Jeremy Warner on the Budget

MS1950

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Infact, it's a bloody good read. Especially the bit about how we racked up debt in the 10 years pre crisis, and how the mirage of low public sector debt was just that....as as soon as it went wrong, the private sector crumbled, instantly leaning on the public sector.

Interesting comment on the Warner article on the Telegraph's webpage:

"Lulled into a false sense of riches by the unsustainable tax revenues of the credit boom, government spending had been rising faster than in any other advanced economy"


Between 1997 and 2007 Government spending as a share of GDP rose from 37.6% to 38.6% - a 1% rise, and a lower percentage than most of the Thatcher years (chart is here: http://www.ukpublicspending.co.... So this idea that the (last) Government had been overspending isn't supported by the evidence. I'd be grateful to hear the author's views on this.

grizzly1911

Wookster wrote: »

Housing would be easily rent-able or salable into the private sector and I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to make a profit on it with a bit of nous!

I suspect it would pay for itself in rather a short time.

Why would it be necessary to sell it into the private sector?

Thrugelmir

MS1950 wrote: »

Between 1997 and 2007 Government spending as a share of GDP rose from 37.6% to 38.6% - a 1% rise, and a lower percentage than most of the Thatcher years (chart is here: http://www.ukpublicspending.co.... So this idea that the (last) Government had been overspending isn't supported by the evidence. I'd be grateful to hear the author's views on this.

GDP includes Government spend. By 2010 50% of the workforce were effectively (more if outsourcing is included) employed by the Government. So like the welfare system. Those actually creating wealth and paying real taxes became a smaller and smaller %. As soon as the UK private sector caught a cold. There wasn't the capacity to fund committed spend.

Like the banking sector. If the Governments accounts for the past 15 years were now restated. To reflect true activity with the credit boom excluded. They wouldn't look so positive.

MS1950

Thrugelmir wrote: »

By 2010 50% of the workforce were effectively (more if outsourcing is included) employed by the Government.

Well, according to the ONS Labour Market Statistics for December 2010:

In September 2010 Public Sector employment was 6.014 million 20.6% of all employment (having increased from 5.803 million 19.8% since September 2008) and Private Sector employment was 23.111 million 79.4% of all employment (having decreased from 23.548 million 80.2% since September 2008)
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/lms-december-2010/index.html

Unless you have some source for your claim?

angrypirate

MS1950 wrote: »

Well, according to the ONS Labour Market Statistics for December 2010:

In September 2010 Public Sector employment was 6.014 million 20.6% of all employment (having increased from 5.803 million 19.8% since September 2008) and Private Sector employment was 23.111 million 79.4% of all employment (having decreased from 23.548 million 80.2% since September 2008)
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/lms-december-2010/index.html

Unless you have some source for your claim?

That the joy of outsourcing and contracts. Public sector work done by private company's. You think your binman is a public sector employee? Wrong - hes employed by a private company who have a contract with the council. He's doing public sector work for public sector money but hes a private sector employee.

MS1950

angrypirate wrote: »

That the joy of outsourcing and contracts. Public sector work done by private company's. You think your binman is a public sector employee? Wrong - hes employed by a private company who have a contract with the council. He's doing public sector work for public sector money but hes a private sector employee.

So you (and Thrugelmir) seriously believe (without citing any evidence) that outsourcing by the public sector mean that the official ONS figures wrongly assign more than 30% of the overall workforce to the private sector when they should be counted as in the public sector?

No wonder many commentators think that the OBR's estimate of the multiplier effect of public sector cuts seriously underestimates their impact on GDP and growth!!

Thrugelmir

MS1950 wrote: »

So you (and Thrugelmir) seriously believe (without citing any evidence) that outsourcing by the public sector mean that the official ONS figures wrongly assign more than 30% of the overall workforce to the private sector when they should be counted as in the public sector?

An example.

How many employees in a major hospital are now employed directly by the NHS and how many are provided under service contracts from Carillion plc?

MS1950

Thrugelmir wrote: »

An example.

How many employees in a major hospital are now employed directly by the NHS and how many are provided under service contracts from Carillion plc?

You confidently asserted earlier in this thread that:

"By 2010 50% of the workforce were effectively (more if outsourcing is included) employed by the Government";

(presumably somewhat more than 50% if we include the type of outsourcing that you're now claiming as an example?)

The ONS figures show nothing of the kind - as I cited above the breakdown in September 2010 was roughly 20% of the workforce in the public sector and 80% in the private sector.

As I asked above - no matter how many supposed 'examples' (without actual figures) you come up with - do you really believe that an additional 30% of the overall workforce (the difference between the ONS figure of 20% and your claim of 50%+) - an extra 9 million people - can be accounted for (through outsourcing, the bailed out banks or whatever) as 'effectively employed by the Government'?