490,000 public sector jobs expected to go by cuts by 2015

rick_chasey

It's much less painful to do it when the economy is growing properly.

With regard to:

I'm sure some of the Tory reputation for liking cuts has come from inheriting collapsing economies from a Labour government.

I don't think Labour can be accused of collapsing the world economy - as I've said before. They can be accused of the way they managed the UK economy before and afterwards, but a global crash is a global crash. It's tough to come out looking good whatever you do. As a seperate note, the whole of Europe has moved towards the centre right, so the Conservative power (shared though it is) is likely part of a larger Euoprean trend than just a Labour thing.

Anyway, I think it's well documented the Conservative party oppose the big state, and it's not a badly kept secret that they use times such as these to change that.

There's a lot of talk today about that particular issue - since the Lib Dems feel these cuts should be temporary and only last as long as they have to. The Conservatives are saying they feel most of it should be permanent.

finchy

Pross wrote:

I'm sure some of the Tory reputation for liking cuts has come from inheriting collapsing economies from a Labour government.

The problem with that point of view is that it's only happened twice - once after the 1970s oil crisis and now.

Both parties would have been hit very badly by the oil crisis, and the Tory economic policies throughout the 90s and early- to mid-2000s was more or less exactly the same as Labour's. Find the Tory election manifestos from 2001 and 2005 and look at the economic policies. Apart from criticising Labour, they don't offer anything different which would have affected the severity of the crisis in this country. The two parties, apart from in the 1980s, have effectively been two sides of one coin for decades now.

EDIT: I can see from your posts that you don't have any particular party political axe to grind, so please don't think I'm trying to imply that.

Pross

Apart from criticising Labour, they don't offer anything different which would have affected the severity of the crisis in this country.

Unfortunately that's politics - much easier to be in opposition and other than those in top jobs I suspect many politicians would secretly prefer to be in opposition where you can snipe away without having to put your cards on the table. As you say I've no particular axe to grind but in my lifetime the ends of two Labour governments that I can remember (although remembering 79 is probably stretching it a bit) had the country in financial chaos. As Rick says the Government weren't fully responsible for the banking crisis but I think the current issues are much wider than that and stem from over spending by a Chancellor who's favourite word was prudence. The bank bail out was just the tip of the iceberg and possibly exposed the situation before it got worse.

finchy

OK, here's my solution to the problem - people think at their most creative and least inhibited when they're slightly drunk. Add this to the collective wisdom of crowds and you have a recipe for success.

Invite the public to meetings in community centres, town and village halls, wherever, and ply them with just enough booze to get them pleasantly rather than aggressively drunk. Make it the decent stuff, not the cheap p1ss that people use just to get smashed out of their minds.

Then have a collective brainstorming, whereby people shout out ideas to solve the nation's economic problems, debate them a bit, and put the best ones forward to a series of local and then national votes.

This will have the added benefit of turning people onto quality alcohols and away from the ten pints of Stella then a fight mentality, thus providing Britain with safer towns at night.

When the economy starts to pick up and crime falls to historic low levels, put a statue of me up in every town and city to remind future generations that it was all my idea.

spen666

Rick Chasey wrote:

...

I'm kind of old school Keynes in the sense that I am of the opinion you MUST spend out of recessions, since recessions are essentially that - a lack of spending by everyone.
.....

What are you going to spend?

There is no money there to spend?


Spending out of a recession sounds good, but it only works when you have the money to spend. We are already spending vastly more than we have coming in.

rick_chasey

spen666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

...

I'm kind of old school Keynes in the sense that I am of the opinion you MUST spend out of recessions, since recessions are essentially that - a lack of spending by everyone.
.....

What are you going to spend?

There is no money there to spend?


Spending out of a recession sounds good, but it only works when you have the money to spend. We are already spending vastly more than we have coming in.

It's not a zero sum game...

finchy

spen666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

...

I'm kind of old school Keynes in the sense that I am of the opinion you MUST spend out of recessions, since recessions are essentially that - a lack of spending by everyone.
.....

