Friday, Aug 21, 2009
More spending is need for recovery
Bloomberg: Darling Says U.K. Recovery at Risk, Treasury Must Keep Spending
The comments are aimed at challenging Conservative Party leader David Cameron’s suggestion that the Labour government is damaging the economy by running up too much debt. Already BoE has printed 5 years of VAT revenues how far can they go before election?
Posted by mander @ 10:52 AM (609 views) Add Comment
6 Comments
- If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
- If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
1. fahrenheit451 said...
Good Grief "Charlie Brown". We are being led by people with the intelligence of cartoon characters. If he is worried about the cost of imports, then the problem lies with the exchange rate. (Both UK and US) And a crashing economy and increasing public debt with only make matters worse.
Good impression of an Ostrich I think.
I wonder what this is really about, … deflecting the news about the economy, perhaps.
See "The first pieces of the inflation puzzle are exposed" previous blog ...
2. Paul said...
See "The first pieces of the inflation puzzle are exposed" previous blog ...
Eh? What?
The government definitely needs to spend - the only problem is that they didn't save when times were good, but cutting sharply now would be a disaster, swelling the unemployed into 15-20%.
Spending more is bad, but not spending more is much much worse.
3. paul said...
See "The first pieces of the inflation puzzle are exposed" previous blog ...
Eh? What?
The government definitely needs to spend - the only problem is that they didn't save when times were good, but cutting sharply now would be a disaster, swelling the unemployed into 15-20%.
Spending more is bad, but not spending more is much much worse.
4. mark wadsworth said...
Doesn't it depend what they spend it ON?
Sure, the government could create a few million make-work jobs (oh ... they already did that) which might mask unemployment but only delay the problem.
Wouldn't it be better to minimise losses of existing jobs by subsidising them, or even better, by simply scrapping Employer's NIC (cutting cost of employing people by about 11%)?
5. mander said...
mark wadsworth,
It is not most of the printed money used to prop up the housing market? What sort of projects to create jobs are they preparing that we know of?
6. mrmickey said...
At the end of the day the government is just doing it's job it's trying to keep favoured businesses going and keep people in jobs by bailing everybody out. This will work in the short term but long term it will destroy the economy, by then it won't be their problem.