Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
George Osborne says austerity plan is working 
Author Message
Legend

Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:30 pm
Posts: 45931
Location: Belfast
Reply with quote
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25225532

Haven't read that myself yet.

_________________
Plain English advice on everything money, purchase and service related:

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/


Thu Dec 05, 2013 7:22 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 17040
Reply with quote
Well he would say that wouldn't he?


Thu Dec 05, 2013 9:13 pm
Profile
Doesn't have much of a life

Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 6:50 am
Posts: 1911
Reply with quote
You have to admit that there has been some chronic BS written in these parts about the grim austerity that will maim and kill us. Here's a favourite of mine from 2010, courtesy of our in house prophet of mega-insane-ultra-doom... but the rest of you disaster queens haven't been much less ridiculous.

Amnesia10 wrote:
I expect at least a country or two in Europe to collapse into revolution. Ireland will collapse but not sure if the public will rise up. Several east European countries will collapse, and Greece will probably become a military dictatorship again to restore order. Hungary looks very vulnerable as well. Though once the revolutions start watch the coalition abandon austerity just long enough to avoid problems here.

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=10774

At some point, it will be time for you to swallow a little of that pride and accept that the man hasn't done as bad a job as you predicted. It's not hard, he doesn't deserve a great deal of credit; the UK economy is not that bad a thing, it will right itself as long as reactionary idiots don't attempt Procrustean fixes.

Thus far Osborne has been slightly to the right of the most obvious pragmatic approach, it would have been smarter to push more of the cost cutting into the medium term through faster pension changes, but he hasn't gone far wrong so long as he doesn't use all this as an excuse to double down.


Fri Dec 06, 2013 12:20 am
Profile
Doesn't have much of a life
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 5:12 pm
Posts: 1171
Reply with quote
Amnesia10 wrote:
I expect at least a country or two in Europe to collapse into revolution. Ireland will collapse but not sure if the public will rise up. Several east European countries will collapse, and Greece will probably become a military dictatorship again to restore order. Hungary looks very vulnerable as well. Though once the revolutions start watch the coalition abandon austerity just long enough to avoid problems here.

Mind blowing stuff!
And to think everyone's vote carries the same weight...

_________________
Image
Free Sim with £5 credit


Fri Dec 06, 2013 7:25 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 17040
Reply with quote
Some people don't agree, surprisingly.

Quote:
The problem with the argument is that the “hard work” hasn’t paid off. After three and a half years of austerity, the outlook for the government’s finances doesn’t look any better than it did when Osborne entered office. In fact, it looks worse.


Sat Dec 07, 2013 9:18 pm
Profile
Doesn't have much of a life

Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 6:50 am
Posts: 1911
Reply with quote
That article's just a matter of interpretation. It effectively agrees with my point about pushing cost cutting into the medium term, and the pointlessness of politicians claiming credit for the movement of an entire economy. The numbers supplied are of course endlessly contestable. Hanging the the chancellor on the basis of OBR predictions that are little better than haruspicy is a bit pointless.

On thing they did say of note though was:
New Yorker wrote:
As Alan Taylor pointed out, the entire sorry episode only confirms what Keynes wrote seventy-five years ago: “The boom, not the slump, is the right time for austerity at the Treasury.


So perhaps what we should look for in a good chancellor isn't immediate fiscal results (which are largely the result of investment decisions taken years beforehand) but improvements in long run policy.

Like this
Economist.com wrote:
The other steps are more radical. Mr Osborne confirmed he will bring a “Charter for Budget Responsibility” around the time of the Autumn Statement in 2014. The idea is to get Parliament to vote for fiscal consolidation, making budget-balance a cross-party agreement, rather than just a policy of the coalition government. Alongside this he aims to put in place a cap on welfare spending. This would put a limit on the amount the state would pay out in tax credits, income support and housing benefit (pensions would be excluded). If the government of the day wanted to break the cap, Parliament would need to vote on it.

The long-term economics of this are interesting. Since the late 1970s academic economists have worried that economics and politics don’t mix well. The problem is timing: short-term political priorities can lead to a bias towards more inflation and higher budget deficits. Mr Osborne’s changes to Britain’s fiscal setup—first the Office for Budget Responsibility and now seeking new rules on balanced budgets—tie the hands of whoever is in charge of fiscal policy. Of course, there is short-term politics here too: asking Labour to decide whether or not they are responsible six months before a general election is a clever move. But in the long run, these changes stand a chance of making counter-cyclical fiscal policy—cutting during booms, spending during slumps—the norm. That would be good for Britain

http://www.economist.com/blogs/blighty/ ... tatement-2


In either case, no matter what pointless window dressing one does for the matter. Osborne hasn't been the disaster that his haters (perversely) wished for. And he hasn't been the glorious saviour that some idiots believe in. He disapoints extremists of every hue, which is not a bad thing.


Sun Dec 08, 2013 2:04 am
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 17040
Reply with quote
On Capitalism and the Social Compact


Sun Dec 08, 2013 7:30 pm
Profile
Doesn't have much of a life

Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 6:50 am
Posts: 1911
Reply with quote
That piece is interesting, but confused and bad. He rejects Marxism on purely empirical terms - Marx's predictions failed. But he does not attempt to understand Marx's methodological failings - the causes of the faulty predictions.

Marx's analytical categories were far too rigid, his teleological historiography was of its time (being in large part a response to Hegel), but directional histories that runs on rails are a Victorian antique that needs no resurrection. Marx was also too smitten by neat turning points, where that forced directional history becomes apparent. And his analysis of capitalism's failings presupposed (as a result of his teleological leanings) that capitalism would have no mechanism for self correction, which turned out to be a Malthusian fallacy.

In that linked article, David Simon has repeated every one of those procedural failings.

Sadly, he's added some additional mistakes, such as attributing articles of America's culture wars to constructs that cannot actually contain them on the flimsy basis that some people who say they are capitalists also say these things. This is the kind of error that Marx would certainly not have made.


Sun Dec 08, 2013 8:15 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 8 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.