Sunday, Nov 01, 2009
The worst economic news for 50 years?
Times Online: Britain needs ‘£350bn of tax rises and spending cuts’
Roger Bootle, economic adviser to Deloitte, will say that Britain’s public finances are in the “worst shape for at least half a century” and warn that the country faces “the tightest squeeze on public spending for a generation”. "Most of this would need to come from a squeeze on public spending, with the remainder from higher taxes."
Posted by tim miller @ 11:46 PM (439 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. mr g said...
"Despite Mr Bootle’s forecast, there are signs of rising consumer confidence. A survey out today will show that it has risen to its highest level for 18 months. The survey by Nielsen, the market researcher, and the British Retail Consortium measured consumer confidence at 75 in October, against 72 in June."
More evidence that the sheeple are in denial.
2. mark wadsworth said...
We can easily cut public spending by £100 billion a year, without anybody noticing.
Local authorities employ 4 million people, which includes nearly all the useful public sector workers, like teachers, nurses, coppers, social workers, plus maybe a million 5-a-day and climate change advisors and street football co-ordinators.
But mysteriously, there are 8 million taxpayer funded jobs, so there are four million not employed by councils. Sure, we need tax inspectors, soldiers, prison officers etc (one million as an absolute upper figure, and I'm being generous here), but in the non local authority state sector there must be 3 million completely superfluous civil servants.
So, sack 4 miilion of them @ £25,000 each (and then some), hey presto, there's your £100 billion saving. We don't need to even go near "frontline services" or making the benefit system even meaner.
3. mrmickey said...
Don't forget the people working in the public sector spend their money in the private sector, you can't take out 4,000,000 salaries at £25K each without giving the economy a good kick in the nuts.
4. mr g said...
MW@2
I'm pleased to see that you have latched on to my "bete noires" namely climate change advisors and street football co-ordinators!
mrmickey@3 I would much rather see the economy get a good kick in the nuts than continue subsidise the "nomenklatura" in the public sector.
The nomenklatura were a small, elite subset of the general population in the Soviet Union and other Eastern Bloc countries who held various administrative positions in all spheres of those countries' activity: government, industry, agriculture, education, etc.
5. nickb said...
No, you need the climate change advisors (at most about 1 per council it seems). Otherwise how are you going to meet emissions reduction targets, or plan for increased flood risk and so on? Implicit in your jibe is the view that CC is not a problem - it is, or do you think there is something more rational to go on than the science? An interesting question for HPCers as they constantly and rightly complain about vested interests in another context.
6. mr g said...
nickb@5
I'll agree to differ with your take on CC but I'm pleased to see that you don't criticise my thoughts on street football co-ordinators.