Am I alone in thinking we will all get poorer and poorer over the next few years?

[kissmyheathenass]

Most people I speak to assume this period of stagflation will soon come to an end and we will then resume 'normal life' when our salaries catch up with inflation. The only possible scenario as far as i can see is that we will all become increasingly poor as fuel costs rise (therefore heating, petrol, food in shops and everything else we take for granted today) will rise.

I am not looking to blame any one political party (they all bastards). I am just wondering if there is a magical solution to our current problems or if, as dh wants, we should buy a small-holding and become self-sufficient.

Is anyone confident that there is a way out of this?

I'm not an economist. What I don't understand about this whole situation is why the gov does not invest in things that will benefit the whole country when 'things get better' in 5 years time (or whenever that happens)? so, eg, investing in wi-fi/broadband facilities for the entire country, or infrastructure (better airports, train stations, roads/bridges) so that people would want to travel (from overseas to do business for eg), education and training (so that our future generations can at least read/write/spell, let alone be the future bank managers, accountants, lawyers and teachers!) etc.

All these things are long term stuff but they will benefit the nation - better broadband/wi-fi means more people can work from home (or at least work!), more education and training so we don't get left behind and we can create new things (sciency, artsy, engineering-type whatever). plus it gets these industries going (telecommunication, building/construction, engineeering, teaching) which surely will benefit the economy because these people employed in these industries will be able to spend the money they're earning etc.

Surely by investing in the people we then have hope. Rather than doing another round of QE which no one can see that it 'works' and where no one seems to benefit but the banks!

@drcrab... they are investing. The high speed rail-link is one project but there are quite a few others. A certain Mr G Brown once pledged to only borrow money to spend on capital projects (the 'Golden Rule' of economic theory) but got rather carried away and ended up using it for current expenditure like paying public sector wages and subsidising pensions. Big mistake.

To answer the original question I'm slightly more optimistic. I think the last 15-20 years or so have been a bit of a blip in our cultural attitude to money. Prior to that the norm was 'save before you spend'. Then it became 'buy now pay later'. Too many confused 'easy credit' with 'affluence'. We're gradually returning to something a lot more sustainable, paying down debts, building up savings and not buying so much on credit but it's understandable if it feels restrictive short-term.

I'm also optimistic that we'll start to appreciate things like university education and value it more. Young people won't just saunter onto a course to waste a few years but will have good reasons to study the subject and be prepared to invest in their own future.

Thanks Cogito, yes I think they are investing - I'm just tired of the nay-sayers saying 'oh wtf are they paying into a high speed rail link when there are people starving' etcetc.

my worry is that the 'sensible' ones will be the ones cutting down their expenditure (do I need that extra pair of trainers/swap down brands etc) especially if they need to (like us, we've gone from a double income to a single one)...and the not so sensible ones will continue to live life the way they are used to. And again, it's fine to live life as per normal if you have the stability of income to continue that lifestyle. It's not ok though, to live life as you're used to if you don't have the means to, whether that's to do with reduction in income, loss in benefits etc.

I also think some sort of Neo-Hippy movement is necessary/inevitable. However, I'm torn, too, as I also accept the economic truism that extreme protectionism impoverishes many and enriches a few, so am I not saying that society has to be unequal?! Yet more equal societies, such as the Nordic countries, seem to be happy, and efficient, and I'm pretty sure they aren't as personally indebted as we are in the UK (lack of consumerist ambition, due to more equality, perhaps?)...

Everyone has to cut their cloth now, governments included. I'm sure some will carry on regardless but that's really their look-out. If we're looking into the future there will be growth eventually, but it probably won't come from the traditional places as things shift around globally. Rather like the turn of the last century when the people that trained themselves up as car mechanics had the edge over the ones that went into horse management. Thirty years ago, those that went into IT or financial services did better than the ones that chose the declining heavy industries. These days ... crystal ball time.... young people that are learning Chinese or studying renewable energy might be the ones that win out.

Big advantage of the UK is that we have a well-educated workforce and a long tradition of trade, innovation and entrepreneurship. If we go into the next 10 years 'heads up' we'll do OK. If we get sucked into the misery propaganda being peddled by so many people with their own agenda, we'll struggle.

I'm still not massively convinced by the Mandarin Chinese thing. Essentially, the language is not fit for purpose as an international business language (in order to achieve close to 80% literacy levels they have to use the roman alphabet to teach it phonetically so Chinese children learn the roman alphabet before the Chinese alphabet and then dedicate most of their primary education to memorising the 1000's of symbols) and unless you're going to dedicate yourself to achieving fluency in both oral and written Mandarin, there's not that much point. A-level mandarin ain't going to cut it. To get fluent you basically have to go and live there and ideally marry a local who speaks no English (hard to find these days )

It would be better IMO for native English speakers to dedicate themselves to actually learning English properly so they don't write "I could of" and "You're company" and have to be corrected by a Beijing 4 yr old

Also, China is happening now. Who knows where the boom will be in 20 yrs. Perhaps children born now would be better studying Tagalog or Urdu? Now, where did I put that crystal ball?