FAT GOVERNMENT COSTS; Even if a government has chosen to build a fat, inefficient, bureaucracy, sucking on the once in a generation tax windfalls of a banking/asset price bubble rather than building homes, nuclear power stations, or the future needs of a growing/aging population - if it then decides not to cut it by 2010, when the private sector jobs/taxes supporting it from 2008 had fallen dramatically, the resulting budget deficit limits the option for any future government to invest/alleviate poverty and lower taxes for the masses.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1214001/The-cost-quango-Britain-hits-170bn--seven-fold-rise-Labour-came-power.html
By 2010, many hundreds of thousands private sector jobs in the UK had been lost, and even those families with parents in work had seen inflation adjusted earnings fall around 5% from 2007, and for some reason in a recession, the low paid saw the 10% income tax rate taken away.
And what did the last Labour government, maintaining the fat government full of regulators then do to get back those jobs for individuals and families alike, and lower ‘the cost of living’ pressures from their many tax rises e.g. Council Tax, _they put an extra tax on everyone’s jobs and their potential private sector creation.
“Labour’s plans to increase national insurance next year will cost jobs, Alistair Darling has said.”
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/7539343/Labours-planned-National-Insurance-increase-will-cost-jobs-Alistair-Darling-admits.html
“In his evidence, Mr Darling defended his plans to increase national insurance, saying it was necessary to raise extra money to reduce Government borrowing, which will be £167 billion this year.”
So do you now understand while I do not accept that the UK needs to go back to more regulation under those who STILL don’t understand what they did, or that any poverty in the UK, was CAUSED by Coalition policies?
P.S. I apologise for the size of the post, but that’s what happens when going into the detail, examining the problems and potential solutions behind ideological soundbites, rather than continually repeating them and the failed policies that made child poverty such an issue.