What are you going to spend?

There is no money there to spend?

Spending out of a recession sounds good, but it only works when you have the money to spend. We are already spending vastly more than we have coming in.

I guess it all depends on whether the government spends the money or invests it wisely on something that will allow further economic development.

spen666

johnfinch wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

...

I'm kind of old school Keynes in the sense that I am of the opinion you MUST spend out of recessions, since recessions are essentially that - a lack of spending by everyone.
.....

What are you going to spend?

There is no money there to spend?

Spending out of a recession sounds good, but it only works when you have the money to spend. We are already spending vastly more than we have coming in.

I guess it all depends on whether the government spends the money or invests it wisely on something that will allow further economic development.

As I asked before

What are you going to spend?

We are already spending more than we have coming in.

Soundbite replies do not provide the money to spend.

We need the money to be able to spend it. To spend more than you receive is the way to end up bankrupt. We were already spending more than our revenue before the credit crunch hit. We cannot go one spending what we do not have.

so, if you want to carry on spending, where is the money coming from to spend?

finchy

spen666 wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

...

I'm kind of old school Keynes in the sense that I am of the opinion you MUST spend out of recessions, since recessions are essentially that - a lack of spending by everyone.
.....

What are you going to spend?

There is no money there to spend?

Spending out of a recession sounds good, but it only works when you have the money to spend. We are already spending vastly more than we have coming in.

I guess it all depends on whether the government spends the money or invests it wisely on something that will allow further economic development.

As I asked before

What are you going to spend?

We are already spending more than we have coming in.

Soundbite replies do not provide the money to spend.

We need the money to be able to spend it. To spend more than you receive is the way to end up bankrupt. We were already spending more than our revenue before the credit crunch hit. We cannot go one spending what we do not have.

so, if you want to carry on spending, where is the money coming from to spend?

OK, if you borrow the money now to invest in certain sectors, we can be competitive in future markets and make a return on the investment. For example graphene is expected to rake in billions for this country in the future, so investment in materials science is an investment which provides a return rather than expenditure and getting further into debt.

rick_chasey

spen666 wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

...

I'm kind of old school Keynes in the sense that I am of the opinion you MUST spend out of recessions, since recessions are essentially that - a lack of spending by everyone.
.....

What are you going to spend?

There is no money there to spend?

Spending out of a recession sounds good, but it only works when you have the money to spend. We are already spending vastly more than we have coming in.

I guess it all depends on whether the government spends the money or invests it wisely on something that will allow further economic development.

As I asked before

What are you going to spend?

We are already spending more than we have coming in.

Soundbite replies do not provide the money to spend.

We need the money to be able to spend it. To spend more than you receive is the way to end up bankrupt. We were already spending more than our revenue before the credit crunch hit. We cannot go one spending what we do not have.

so, if you want to carry on spending, where is the money coming from to spend?

It comes from borriwng - just like it has been ever since the crash happened. The fear is that if the UK borrows too much and there is a fear not all of it can be easily paid back, the credit rating will drop - and then the financial sh!t hits the fan. So you spend as much as you can before that happens. As soon as proper growth kicks in, those fears will subside.

redddraggon

johnfinch wrote:

OK, if you borrow the money now to invest in certain sectors, we can be competitive in future markets and make a return on the investment. For example graphene is expected to rake in billions for this country in the future, so investment in materials science is an investment which provides a return rather than expenditure and getting further into debt.

Definitely, materials are the way forward.

spen666

Rick Chasey wrote:

....

It comes from borriwng - just like it has been ever since the crash happened. The fear is that if the UK borrows too much and there is a fear not all of it can be easily paid back, the credit rating will drop - and then the financial sh!t hits the fan. So you spend as much as you can before that happens. As soon as proper growth kicks in, those fears will subside.

Are you realy as stupid as that post sounds

Quite when are we ever going to be able to repay the debt?

