You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Osborne ' s emergency budget 5 months late?
- Thread starter Vic
- Start date
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader
Well-Known Member
Yet further evidence that the Westminster Wankers are pretty clueless when it comes to important things that affect everyday life! One month we have to embark on a vicious austerity programme, the next month seems that things aren't so bad as George was having us believe.
remember arthur mann
Well-Known Member
Chippy_boy
Well-Known Member
The main message is that if people voted Brexit because of austerity they'll be getting more of the same.
And quite right too. Unless anyone thinks increasing the deficit even further when we are already £4,000,000,000,000 in debt is a good idea. (It isn't.)
And anyway, lets wait and see. It may be worse than I hope and better than you hope.
Last edited:
Len Rum
Well-Known Member
U Wot?And quite right too. Unless anyone thinks increasing the deficit even further when we are already £4,000,000,000,000 in debt is a good idea. (It isn't.)
And anyway, lets wait and see. It may be worse than I hope and better than you hope.
I don't take much of an interest in these things but I seem to remember Ozzie saying the public finances would be in surplus in 2015?
Did something go wrong?
Chippy_boy
Well-Known Member
U Wot?
I don't take much of an interest in these things but I seem to remember Ozzie saying the public finances would be in surplus in 2015?
Did something go wrong?
Yes, he couldn't cut deep enough because of political pressure. I say that half in jest because I think actually he got the balance about right. Cuts are painful obviously and although necessary, you have to be pragmatic sometimes and reign it in a bit.
But the strategy (austerity) was necessary and correct. The fact that the deficit didn't come down as quickly as projected doesn't mean it was wrong, merely that the projections were a bit out. That's not exactly a unique scenario for either party, is it.
Look at the state of our economy now, after 7 years of Tory cuts, compared to more socialist policies generally in Europe. We have the highest growth rate of the major European countries, the lowest unemployment rates, low inflation etc.
So, no actually, nothing went wrong.
Last edited:
Citizen of Legoland
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 10,030
And quite right too. Unless anyone thinks increasing the deficit even further when we are already £4,000,000,000,000 in debt is a good idea. (It isn't.)
And anyway, lets wait and see. It may be worse than I hope and better than you hope.
If increasing the deficit in the short term results in reducing it in the long term, then it can be a good idea. Investment in the national infrastructure, for instance.
Len Rum
Well-Known Member
Cheers mate.Yes, he couldn't cut deep enough because of political pressure. I say that half in jest because I think actually he got the balance about right. Cuts are painful obviously and although necessary, you have to be pragmatic sometimes and reign it in a bit.
But the strategy (austerity) was necessary and correct. The fact that the deficit didn't come down as quickly as projected doesn't mean it was wrong, merely that the projections were a bit out. That's not exactly a unique scenario for either party, is it.
Look at the state of our economy now, after 7 years of Tory cuts, compared to more socialist policies generally in Europe. We have the highest growth rate of the major European countries, the lowest unemployment rates, low inflation etc.
So, no actually, nothing went wrong.
"The projections were a bit out" you say.
Does that mean the deficit will be eliminated soon then?
Just asking.
Chippy_boy
Well-Known Member
If increasing the deficit in the short term results in reducing it in the long term, then it can be a good idea. Investment in the national infrastructure, for instance.
In principle yes. But at the same time, with a debt of 4,000 billion pounds hanging over us already, fiscal prudence (and being SEEN to be fiscally prudent) is necessary in order to maintain market confidence and our AAA credit rating, in order to ensure low interest rates. Had the cost of servicing the public debt gone up, that would have eaten into our revenues even more, and the increased burden on private sector spending due to higher interest rates would have made growth more difficult.
So it's a fine balancing act. Had the national debt NOT been so higher, I am sure borrowing to invest in infrastructure would have been more appealing and we'd have seen more of it.