The Autumn Spending Review

[Caged]

We've done very well compared to other European countries (didn't one county create more jobs than France at some point?) and have low unemployment, zero inflation, a growing economy, increasing wages.. sounds like things are working out fine (not perfect but nothing is of course). Whether or not we'd done better by borrowing more first or not we'll never know. Having a bloated public sector (which Labour gave us and is being reduced to what is affordable at present), like other failing Euro countries doesn't seem to work out well for them.

I'm not going to argue that the public sector didn't have some fat that could be trimmed away because frankly every organisation that has ever existed has inefficiencies, but when it results in services being reduced then surely that's too far? If you want to debate what is and isn't the responsibility of the state then go ahead, but slashing local authority budgets and forcing them to decide what to keep isn't helpful either in the short or long term.

Currently the approach has been to provide less funding, force councils to make choices themselves, and then point at those councils for being bad with money when people start complaining that services are getting worse.

 

[Danthus]

This is another one I'm sick of people peddling around. Given no party is going to even bring the deficit into line until 2020 at least (and labour didnt want to even promise to do that) We are going to keep borrowing more and more until that balance is reached - only then will the amount of debt start to reduce

So whoever got into powere would have fallen to that daft comment about the debt increasing

Try and think for yourself and and not what you hear or read in forums and tabloids

Was what I said factually incorrect?

 

[jimjamuk]

Economic recovery.

The UK for example, is a very similar economy to the US. Both the Federal Reserve and Treasury responded in similar ways. The US however, have recovered much faster than the UK and continue to do so.

The Bank of England themselves think that this is due to a difference in investment and consumption behaviour.

Reduced investment and consumption behaviour is directly correlated to the austerity myth which the Tories have been pedalling.

You cant just say the UK is like the US and they grew faster based on that - economics is black art at best with hundreds of factors. Just accept that no one knows what would have happened if x decision was taken. Suddenly every tom, dick and harry can have an opinion that cant be proved wrong if they shout it loud and long enough.....

 

[jimjamuk]

Was what I said factually incorrect?

No but its the rubbish I read on all of these types or arguments from one particular side. I wasnt possible for anyone to bring down the debt so its not an argument for or against austerity

 

[V F]

So let's continue to pay overpriced rental costs chartering commercial widebody jets then?

He's not getting Air Force One - he's getting an RAF A330 which, when not in use for air tanker duties, can double as official transport.

I was being sarcastic. I know it is a re-kitted out plane.

You need a new car - whats cheaper - renting a Focus from Hertz every single time you need to drive somewhere or taking out a 3 year lease on something? Short term spot hire is expensive - this solution gives arguably a more appropriate form of transport with lower long term costs.

You're paying for it yourself. Politicians abuse and squander your money no matter what it is.

 

[Danthus]

No but its the rubbish I read on all of these types or arguments from one particular side. I wasnt possible for anyone to bring down the debt so its not an argument for or against austerity

Osborne said he would.

 

[Caged]

And what the people voted for, let's not forget...

But let's also not forget that this isn't true austerity - talk to the Greek people if you want to know what that is.

Do you have a better word for it than austerity? All parties seem to agree on the phrasing, economists agree as well. You can argue that it's not as severe as other implementations of austerity but that doesn't make it somehow not-austerity.

 

[Caged]

I'm not sure "it could be worse" is the answer people are looking for

 

[Slam62]

The debt is higher now then when Osborne became Chancellor.

Oh do come on, its only gone from 450bn to 1.5trn in 5 years, good job they're paying down the debt.

 

[jimjamuk]

Osborne said he would.

A quick google suggests that in the first parliament of the coalition the amount we would have to borrow this year (debt) 2015 in their budget was 37B so debt would still be increasing now.

 

[jimjamuk]

Oh do come on, its only gone from 450bn to 1.5trn in 5 years, good job they're paying down the debt.

deficit not debt - read ^^^ nobody starts to pay off that debt for a few years yet

and in 2010 the debt was at least 900Bn

 

[Caged]

Debt was always going to increase. His original promise was that his spending cuts would remove the deficit by the end of the parliament, a task which he miserably failed at.

