Simple Economics ?

[JemimaMuddleFuck]

I have cut back on everything.
I am going to cut back futher.

I will not be buying anything because I do not know what the future holds.

It's the Thatcher recession all over again. Tories. Cuts will hurt eveyone that works for a living; but not them.

Normally I would buy from John Lewis; Boden; Vertbuadet; La Redoute, Next.

I have spent not a penny; because the household budget is too tight.

It's a typical Tory recession. Look after your own is the Mantra. Those that have money will make more money.

Interest rates will rise. Production and unemployment will increase; but be carefully hidden in statistics.

Because I am not spending; like thousands of others; jobs will be lost..

Verbaudet, Boden, John Lewis. No sales.

No sales mean more unemployed. It fits the Tory profile because we will all be working for a pittance

Onky - You have spectacularly missed the point.
Notniceguy - The article from the FT specifically states that "Investor worries were exacerbated after it was reported that Portugal?s economy contracted in the last quarter of 2010 for the first time in a year as austerity measures curbed consumer spending."

Now come on, that is not difficult to understand. Also I notice you never back up your pronouncements with anything. Just like the tories, all talk and no facts, no evidence, just a bit of wool over your eyes.

The Private Sector took its medicine shortly after the crash ... while the public sector trundled on, in its own inefficient way.

When people talk about cuts it doesn't seem to have occured to anyone that the cuts will come from the incredible waste that currently exists in the public sector. It is horribly inefficient and there are too many lazy arses working there reinventing the wheel.

Tea and biccies, anyone?

manfromCUT - yes its very interesting, when we bailed out the banks, guess where we got the money from to do that? Yep, the banks, who bought our guilts to raise the money.

HHLimbo - Why are you quoting from an FT piece dated 14th Feb? Things have moved on a bit since then. Besides the UK isn't Portugal.

This is from an April 11 article in the FT:
"In its twice-yearly world economic outlook, the IMF said that fiscal consolidation would slow growth but was ?necessary? and said that the UK had a ?strong? fiscal framework."

The UK economy is growing - slowly but still growing.

To add to Onky - Today the number of people claiming unemployment benefit has dropped. The private sector has taken on more full timers than the public sector has lost. Inflation is still high, but LOWER than last month.
The country is turning round slowly like the proverbial tanker.

For those who are interested, this is the article Onky refers to: IMF downgrades UK growth forecast

Other quotes from the article:

The US, Canada, Germany and most of the Scandinavian countries are expected to do better.
Cuts in public spending are expected to dampen growth in the UK relative to some of its better performing peers.
The UK?s ?necessary front-loaded fiscal consolidation? will dampen domestic demand, it said.

I love how they have put necessary and strong in quotation marks. Do you see what they did there? ;)

Another interesting article from the FT:
"This disappointing forecast from Niesr would mean that over the last six months, and since George Osborne?s spending review, the recovery has ground to a halt and our economy has barely grown at all"

Yes, we;ve had some o the best figures for a while. We need to get the public sector down to a much smaller % than it currently is. It's right up to 50% or something massive like communist USSR used to be. There is a huge way to go in terms of proper cuts but this Government if far too wet to do it properly.

HHLimbo - Your love for the Tory party is really coming across. :)

Xenia the public sector was 50% in Communist Russia? Wasn't it more like 100%?

Of coruse not. It was more like 100% but 50% is more than we can afford. In some parts of the country it's the main employer. That is not sustainable for a nation.

The other big elephant in the room is public sector pensions - particularly those such as the police where you can retire at 50 after 30 years service and claim your pension. In this day & age, you can expect to be claiming your pension for as long as you actually worked. This was never what pensions were expected to cover.

I know that sounds very harsh, but in reality at 50 you would expect to continue working for another 10-15 years. Not suggesting walking the beat, but certainly in an office, or interviewing people is still perfectly possible.

