I know I'm going to sound like a know-all, but I'm one of those guys - there's a community of us who should probably get out more - who has known for about 2 - 3 years (I'm a property developer) that it would come to "this" ... where "this" is a 35% cut in public spending. We've been living in Debt Neverland for the thick end of a decade and now the chickens are coming home to roost ... with a vengeance. The issue now is not so much the imminent economic train crash - that's a given ... it's the upheaval to society that is going to cause us huge grief. At the risk of sounding alarmist, we shall witness civil unrest like we've not seen in generations in the UK. Brace yourselves chaps.
Government spending is in reality a government transfer from the wealth generating part of the economy.
The state diworsified into areas where extortion funding actually harms rather than helps the country.
Cutting those areas = Less government = more wealth.
At last some serious discussion within the civil service of a survival plan.
Tube strikes-check, wage freezes-almost certainly, power shortages-undoubtedly this winter, public sector union strikes-coming to a country near you, hyperinflation-how can it be avoided, no real political choice-check. Nobody will buy your bonds-hell,why not!
Looks like it's back to the seventies but with North Sea oil revenues blown on worthless social welfare plans that people will now demand as essential. An untrained workforce and hundreds of thousands of hopeful baby boomers demanding their pension, minor problem the pension plan has no money in the bank.
Never mind you can always put the telly on and enjoy the Olympics.
If you smarten-up and find a leader who has actual experience with a household budget she might just bring you through this. I'm talking about somebody who has NOT been to university in the last thirty years, somebody very unfashionable, with life experience. Davie and georgie are not up to the task.
Before the government put in currency transfer restrictions, or attempt to minimize how much you can spend abroad (yes they did that in the seventies) perhaps you should consider putting some of your savings out of their reach. None of my business really, free advice worth only what you paid for it, but based on actual experience.
The council-run educational service I work for has just imposed a 7% cut across the board, already.
PFI can be dealt with as bank recaps were dealt with. Just increase Health & Safety regulations, impose maximum temperature working conditions and force building re-design and air conditioning and impose rental freeze.
The PFI providers will find their revenue models compromised. The private sector can be expropriated as Lloyds-TSB shareholders discovered.
Moving all PFI deals onshore would change HSBC revenue models and legislation can make it all possible.
Government spending is in reality a government transfer from the wealth generating part of the economy.
That is the welfare leeches and that is the part that will not get cut, because no politician has the balls to tell them that they need to get off their (tax payer funded) sofas and a job.
Sounds good, whoever gets in next only has to do half of the spending cuts to make the 10% they've been chatting about. But I'm somewhat sceptical, public sector job vacancies have been increasing for the past three months, that's not exactly the behaviour of a sector that bracing itself for downsizing.
I figured it was because there was going to be more devolved power out to council level, so they needed more staff. But if mandarins are planning for cuts, it doesn't make so much sense.
Depends how you look at it, of course. If you're in Govt it's a 20 pc cut, but if you're a taxpayer paying for it, it's a 10pc pay RISE (as govt takes roughly 50pc of what we make). Ten per cent pay rise! Sounds good to me!
Smoke and mirrors .... media manipulators.
'Spinning' Labour's tied itself in knots trying and failing to hitch a ride on the popular Tory cuts policy.
How does a 20% (or any%) cut in Govt spending translate as a cut in GDP? I thought Govt was a cost.
And tax from Government paid jobs isn't really money either, is it?
I'm new to this economics lark.
Too much to hope for a significant amount of trimming from the Civil Service itself?!
Commenting by HaloScan
