UK returns to budget surplus

I know a fascist such as yourself is more openly honest about the brutality of your politics. If only that counted for anything.

Ah the old, "if you're even to the slightest right of me, you're a facist".

Disagree. We had huge debts after WWII. Far greater than what we have now. Instead of a austerity we built hundreds of thousands of houses, a welfare state and the NHS. The debt shrank. This was the era which you said was superior to the one we have now.

The idea that you need austerity to pay the debts down is economically false.

I (well not Dajiv038, we have history )

. But then again unlike with fascism, there are actually commendable things about being a communist.

Yes, becsuse we just finished in a major war and started dismantling a crumbling empire. Go figure.

We are spending far far more on things like the NHS now than then. It was not designed to cope with today’s society.



It’s not. It’s not quite as simple as just cutting, but as we can see from the OP and others it works. I’d also add it’s a more proven way than spending your way out of recession.

That's a very rose-tinted view of post-war history. We also devalued, a lot, and the burden hobbled us economically until at least the 80s.

I don't agree with that, at all. The reality is high debt necessitated contractionary economic policies in the decades following the war. We are talking about a time where the top rate if income tax was 90% and inflation was high (hitting 24% in the 70s). I don't think we want to return to that scenario.

One way or another, debts must be repaid. It's very easy to say "we can grow our way out", but as debts mount investors lose confidence in the government's ability to pay. The inverse relationship between government debt and GDP growth is pretty well established. Yes, we did grow in the immediate aftermath of the war. But given the damage and disruption the conflict had wrought we were always likely to. Adding all those men back into the workforce was always going to increase GDP. It was a special circumstance which, god willing, won't be repeated.

I'm not saying we should replicate the 50s and you're right in that the situation now is very different. Nor was it all plain sailing.

But the bottom line is we spent hugely invested in all sorts of public services and goods and our economy grew hugely. Our debt shrunk from 200% GDP to less than 60%
It is possible to pay debts off through growth rather than austerity. Considering interest rates are so low, we really should be seconding more on infrastructure at the moment. As well as on creating jobs in the renewable energy sector which is going to be of increasing importance.

If you invest in things like housing, education, healthcare etc you will have a healthier, higher skilled and more productive workforce. I'm always going to prefer paying down debts by increasing the country's income rather than cutting public services which people rely on.

Honestly, since 2008 does it really feel like this country has made ten years worth of progress? From 1997 to 2007 the answer to that would have been a lot more positive.

To the average British punter the state of the economy is what The Sun and/or the Daily Mail says.

The food banks, the desperation, the cuts to local services... all due to individual traits (the scrounger narrative) or the local councils (bonus points for non-Tory)incompetence.

Case in point: Gavin Williamson recently blaming cuts to local services on the local council and getting a petition to shield central governments savage cuts.

I remember Cameron signing a letter to his Council complaining about cuts, when his government has cut their grant by 40%.

Honestly does anyone feel like this country is a better or happier place than it was ten years ago?

As if any of this has any consequences. Or that you weren't actually knobs.

I didn't realise that you convinced people by calling those who disagree with you "knobs"

It's very important to distinguish between current spending and infrastructure spending. It is the current deficit which has (finally) been eliminated.

Yes, low interest rates make infrastructure projects easier to finance and that's all well and good, because you assume you'll derive some benefits from them at some point to make the cost of financing worthwhile. But we have also been running a deficit in day-to-day spending, and financing that with long-term debt. It's the government equivalent of taking out a mortgage to pay your food bills. We have been spending beyond our means and then just kicking the can down the road, hoping future taxpayers will be more able to pick up the bill.

And yes, if we grow, they might. But it's a very optimistic government which takes the risk of assuming we'll grow at a good enough clip to overtake our spending habits. Because what if something unexpected happens (as they often do) and we don't grow all that much? We'd be ****ed.

Even if they would be able, there's the secondary argument of whether it's really fair or moral to ask kids to pick up the tab for their parents' largesse.

Who says I am trying to convince you or people like you?

On this issue I don't need to anyway. You guys are not exactly doing a great job of stopping the Trans tidel wave.

I personally think you are both wrong.

Getting the day to day spending of the government to a neutral position is very important but we must also heavily invest to fix what is wrong with the country I.e. housing and transport for example.

That requires many hundreds of billions.

It’s not an either or it’s simply the right thing to do as is putting tax up for everyone.

If you think Pinochet was on the whole the right thing for Chile you are a bit of a fascist.

You are all such (well not Dajiv038, we have history ) snowflakes. It's the easiet way to wind you all up. I don't cry when I get called a commie. But then again unlike with fascism, there are actually commendable things about being a communist.

Housing and transport require higher taxes? The private sector says high, especially in the case of housing it is government (mostly local) holding things back.

But you're missing my point, it's not about you hurting people's feelings (which tbh, I couldn't care less about), it's about you shutting down a conversation.

General tax on the public is needed for that investment.

We are never going to build enough houses until the government directly commissions houses to be built for example.

The roads needed 20 billion spent on them just to bring them up to good working condition and that’s without building the new roads needed.

And so on.