Oh yes I understand Tories and public-sector-haters very well:

"I cant believe we live in a system where people are employed to make our society run better. Those bloody nurses and doctors! Healthcare, provided freely through taxes, and no fat-fat-cat at the top raking in a fat profit from it all! Disgraceful!
Education provided for all, even when their parents aren't rich! Teachers being paid a salary! Binmen being paid a salary! Rubbish collected from all! Theyre not rich, so they should all work for free. Bloody people always expecting to be paid. This country is a disgrace"

Frumpy, I agree, anyone being paid over 6 figures a year should work for free when they hit 60. Is that what you mean?

Onky - before the last election I read all three major party manifestos. I looked at the Tory party with an open mind, that david chap was always saying such nice words about everything. But the manifesto contents made me absolutely livid! They did not match his words at all, he truly was a Con, all spin and no substance.

So I campaigned against them and they did not win here. They didnt even gain a mandate to govern, but unfortunately we are now seeing their destructive policies implemented, and visibly denigrating this country and its people. I am very concerned.

HH wtf?
What I mean is if you are still fit and able, then you should not expect to start drawing you pension at 50.

No frumpy, you are wtf. The people who take retirement at 50 are those who can afford it on 6-figure salaries. Hence I assume you mean "anyone being paid over 6 figures a year should work for free when they hit 60".. if you think that sounds weird then dont say it!

Basing this on friend who is a DC and planning to retire next year at 50. So no not someone on a 6 fig salary. Mind you, if she makes it to 80 (and I hope she does) then her pension will have paid out well into 6 figures.

You are the only one talking of public sector workers on 6 fig salaries, not me.

Please re-read my post, I am talking of pensions.

Oh I was talking about the private sector also.
Is she taking a compulsory redundancy package? I imagine we will see many more of these as experienced public sector staff are dropped to satisfy these unnecessary and damaging cuts.

no, its voluntary. And I agree that it is damaging that experienced public sector staff will be going, but it is through choice, despite the fact she works in a specialised field and could stay and continue to work, she is choosing to take the money.

I wish our country's money was managed by economists and accountants instead of idiot politicians.

I imagine seeing a real Fisher Debt Spiral, watching a Laffer Curve take shape and having to observe the Taylor rule as part of real economic policy is very exciting for our economists. This IS their moment. But there's no consensus on the route out of this mess. Having economists steer us out of this would be much more messy than having politicians driving this thing.

As JK Galbraith remarked about fellow ecomomist Irving Fisher who lost $10M on the stock market in the 1920s: "This was a substantial sum, even for an economics professor.?

missingmysleep What? You mean you'd like for example someone who's never had a job? Is a history grad and has bounced personal cheques in charge?

Sorry to post and run, D & V issues.

Three of our friends have been made redundant in the last few months; the latest on Monday from a job that he's been in for 23 years. His wife was made redundant just before Xmas when the nursery she worked at closed down completely. She's now doing agency work here and there.

No-one is recruiting in his sector due to reduced demand; and as he says, his age counts against him (late 50's).
The other friend took voluntary redundancy, but since another 20 have gone through enforced redundancy.

That's three productive experienced workers, now claiming benefits (presumably). They will not contribute anything to the economy, they will just be an overhead.
In addition, that's 3 people not paying tax/NIC because they are no longer working.
That's another 3 people that are not buying anything beyond the basics (like me).

And to the posters that critisised my spending habits and the shops quoted. I work full time (but am off sick at the moment).
I earn my money and spend and save dependent on my circumstances. I don't spend now and worry later. I live within my means; not that it's any of your business.
I shopped on-line at Boden/Vertbaudet/La Redoute mainly for the children and because it's 17 miles to our nearest shopping centre. Doing otherwise would mean getting of my fat arse and taking out a 2nd mortgage to fill up the car with diesel.I also fucking hate shopping of any variety/type/fashion.

When I bought stuff from JL (extravagent stuff like cookers, washing machines etc.), I did so under their price match scheme, great customer service and extended guarantees.It wasn't to massage my inner snob. It makes good fiscal sense.
Yes I use the (sometimes) green Ocado van (for the fat arse/diesel reasons stated above); in addition when I drag DC's round a supermarket I spend more, loose the will to live and I am not only fat arsed but too lazy to boot. They price match Tesco for the exciting stuff like soap powder.

Ocado also deliver the cavier that I scoop out of my DH's navel with a silver spoon whilst chugging champagne .