'Collossal cuts' on the way.

[tzijlstra 11]

Because the moment interest goes up two things will happen:

 

Money will not enter the economy, reducing growth/increasing shrink.

 

Debts will become more expensive, reducing growth/increasing shrink.

 

For the interest to really come up we either need the pound to crash (Brexit might cause that) or the economy to really overheat which is unlikely considering the global economy.

[spilldig 187]

Mecky said in another thread yesterday that 'why has the national debt doubled in the last term' (meaning Tory ********) - it's because the necessary cuts to balance the books are so huge that is has to be done in stages, otherwise you have riots.

 

Regardless of who wins the next election, the cuts that have happened so far haven't even scratched the surface, IF you want the deficit cutting to balance.

 

 

-

 

Bold: As for where the 60% will be cut. Just look at the yearly government budget. You do know all the figures right?

 

Look at the three biggys. DWP/benefits/social protection, NHS, Education (though education is a 'smally' really in comparison to either of the others).

 

They'll be the obvious targets, but the benefits bill is mainly pensions and neither DARE touch those precious those people [votes]. Or because they deserve a pension after working all life and being promised it (depending on your view of politicians) . The worst case scenario for us all is if in the next or the one after, or the one after that, is a coalition of Labour/Tory, because then they can team up and slash pensions. That is one of the big ones and all the others suffer more now because that wedge of the pie chart is untouchable at the moment.

 

Your idea of getting rid of a few MPs, or Lords is very small fish. It's the 1ps, 2ps and 5ps in my savings tin.

No. The benefits bill is not mainly pensions. I don't know if you pay tax?,but if you do you should have just received a breakdown of taxes expenditure from HMRC and that will tell you.

[Jonny5 10]

So the collapse of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Northern Rock and Lehman Brothers was because New Labour spent all that money on teachers and nurses which caused the sub prime lending bubble to burst?

Labour hired a load of pen pushers in nothing jobs, not teachers and nurses.

 

The big problem was the Global crash but at some point the expansion of civil/public servants had to be corrected and addressed.

[Eater Sundae 12]

I wonder if/when any politician will be prepared to mention the NHS.

 

None of the major parties will address this, but until someone does then the current imbalance will only get worse. The NHS is easily able to use up any spare money, but is a no-go area for discussion, let alone reform. The potential demand for funds will always exceed supply.

 

IMO, the major parties are failing in their responsibilities by not even being prepared to discuss the subject.

[taxman 12]

I wonder if/when any politician will be prepared to mention the NHS.

 

None of the major parties will address this, but until someone does then the current imbalance will only get worse. The NHS is easily able to use up any spare money, but is a no-go area for discussion, let alone reform. The potential demand for funds will always exceed supply.

 

IMO, the major parties are failing in their responsibilities by not even being prepared to discuss the subject.

 

This govt has reformed the NHS, unfortunately its top down re-organisation has just led to vast profits for private companies rather than a better service for patients.

[Stan Tamudo 10]

Labour hired a load of pen pushers in nothing jobs, not teachers and nurses.

 

The big problem was the Global crash but at some point the expansion of civil/public servants had to be corrected and addressed.

 

Do you think the people and institutions largely responsible for the 2008 financial crisis need correcting and addressing? Or shall we just let the bankers lead us into more financial ruin so we can spread their debt to the people of this country?

[El Cid 213]

 

The big problem was the Global crash but at some point the expansion of civil/public servants had to be corrected and addressed.

 

The problem is not with the economy, that is working jut fine, the problem is the sizr of public debt.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25944653

[alchresearch 214]

Source for 60% claim would be welcome.

 

It was the opening question from a woman in the audience on last night's Question Time. It surprised me too.

 

The claim came from the "Office for Budget Responsibility".

 

Bit about them here:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/cutbacks-for-everyone-apart-from-the-office-for-budget-responsibility-9456842.html

[biotechpete 10]

Ah right, that is something entirely different than cutting 60% of the public budget!

 

This figure comes from a mixture of the OBR forecast and the IFS think tank on a measure of public spending based on GDP. It will fall from around 40% under Labour to 12.6% according to the OBR.

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/total_2005UKpt_14pc5n

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/dec/04/osborne-accuses-bbc-hyperbolic-coverage-spending-cuts

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2014/dec/04/autumn-statement-2014-reaction-politics-live-blog

 

On those figures it's somewhere north of a 60% cut in % GDP terms. Of course this is because the forecast is for the economy to grow faster than public spending so the % of GDP will necessarily decrease if we are to make a surplus. The real terms figures might be something different.

 

I guess AnnaB is confusing the figure that we have had 40% of the cuts already with a further 60% to come post election with the total cut in government spending.

 

It's worth noting that the planned reduction in spending Orborne is followng is not far of that of Labour's of 5 years ago.

[Jonny5 10]

Do you think the people and institutions largely responsible for the 2008 financial crisis need correcting and addressing? Or shall we just let the bankers lead us into more financial ruin so we can spread their debt to the people of this country?

Of course it does. However you claimed that Labour hired a load of nurses and teachers. Which is not the case at all.

[*_ash_* 88]

No. The benefits bill is not mainly pensions. I don't know if you pay tax?,but if you do you should have just received a breakdown of taxes expenditure from HMRC and that will tell you.

 

I wrote DWP/Benefits/Social Protection (meaning social protection, but people know it as any of the 3)

 

Social Protection is £222b. By far the biggest outlay, of which pensions is a high percentage of that.

 

I do pay tax, but not had anything from HMRC about the breakdown.

[landlordshef 10]

No, poor people are easily duped by financial industries that they should be able to trust. Banks are not like any other business. They're a necessity in life. In order to receive a salary and buy a house, you NEED a bank account. When these trusted establishments tell you about all there new amazing offers, what do you think people will do?!? Also, many of the banks in question often gave their staff targets to hit, same as they did with the PPI. Sorry, but this has got nothing to do with poor people, it's the banks fault. It's not just the banks though, it's the entire system.

So you are saying poor people are stupid?