Postpone some of the cuts?

shortchanged_2

Thrugelmir wrote: »

When you reach a bend when driving your car. What do you do? Steer accordingly.

If only it was simple to map out how the UK economy is going to be turned round over the next 10 years at the outset.

The problem is though Thrugelmir is it looks like the tories are heading for that bend with blindfolds on.

They appear unwilling to adapt if they need to. Unfortunately it's all about face saving now and not wanting to appear that they have made some poor calls.

ILW

I still cannot see how throwing more and more money at a non productive public sector can do anything but get the country deeper into debt.

Wheezy_2

Thrugelmir wrote: »

When you reach a bend when driving your car. What do you do? Steer accordingly.

Assuming your car will stay on the road after steering, that is the correct thing to do, yes.

When Labour states it wouldn't cut so sharply so soon, I hear some on here saying "Where is the money gonna come from??"
Well, I ask you the same: When Conservative policy results in dwindling tax revenue and increasing social security payouts...where is the money gonna come from then?

Mr_Mumble

Postpone some of the cuts?
That is what the well regarded NIESR thinks

That's not what the press release says.

Any "case" (what they actually say) for postponing some 'cuts' is based on the ever-dodgy output gap that the BoE admit to have totally misjudged prior to the recession.

The report does say:"In the longer term, however, the government should set itself a more ambitious target of running sustained surpluses to prepare for the cost of population ageing."

The NIESR saying we can spend more now because of low interest rates is bizarre. It's the reigning in of more spending that has led to lower borrowing costs!

Britain is currently paying 1.5% less than Germany, US & Japan for 10 year borrowing based on current inflation rates*. There is an assumption in the market that inflation will come down over the next decade and Britain will not continue spending at such a crazy rate. Any foolhardy change in government policy will dramatically change our creditworthiness.The cost of borrowing is projected to rise from £30bn last year to £64bn by the end of this parliament. How high should the debt bill become before Labour supporters stop their support for rampant spending?

*bottom chart from Nomura in this ftalphaville post.

Losing_the_way

PasturesNew wrote: »

They should set the retirement age at: "60 years of age with 30 years of working completed -or- 70". So between 60 and 70 you retire once you've done 30 years of full-time work.

As most positions being created today are part-time, when then can this present generation expect to retire ?

Thrugelmir

shortchanged wrote: »

The problem is though Thrugelmir is it looks like the tories are heading for that bend with blindfolds on.

They appear unwilling to adapt if they need to. Unfortunately it's all about face saving now and not wanting to appear that they have made some poor calls.

Which bend are you referring to ?

We've been round a few already, with measures such as low base rate and QE. This has merely deferred the pain not cured the cause.

ILW

Wheezy wrote: »

Assuming your car will stay on the road after steering, that is the correct thing to do, yes.

When Labour states it wouldn't cut so sharply so soon, I hear some on here saying "Where is the money gonna come from??"
Well, I ask you the same: When Conservative policy results in dwindling tax revenue and increasing social security payouts...where is the money gonna come from then?

Why will cutting public spending decrease net tax revenues?

shortchanged_2

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Which bend are you referring to ?

We've been round a few already, with measures such as low base rate and QE. This has merely deferred the pain not cured the cause.

The tories seem a little growth averse to me.

Losing_the_way

Borrowing is accelerating at the moment due to the spending set out in the last few months of the last government. Rapidly the country is moving to a point where the interest on the national debt will need an unacceptable amount of the tax take to service it. Those that argue as to when the cuts should come in need to start thinking of how deep their cuts will have to be as opposed to if they start earlier. If cutting earlier means we can save some of the welfare state then sadly that is a price that I for one am willing to bear.

Thrugelmir

Losing_the_way wrote: »

Those that argue as to when the cuts should come in need to start thinking of how deep their cuts will have to be as opposed to if they start earlier.

Or taking the Labour view. Over an extended period of time i.e. 10 years.

Easy to say 10 years as few people think beyond their next pay day.

Ultimately is a zero number game. However we get there.