UK Coalition Government Comprehensive Spending Review - Oct 20th 2010

PaulW1965

I've been dreading this day for at least 2 and a half years (when the credit crunch started) but that didn't seem to bad to me....:cool:

tomterm8

bendix wrote: »

Well, Osbourne has pulled of another great day, to surpass his initial emergency budget.

Very very impressed. Politically expedient - great stuff about bank levies, extra to find tax evasion, no more assistance to Russia or China, woven into some of the tougher messages.

Am a bit disapointed in it, I was hoping he would means test Disability Living Allowance, because it would have saved more than £7 billion and only affected people who are relatively wealthy anyway.

I am also not a fan of the bank levies, because I think despite the bashing on here it is important for the banks to be allowed to recapitalise.

I'll wait until the IFS review comes out to make my mind up.

There is very marginal difference between this headline figures announced and the headline figures labour announced before the election, which the Torys said were unworkable, and would cause a run on the pound / a soverign debt crises / general panic so I am a bit surprised.

carolt

Gosh, v little comment, considering its importance...

My only observation was that Osborne sound remarkably like the youth playing Pitt the Younger in Blackadder. That kept striking me as I listened, meaning that I'd then miss the next few sentences while I marvelled at this. Anyone else find this?

I liked the Equitable Life thing - way too late, but at least we are finally doing the decent thing.

ukcarper

Will these new jobs be anything like the ones lost or will they be part time shelf stacking?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

when we know 490k jobs are going, .

Just to put that into perspective, it's 120K a year, almost all of which can be achieved through natural attrition.

The government already loses 300K people a year to natural attrition.

They'll still be hiring 180K people a year.

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Just to put that into perspective, it's 120K a year, almost all of which can be achieved through natural attrition.

The government already loses 300K people a year to natural attrition.

They'll still be hiring 180K people a year.

I keep seeing this. "Natural wastage, people will retire".

But the crux is...normally, those jobs, through natural wastage, would be avaliable for someone else.

However, they won't now. So whichever way you put it, it puts the unemployed numbers up.

As people retire, people arrive at working age to take their place. That's how things have always happened, and will continue to do so.

It's 490k jobs gone, whether it's through natural wastage or retirement, as it's 490k less jobs than there would normally have been for those coming into the workforce.

Example: Say there are 35 million people wanting to work, or in work and currently 33 million work places.

At the end of 4 years, there will still be 35 million people wanting to work, or in work, and 32.5 million work places.

Whichever way you look at it, it's less people employed.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

So whichever way you put it, it puts the unemployed numbers up.
.

Not if the private sector continues to create jobs faster than the public sector reduces them.

The OBR forecast is for 2.6 million private sector jobs to be created over the term of this parliament.

Even if they miss that by a mile, unemployment will reduce markedly over the next few years.

I really thimk it's time for the doomers and housing bears to just give in. Bearmageddon has been averted. It's over.

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Not if the private sector continues to create jobs faster than the public sector reduces them.

The OBR forecast is for 2.6 million private sector jobs to be created over the term of this parliament.

Even if they miss that by a mile, unemployment will reduce markedly over the next few years.

I really thimk it's time for the doomers and housing bears to just give in. Bearmageddon has been averted. It's over.

Important word bolded.

Funny desperate waffle on the day of the biggest cuts since the end of world war 2 in in italics.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Important word bolded.

Funny desperate waffle on the day of the biggest cuts since the end of world war 2 in in italics.

Graham.....

The "cuts" were pathetic.

In fact, there were no cuts overall. The overall budget is actually increasing every year of this parliament, just by a bit less than what inflation is projected to be.

2011-12: £651 bn

2012-13: £665 bn

2013-14: £679 bn

2014-15: £693 bn

There is no doomfest coming, this has turned into yet another big damp squib for all the doomers.

This was the last great hope for the bears, and it was a spectacular failure for them.

It's over. Give in.

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Graham.....

The "cuts" were pathetic.

In fact, there were no cuts overall. The overall budget is actually increasing every year of this parliament, just by a bit less than what inflation is projected to be.

2011-12: £651 bn

2012-13: £665 bn

2013-14: £679 bn

2014-15: £693 bn

There is no doomfest coming, this has turned into yet another big damp squib for all the doomers.

This was the last great hope for the bears, and it was a spectacular failure for them.

It's over. Give in.

Oh, there wasn't any cuts?

Blimey. Thanks Hamish. Today must all have been a dream. How foolish do I look now talking of cuts!