You are using a rather warped logic - it seems to be I've got no money so I will keep on spending and hope something happens to change things, and in the meantime I will not think about how I'm going to pay the debts due this month

rick_chasey

spen666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

....

It comes from borriwng - just like it has been ever since the crash happened. The fear is that if the UK borrows too much and there is a fear not all of it can be easily paid back, the credit rating will drop - and then the financial sh!t hits the fan. So you spend as much as you can before that happens. As soon as proper growth kicks in, those fears will subside.

Are you realy as stupid as that post sounds

Quite when are we ever going to be able to repay the debt?

You are using a rather warped logic - it seems to be I've got no money so I will keep on spending and hope something happens to change things, and in the meantime I will not think about how I'm going to pay the debts due this month

It's not a zero sum game like I've said. Using micro individual analogies are very misleading. Macro economics works differently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics -

See "active fiscal policy"

daviesee

spen666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

....

It comes from borriwng - just like it has been ever since the crash happened. The fear is that if the UK borrows too much and there is a fear not all of it can be easily paid back, the credit rating will drop - and then the financial sh!t hits the fan. So you spend as much as you can before that happens. As soon as proper growth kicks in, those fears will subside.

Are you realy as stupid as that post sounds

Quite when are we ever going to be able to repay the debt?

You are using a rather warped logic - it seems to be I've got no money so I will keep on spending and hope something happens to change things, and in the meantime I will not think about how I'm going to pay the debts due this month

If he is then he wouldn't be alone. It was that kind of thinking that got the whole banking crisis rolling and the Government in the mess it is now - and that was during the boom years!
Some people just never learn.

Frank the tank

Didn't some tory famously say unemployment is a price worth paying. :roll:

davelakers

Can we not just press the big "RESET" button....................?

Mccaria

Not sure Keynesian economics will work if adopted by one (already highly levered)country in a global economy. The muliplier effect only really kicks in if you can benefit from the demand for products which would be doubtful with the potential for slippage (ie cash going out of the system to buy Chinese manufactured products etc).

If you think of debt as being future consumption brought forward, then unfortunately at some point there will need to be a period of lower demand. The only remaining question is whether it is hard and quick or more drawn out and the respective dangers of each approach. Or trying to inflate your way out of the debt - bad for savers and a hell of a difficult balancing act with significant downside risk.

spen666

Rick Chasey wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

....

It comes from borriwng - just like it has been ever since the crash happened. The fear is that if the UK borrows too much and there is a fear not all of it can be easily paid back, the credit rating will drop - and then the financial sh!t hits the fan. So you spend as much as you can before that happens. As soon as proper growth kicks in, those fears will subside.

Are you realy as stupid as that post sounds

Quite when are we ever going to be able to repay the debt?

You are using a rather warped logic - it seems to be I've got no money so I will keep on spending and hope something happens to change things, and in the meantime I will not think about how I'm going to pay the debts due this month

It's not a zero sum game like I've said. Using micro individual analogies are very misleading. Macro economics works differently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics -

See "active fiscal policy"

So you are unable to explain where this money you want the country to spend is going to come from or how we will ever pay it back?

That's fine - we all know now you are calling for spending without any explanation of where the money is to come from.

Bankruptcy for the UK this way

rick_chasey

spen666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

....

It comes from borriwng - just like it has been ever since the crash happened. The fear is that if the UK borrows too much and there is a fear not all of it can be easily paid back, the credit rating will drop - and then the financial sh!t hits the fan. So you spend as much as you can before that happens. As soon as proper growth kicks in, those fears will subside.

Are you realy as stupid as that post sounds

Quite when are we ever going to be able to repay the debt?

You are using a rather warped logic - it seems to be I've got no money so I will keep on spending and hope something happens to change things, and in the meantime I will not think about how I'm going to pay the debts due this month

It's not a zero sum game like I've said. Using micro individual analogies are very misleading. Macro economics works differently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics -

See "active fiscal policy"

So you are unable to explain where this money you want the country to spend is going to come from or how we will ever pay it back?

That's fine - we all know now you are calling for spending without any explanation of where the money is to come from.

