CSR and 'new jobs' - the question that dare not speak its name

Charlton_King

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Nonsense.

Spending is increasing every year of this parliament.

2011-12: £651 bn

2012-13: £665 bn

2013-14: £679 bn

2014-15: £693 bn

Natural attrition in the public sector is 300,000 a year, and they'll be reducing positions by 120,000 a year. They'll still need to hire 180,000 people a year.

And in the meantime, private sector employment is projected to increase by 2.6 million over the term of the parliament, and it looks like unemployment has well and truly peaked.



Todays spending review will succeed in rebalancing the economy towards the private sector away from the public sector, but all within an overall pattern of growth.

Squeeky bum time is limited to public sector non-jobbers and benefits claimants. Labours client state, in other words.

The rest of the country is going to do very well indeed over the next few years.

Dear Hamish

Engage brain before opening mouth. 'Spending' per se does not equate to growth or economic recovery. Economic growth in the UK now needs the Hubble Telescope to see it after today's fiasco. Spending on redundancy packages and dole queues, in particular, does very little in this regard.

Oh and do learn how to spell 'squeaky'. You're going to need it to describe your voice when, in four years time, you're still looking for those green shoots. My guess is they will be about as real as the ones you talk up every day in house prices.

Still, keep on eating those mushrooms, right?

Charlton_King

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Seriously interesting statistic.

And one which Alan Johnstone should have made more of in today's otherwise pretty good response. I'm sure he'll improve as he gets used to the job of facing down the odious Osborne.

The jobs, as the OP mentioned, are going to come from WHERE exactly?

No government defender on the thread has made any remote reply to this most serious of points, as far as I can see, and this is a case of: no jobs, no recovery, period.

Rochdale_Pioneers

Without those 2.5m jobs the entire budget falls flat on its face. No millions of new jobs, no big recovery in tax receipts, no cut benefits spending. We copy Ireland and cull so much growth potential from the economy that its stuck in at best stagflation

Wookster

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

We copy Ireland and cull so much growth potential from the economy that its stuck in at best stagflation

You have pointed out so many times that the UK is different to Ireland, that we are in a much better situation.

What gives now? I thought we were much better placed to cope?

Rochdale_Pioneers

Wookster wrote: »

You have pointed out so many times that the UK is different to Ireland, that we are in a much better situation.

What gives now? I thought we were much better placed to cope?

We are different. We have a bigger broader economy. We control and print the currency that our debts are issued in. We pay interest on those debts over long periods and to ourselves as the bulk of it is owned by UK pension funds.

But we're behaving the same way, and maths here is the same as in Ireland. Cut the number of people in jobs and spending and investment, and its very difficult for an economy to grow. Ireland was told to cut its deficit or the money markets wouldn't like it. It has done so and the money markets don;t like it - they have killed all prospects of recovery.

Unless the private sector can produce 70% more jobs than in the last boom in half the time, then we are screwed. The budget plan only works if 2.5m more people are in private sector jobs than today. If they're not then our tax receipts collapse and spending goes up.

For all the political sniping I am yet to hear any right wing commentator explain how the private sector is going to pull off this magic trick. Ultimately thats all that matters, political tot for tat is irrelevant.