viable, was put forward by the UK (ie Brown). World leaders heralded his understanding of the situation & plans. Everyone else went off & implimented his idea.

In the UK, the media, tory party etc tried to score points & delayed the implimentation of the plan, thus reducing its effectiveness, & also prolonging the misery for many. Well done them!

We've had various individuals over the past year or so saying we need to do this or that, but whatever it is, it must be severe.

We now have quite a collective of emminent experts, generally agreeing with the current policy of the government, who are saying "lets do this gradually & carefully".

Now, am I more likely to have faith in some pillock from the sun, or worse, the mail, or a large group of people who have dedicated the majority of their lives to studying economics...

Second point. It is unarguable that severe action, & cutting vast swathes of jobs from any sector would absolutely have a massive impact on the economy, & therefore the lives of most of us. The thing is, would this sudden action be beneficial, or not? My feling is it wouldn't.

First, local authorities are already making large scale cuts - birmingham, 2000 minimum, nottingham have announced another 1000 on top of over 500 already. I'm sure many other councils are doing the same.
Second, in times of hardship, it is the statutory sector which is relied upon by so many. The jobcentres will be needed. The homeless service will be required. More people will require access to benefits. As more people have no money, for days out they're going to be using local parks, art galleries etc, cos they're free!
Third, the loss of tax income from all these cuts, added to the short term cost of redundancy payments & the additional cost of benefits payable to thos out of work would be an additional drain on the public purse in the short term. I feel this would create additional hardship, for the vast majority.

If you have a patient, who is very weak, vulnerable, and the slightest little thing would cause major ripples or even extermination, you should not go ahead & do anything which is likely to cause the patient to go into shock, as that would kill them. Simple as...

Any change has to be gradual. Placing large impact policies into place now could cause massive rammifications in the same way as was seen in places like Argentina, Chile, Bolivia and the like in the 70's & 80's where the political powers decided that they were really gonna affect the economy. Sure enough they did, but the cost was absolutely massive, & the vast majority, as well as the countries in question ended up worse off.

chucky

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

More than 60 senior economists have signed two open letters that back the chancellor's decision to delay government spending cuts until 2011.

sorry to disappoint Hamish but i'd rather take notice of the froth spouted by the armchair economists on this forum - their soundbites are much more dramatic and make less sense :eek:

Conrad

For the first time I won't be voting Tory. Time and again Osborne has shown himself to be very limited. On the run up to QE he was argueing for the opposite.

abaxas

I'll rephrase.

"More than 60 senior economists have signed two open letters that back the chancellor's decision to not cut their funding until 2011."

FATBALLZ

What we need is something in between what the two parties offer, we need more serious cuts than Labour will give us, as they rely on public sector unions to keep them going financially so will only make token cuts, and less drastic cuts than the tories will give us.

Pain free savings like increasing the retirement age is a good place to start.