Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

What's wrong with sensible austerity policies? Watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    No, I was just using the Queen as an example of that top 10% I was referring to and at the same time mentioning that her wages are actually benefits like people on JSA and ESA. Whether the cost of the monarchy has fallen is irrelevant.
    The Queen's unpaid for what she does, actually...but let's not turn this into a debate on the monarchy. I sympathise with your broader view, but it's undermine by your flawed example, is all I'm saying
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Meh to err is human
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    Charades: One word, one syllable, begins with O and ends in L.
    Owl ?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the bear)
    Owl ?
    What better reason to go to war, to get their owls lol
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    So the Tories are cutting public services out of sadism? The Tories want to see less policemen on the streets for a laugh?
    Yes, that's correct.

    There is no such economic policy as "austerity". Its just an excuse the tories are using to try and make the nation suffer because they're sociopaths. Fortunately for them, most people know so little about economics that they don't understand this.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by whorace)
    Or put another way:

    How much would they be suffering if he we did not have austerity policies? They would be far worse.
    Incorrect - they'd be far, far better.

    This is the entire point. Austerity has done no good whatsoever, its simply destroyed thousands of people's lives for no reason. This was not a mistake or a surprise, the desire to destroy lives was the tories' reason for implementing the cuts in the first place.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dandaman1)
    In a time when a nation is recovering from one of the worst recessions in decades, and when the government is loaded with debt and an immense budget deficit, more borrowing and spending is going to be quite counterproductive..
    lol. I can tell you've never studied economics. Borrowing and spending is EXACTLY what the government needs to do in a recession to get the economy growing and tax receipts increasing again and the deficit starts going down.

    By slashing government expenditure, you suppress growth, permanently damage the economy and the deficit ends up growing. and of course, ruin the lives of millions of people, and all for nothing.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    During the world recession the top 10% of the rich actually got richer. Austerity would only be sensible if it was applied equally to everyone in society. Do you think the Queen is hit by austerity? Is her £35m per year benefits package cut? No way. Only the poorest and most vulnerable of society are targeted - mostly because they can't afford lawyers.

    If you ask these questions, then you have to be willing to find the answers. That takes research and talking to experts who know the subject. Simply asking the question isn't good enough.
    That's unpalatable, but lucky because the top 10% pay the majority of all the income tax collected. The poorest half of taxpayers pay about 12% of the income tax - and of course only around half the population are even taxpayers. So the richest are disproportionately rich, but they are also disproportionately harder working and disproportionately contributing far more to society than the rest.

    If you still feel that these people aren't paying their fair share, and perhaps that companies don't, consider these questions. Are you contributing your fair share? Government spending per capita is a bit more than £10,000 per year. Given that only half of people are taxpayers, are you paying more than £20,000 a year in tax?
    I'm not, and consider myself lucky that I live in country where rich people are prepared to subsidise everyone else's lifestyle and where businesses are able to create enough wealth to provide very high levels of social security, protection, healthcare, insurance and free pensions.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cole-slaw)
    lol. I can tell you've never studied economics. Borrowing and spending is EXACTLY what the government needs to do in a recession to get the economy growing and tax receipts increasing again and the deficit starts going down.

    By slashing government expenditure, you suppress growth, permanently damage the economy and the deficit ends up growing. and of course, ruin the lives of millions of people, and all for nothing.
    I like the way you use your degree to suppress every dissenting school of thought as though there wasn't any controversy in economics. Your view of government expenditure is not exactly the one being recommend by global institutions, so maybe you should be the one thinking about why people who have studied economics are pushing austerity on a global scale?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cole-slaw)
    Incorrect - they'd be far, far better.

    This is the entire point. Austerity has done no good whatsoever, its simply destroyed thousands of people's lives for no reason. This was not a mistake or a surprise, the desire to destroy lives was the tories' reason for implementing the cuts in the first place.
    It was not even a domestic decision really, it's the one taken by the Eurozone and every single other country, the fact you seriously think having a sensible deficit is a bad thing makes me think you were taught under Ed Balls, another idiot with a degree.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cole-slaw)
    lol. I can tell you've never studied economics. Borrowing and spending is EXACTLY what the government needs to do in a recession to get the economy growing and tax receipts increasing again and the deficit starts going down.