It's entirely fair to judge someone against their own claims.

You can argue whether it was his policies that were directly responsible for this miserable failure to hit his own targets, but without access to a parallel universe it would just be speculation.

 

[Sheff]

With regards to the OP I'd say neither, it's a political stunt to make harsh cuts to spending now (pleasing the harsher tories) with plans to increase spending in the last 1-2 years of this parliament in the hopes that everyone will have forgotten the previous 3 and think they're brilliant.

Rather than less harsh (or none) cuts over the full term giving everone cause to complain a little.

It worked last time so... I guess you can't blame them?!

 

[Nix]

You cant just say the UK is like the US and they grew faster based on that - economics is black art at best with hundreds of factors. Just accept that no one knows what would have happened if x decision was taken. Suddenly every tom, dick and harry can have an opinion that cant be proved wrong if they shout it loud and long enough.....

From the speech itself:

Both countries are in the grand scheme of things liberal market economies, with democratic institutions, secure property rights, low average inflation for more than a decade pre-crisis, and so on. The UK is of course much smaller and more open to the world economy than the US is, as well as much more tied to Europe (less tied to Asia). Both economies, however, actually gained similar amounts of GDP from net trade during the downturn of 2008-09, because imports fell rapidly with the contraction.

 

[Over Clocker]

Of course they're ideologically driven.

1. Austerity is not the only solution. In fact, several respected economists assert that austerity is the worst way to resolve the situation. Britain is currently doing worse than other modern countries which didn't adopt such harsh austerity policies.

2. The Conservatives are staunch advocates of privatisation and neo-liberalism; they want the smallest state they can manage, whilst selling off the state's assets to benefit themselves or people they know. They run in circles of corporate interests and privilege. It's self interest.

The UK is actually the fastest growing of the world's advanced economies with lower taxes, lower unemployment etc than most.

I certainly don't agree with everything this government is doing economically, however we are certainly on the right road. Certain things, EG defence, were cut too far in 2010 which the governement are now having to invest back in, however the debt pile that Labour gave us could have eventually ruined the economy.

If you actually look at most of the figures, a lot of waste / lazy man's policies are being chopped out, and a huge amount of infrastructure investment is coming in instead.

Far better than some of Labour's terifically wasteful projects and policies of rewarding people for not working.

 

[Nix]

We've done very well compared to other European countries (didn't one county create more jobs than France at some point?) and have low unemployment, zero inflation, a growing economy, increasing wages.. sounds like things are working out fine (not perfect but nothing is of course). Whether or not we'd done better by borrowing more first or not we'll never know. Having a bloated public sector (which Labour gave us and is being reduced to what is affordable at present), like other failing Euro countries doesn't seem to work out well for them.

The Eurozone has its own problems.

There is a huge difference between optimisation and ideological driven cuts. The fact is this: the Tories have used the recession as an opportunity to push ideological privatisation.

 

[[TW]Fox]

You're paying for it yourself. Politicians abuse and squander your money no matter what it is.

So the rationale for the status quo would be what exactly? Damned if they do, damned if they don't..

 

[Nix]

Far better than some of Labour's terifically wasteful projects and policies of rewarding people for not working.

Again, that doesn't mean that public waste was the main cause. I'm not defending it and think that regardless of who's implementing a cut, it's the right way to go.

The state economy isn't like a family's budget. Debt for a country is actually okay and helps to produce growth.

However, the Tories have gone too far. As evidenced by the recent backlash of the Oxfordshire county council's reply to Cameron when he complained over cuts.

 

[DR_Pingu]

Was what I said factually incorrect?

No, but there's a bit more to it than just what you said.

Just a question to the masses; shouldn't this be in the Speaker's Corner, being a pretty controversial thing to be talking about?

 

[jimjamuk]

Both sides are brainwashed if you ask me - no point trying to argue with people on this one. Dont like every decision made by the Tories at the moment but all you get to do is mark a card with a cross every 5 years for those you trust more