Britain’s Self-Inflicted Misery

[ttosca]

For a year now, Britain?s economy has been stuck in a vicious cycle of low growth, high unemployment and fiscal austerity. But unlike Greece, which has been forced into induced recession by misguided European Union creditors, Britain has inflicted this harmful quack cure on itself.

Austerity was a deliberate ideological choice by Prime Minister David Cameron?s ruling coalition of Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, elected 17 months ago. It has failed and can be expected to keep failing. But neither party is yet prepared to acknowledge that reality and change course.

Britain?s economy has barely grown since the budget cuts began taking effect late last year. The most recent quarterly figures showed the economy flat-lining, with growth at 0.1 percent.

New figures released this week reported Britain?s highest jobless numbers in more than 15 years. Independent analysts expect unemployment ? now 8.1 percent ? to keep rising in the months ahead. The government has kept its promise to slash public-sector jobs ? more than 100,000 have been lost in recent months. But its deficit-reduction policies have failed to revive the business confidence that was supposed to spur private-sector hiring.

Drastic public spending cuts were the wrong deficit-reduction strategy for the weakened British economy a year ago. And they are the wrong strategy for the faltering American economy today. Britain?s unhappy experience is further evidence that radical reductions in federal spending will do little but stifle economic recovery.

A few years of robust growth would go far toward making swollen federal deficits more manageable. But slashing government spending in an already stalled economy weakens anemic demand, leading to lost output and lost tax revenues. As revenues fall, deficit reduction requires longer, deeper spending cuts. Cut too far, too fast, and the result is not a balanced budget but a lost decade of no growth. That could now happen in Britain. And if the Republicans have their way, it could also happen here.

Austerity is a political ideology masquerading as an economic policy. It rests on a myth, impervious to facts, that portrays all government spending as wasteful and harmful, and unnecessary to the recovery. The real world is a lot more complicated. America has no need to repeat Mr. Cameron?s failed experiment.

www.nytimes.com/2011/10/15/opinion/britains-self-inflicted-misery.html?_r=4&ref=opinion

Shame you are such a delicate flower, Custy.
People disagreeing with the likes of you? The very thought-!

Sometimes it seems as if personal comments are used in an attempt to derail the discussion. Why would anyone come on to Mumsnet to do that?

People should take comfort from Thatcher's observation that she positively adored personal attacks as it meant her foers had run out of ones focussed on her politics.

Greece wasn't forced into recession by anyone. For decades, its governments have been based on cronyism, have made no effort to create/enforce an effective tax collection system and they've been sheltering behind low borrowing costs across the Eurozone, piling up credit with no intention of repaying their debts. Now they can't afford the borrowing and they're finally having to take some tough decisions that affect their own population. Tough for the population, yes, but they've also been electing ineffectual governments and not demanding anything better.

You get my drift, Moondog.

I think you are right about Greece, jkklpu. Are you saying the same about UK?

I do not like the posting of newspaper articles for the following reasons;

• it is very lazy, as I said before why not just articulate your own thoughts if you have any. Doing that is really debating (what this board is for) rather than posting material we could all find and read if we had the inclination.
• a journalist will never, ever have to make any of the difficult decisions on which they pontificate. They can change their views at the drop of a hat, and often will write another piece on their conversion.
• a journalist has to broadly appeal to the views of their readership or else their livelihood is threatened - so what is printed may not be a truthful exposition of their opinion
• IMO what is published in a newspaper carries no more weight than the opinion of any other member of the public. Why should it?

The recent statements by the retired Star journalist, for those that heard them, were very instructive as to how journalism works.

Oh bless, it must be true because a journalist said so. If they had done a bit more research they might have found out that VAT is 20%. They may also have found out that the Greek situation is basically like an individual doing a job but needing their employer to pay them so that they have money to live. When the money doesn't come in, they decide they can't be arsed to chase their employer for the money they are legally owed but they will just go and borrow money to sustain their lives. Then they keep repeating the cycle. Your employer thinks you're a muppet as you're working for free so they carry on not being bothered to pay you. Eventually the many people you have borrowed money from a) run out of funds themelves and b) crack on that you are not going to pay them back because you don't have the means to - you're living a champagne lifestyle but without being bothered to collect your wages. So they pull the plug because they are not stupid. Then some idiot journalist comes along and describes the people you have borrowed money from as "misguided". Oh yes, because that makes sense.

Oh bless, it must be true because a journalist said so. If they had done a bit more research they might have found out that VAT is 20%. They may also have found out that the Greek situation is basically like an individual doing a job but needing their employer to pay them so that they have money to live. When the money doesn't come in, they decide they can't be arsed to chase their employer for the money they are legally owed but they will just go and borrow money to sustain their lives. Then they keep repeating the cycle. Your employer thinks you're a muppet as you're working for free so they carry on not being bothered to pay you. Eventually the many people you have borrowed money from a) run out of funds themelves and b) crack on that you are not going to pay them back because you don't have the means to - you're living a champagne lifestyle but without being bothered to collect your wages. So they pull the plug because they are not stupid. Then some idiot journalist comes along and describes the people you have borrowed money from as "misguided". Oh yes, because that makes sense.

cheers moondog.

yes, i do have feelings, and no, its not ok to be personal (little flower) becuase im custy. i can take an opinion that differs. its not a different opinion that upsets me. debate on mn is futile

I agree. Austerity is political not economic. The tories want to punish the poor and public sector workers who didnt vote for them. The party is funded by businessmen who have paid them to deliver a low tax for the rich agenda. They are motivated by their own career ambitions, not by doing what is best for the whole country.

Persona/ly i think part of tje solution is state funding of political parties and requiring politicians to have real world experience rather than being career politicians.

ElBurro, agree with your points about journalists, but enjoy having a controversial opinion, if possible well-researched and eloquently discussed, to debate.

You seem to be concerned to get at people's real, sincere opinions, rather than just playing with ideas. I think both are important.

I agree, Margery. If the parties were state funded, they wouldn't be so dependent on rich multi-nationals.

'The tories want to punish the poor and public sector workers who didnt vote for them'
So Marjery, does that mean in turn that Labour will (or have) punished those who didn't vote for them?

smallwhitecat is quite awful as is niceguy2 who insists on calling posters "he" just coz he has the misfortune of being an intellectually limited male lacking any emotional intelligence. The rancid rightwingers on here are so rude it's unbelievable. They're so proprietorial too as if MN Politix is THEIRS and how DARE anyone with vaguely leftish opinion come on here. How pathetic.

Their kneejerk aggression is indicative of people who know they're in the wrong yet must defend agendas for other reasons. What are they?

Glasnost, my politics are nearer yours than Niceguy's, but you called me 'he' on this very board not so long ago. He is not the only one to make assumptions about gender.

tethers you were well out of order and so rude and dismissive of the Occupy movement (that I'm sure you'll concur now is THRIVING) that you seemed a male. ttosca, on the other hand, has never exhibited these defects.

Arf at 'defects'

I was never rude, nor dismissive, I just asked for a painting. I made no comment on the Occupy movement, nor any personal comment about you; which you did, which you did about me. Oh look, you have done it again.

'Seemed male' has made my day though

Back to the thread: surely it is possible to disagree with measures such as this without having to have a detailed thought out alternative? I am a teacher, not an economist. Yet I can see that government policy is not working- we are still in recession. Is it not enough to point to where other economists have detailed critiques from a far more knowledgeable perspective than my own?

I'll get you that painting.

@solo No, I wasn't saying that about the UK, it was about Greece, contesting the OP's first point. Thought there were already enough people arguing about the UK on this thread.

That would be marvellous, glasnost.