    By slashing government expenditure, you suppress growth, permanently damage the economy and the deficit ends up growing. and of course, ruin the lives of millions of people, and all for nothing.
    It's interesting how you use the idea of having studied economics as an authority statement. If you had studied economics as you say you have, you'd know that no two economists can agree, let alone an entire discipline. Economics doesn't pop out a convenient 'correct answer'.

    Both cutting and increasing borrowing are legitimate economic proposals which many highly-qualified economists (who probably studied economics more than you) have proposed in thousands of different guises.

    You're using your political motivations to try to make economic theories into right and wrong.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cole-slaw)
    lol. I can tell you've never studied economics. Borrowing and spending is EXACTLY what the government needs to do in a recession to get the economy growing and tax receipts increasing again and the deficit starts going down.

    By slashing government expenditure, you suppress growth, permanently damage the economy and the deficit ends up growing. and of course, ruin the lives of millions of people, and all for nothing.
    "I can tell you've never studied economics." Well, many economists would actually agree with my statement. If all one needed was an undergraduate economics course to solve an entire county's economic challenges, I doubt the UK would be in this situation.

    So it's just not that simple. Regardless, borrowing more money is probably a bad idea. 'Spending money to make money' got you into this mess, especially when it's money you don't actually have. Ya can't keep digging a deeper and deeper hole hoping to find gold.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cole-slaw)
    lol. I can tell you've never studied economics. Borrowing and spending is EXACTLY what the government needs to do in a recession to get the economy growing and tax receipts increasing again and the deficit starts going down.

    By slashing government expenditure, you suppress growth, permanently damage the economy and the deficit ends up growing. and of course, ruin the lives of millions of people, and all for nothing.
    You can't just say that borrowing and spending is needed to get the economy growing when what actually matters is what the money is spent on. Is it spend on something that can result in sustainable growth or does it just fuel short-term consumption with no regard for sustainability.

    You also ignoring that borrowing and spending by government takes money out of other areas of the economy and means that we have to devote more resources to paying off debt in the future.

    Another thing to consider is the projections for what the debt and deficit will be in the future. With massive unfunded liabilities that are not included in the official debt figures, it becomes obvious that growth will never be enough to help us pay those debts off.

    It is Keynesian tax and spend that got us into this fiscal mess. It won't get us out.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by whorace)
    I like the way you use your degree to suppress every dissenting school of thought as though there wasn't any controversy in economics. Your view of government expenditure is not exactly the one being recommend by global institutions, so maybe you should be the one thinking about why people who have studied economics are pushing austerity on a global scale?
    No-one who has studied economics supports austerity anymore, the only proponents who did based their argument (infamously) on an excel typo. There is no debate.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dandaman1)
    "I can tell you've never studied economics." Well, many economists would actually agree with my statement. If all one needed was an undergraduate economics course to solve an entire county's economic challenges, I doubt the UK would be in this situation.

    So it's just not that simple. Regardless, borrowing more money is probably a bad idea. 'Spending money to make money' got you into this mess, especially when it's money you don't actually have. Ya can't keep digging a deeper and deeper hole hoping to find gold.

    Well it should be easy for you to reference an academic paper that supports austerity then.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cole-slaw)
    No-one who has studied economics supports austerity anymore, the only proponents who did based their argument (infamously) on an excel typo. There is no debate.
    Should I contact the Eurozone to tell them they are all wrong?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
    You also ignoring that borrowing and spending by government takes money out of other areas of the economy and means that we have to devote more resources to paying off debt in the future.
    .
    That's a new one to me, care to explain how you think this might work?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cole-slaw)
    Well it should be easy for you to reference an academic paper that supports austerity then.
    Real world != Some nice academic papers. Ed Balls wrote a lot of **** in academia and has been doing so for a long time, take a look at this clip
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NB3neSNfmg
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by whorace)
    Should I contact the Eurozone to tell them they are all wrong?
    There's no need, I talk to them on a daily basis. They're well aware of what an utter disaster their brief flirtation with austerity was.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cole-slaw)
    There's no need, I talk to them on a daily basis. They're well aware of what an utter disaster their brief flirtation with austerity was.
    Is this from the very small number of socialists who still live in the 60s? I don't see a fundamental change in Eurozone economic policy, so you must be a minority.
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling about your A-level results?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.