Bankruptcy for the UK this way

*facepalm*

It's not a zero sum game.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_debt

daviesee

The reason the Government is making so many cuts is because it can't afford to pay for everything and so the national debt keeps increasing.

The Government is saying that the debt is getting out of control and it can't meet the payments while maintaining current costs. Increasing the debt will simply make the payments higher.

Other than increasing taxes, can anyone see where the money will come from to increase spending as borrowing is out of the question?

It's not a zero sum game but payments have to be met.

proto

Rick Chasey wrote:

It comes from borriwng - just like it has been ever since the crash happened. The fear is that if the UK borrows too much and there is a fear not all of it can be easily paid back, the credit rating will drop - and then the financial sh!t hits the fan. So you spend as much as you can before that happens. As soon as proper growth kicks in, those fears will subside.

Where is this 'proper growth' going to come from?

We don't make very much in this country, our imports consistently outweigh our exports, invisible earnings don't make up for the loss. We have precious little in the way of natural resources. We don't grow enough food to feed ourselves. There is a continuous outflowing of 'wealth' from this country funded by borrowing. It has been this way for decades. As an economic power we have been in relative decline since the early 1900s.

Everyone seems to be convinced that we will recover. We won't. This is an adjustment that has been a long time coming. We are going to be poorer than we were as a country and poorer individually (well, most of us). We are moving towards east European and far eastern standards of living. They do the work, we buy their products/food/gas/whatever. Unless we can sell them something to balance our purchases then they get richer and we get poorer, it's as easy as that.

TMR

If I read one more post with 'zero sum game' in it, I'm going to shoot someone in the face*

























* With my big todger

TMR

Have any of you read about the Georgia Guide Stones? There's one answer there...

Mr_Cellophane

The announcement was for 490,000 job cuts. Not 490,000 people being put out of work. A large number of these jobs will be vacant, many people will be offered early retirement and some will now be done by contractors/consultants.

rick_chasey

The Mad Rapper wrote:

If I read one more post with 'zero sum game' in it, I'm going to shoot someone in the face*

























* With my big todger

Zero sum game...

TMR

Rick Chasey wrote:

Zero sum game...

On your knees!

TMR

Mr_Cellophane wrote:

The announcement was for 490,000 job cuts. Not 490,000 people being put out of work. A large number of these jobs will be vacant, many people will be offered early retirement and some will now be done by contractors/consultants.

Consultants are the bane of the Public Sector. What a truly retarded approach - sack a worker and replace them with a consultant being paid 10 times as much *sigh*

TMR

proto wrote:

Where is this 'proper growth' going to come from?

We don't make very much in this country, our imports consistently outweigh our exports, invisible earnings don't make up for the loss. We have precious little in the way of natural resources. We don't grow enough food to feed ourselves. There is a continuous outflowing of 'wealth' from this country funded by borrowing. It has been this way for decades. As an economic power we have been in relative decline since the early 1900s.

Everyone seems to be convinced that we will recover. We won't. This is an adjustment that has been a long time coming. We are going to be poorer than we were as a country and poorer individually (well, most of us). We are moving towards east European and far eastern standards of living. They do the work, we buy their products/food/gas/whatever. Unless we can sell them something to balance our purchases then they get richer and we get poorer, it's as easy as that.

There's a lot of truth there IMHO. The UK, particularly England is now Service Industry focussed. What manufacturing still exists is very small scale.

rick_chasey

The Mad Rapper wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Zero sum game...

On your knees!

I thought you were going to shoot me not ask for a.... :shock:

finchy

The Mad Rapper wrote:

Mr_Cellophane wrote:

The announcement was for 490,000 job cuts. Not 490,000 people being put out of work. A large number of these jobs will be vacant, many people will be offered early retirement and some will now be done by contractors/consultants.

Consultants are the bane of the Public Sector. What a truly retarded approach - sack a worker and replace them with a consultant being paid 10 times as much *sigh*

+1 million, billion, trillion.