Great First Budget

[Guest_ringledman_*]

Great first Budget from Osborne.

A man with the balls to cut out the crap from the public sector.

The realisation at last that private sector lead economies are the ones that survive over the longer term.

Bring on the austerity.

Short term pain for long term gain.

[Pent Up]

Great first Budget from Osborne.

A man with the balls to cut out the crap from the public sector.

The realisation at last that private sector lead economies are the ones that survive over the longer term.

Bring on the austerity.

Short term pain for long term gain.

Death of the Keynesian. Unless of course it doesn't work and we plunge into depression.

[non frog]

Great first Budget from Osborne.

....

Non-budget from dickhead.

[Guest_ringledman_*]

Death of the Keynesian. Unless of course it doesn't work and we plunge into depression.

We would have had a depression under Labour anyhow so bring on the hard times.

If we don't cut the non productive public sector we are fuked anyhow.

If it means a double dip to maintain the long term health of UK plc bring it on.

Edited June 27, 2010 by ringledman

[huw]

Death of the Keynesian. Unless of course it doesn't work and we plunge into depression.

Actually this budget contained at least one idea that could be expanded into a proper counter-cyclical measure -- balance sheet tax. It just needs to be tweaked so it bites more as balance sheets grow; less as they shrink.

Simply acknowledging that boom-and-bust still exist makes this government more Keynesian than New Labour

[non frog]

....

If we don't cut the non productive public sector we are fuked anyhow.

...

Also the vast gargantuan non-productive parasite part of the private sector, like banks. Cut both of these and all will be well. Although unemployment will be about 45%

I really hope you like the depression you want so much. You must be very skilled at begging already.

[campervanman]

Non-budget from dickhead.

UK=all dickheads together

[headmelter]

Also the vast gargantuan non-productive parasite part of the private sector, like banks. Cut both of these and all will be well. Although unemployment will be about 45%

I really hope you like the depression you want so much. You must be very skilled at begging already.

So many on here are so short sighted. I can't understand why so many want the bad times so much.

[Pent Up]

So many on here are so short sighted. I can't understand why so many want the bad times so much.

We want sensible house prices. We focus on anything negative that may effect house prices. There are plenty of people not just on here that believe depression is inevitable. That doesn't mean we or they want it.

[Traktion]

Also the vast gargantuan non-productive parasite part of the private sector, like banks. Cut both of these and all will be well. Although unemployment will be about 45%

I really hope you like the depression you want so much. You must be very skilled at begging already.

I agree that banking reform is badly needed, but you can't live off public borrowing forever. Not only is public borrowing "regressive" (I hate those terms - they're loaded with spite), but it's unsustainable.

If Labour want to go into an election, saying they will tax everyone left working to death, in order to fill the country with non-jobs and scroungers, that's fair enough. I wouldn't vote for them and neither would loads of people working in the private sector, but it's a straight forward choice. Borrowing in order to fill the country with non-jobs and scroungers, giving the bill to the next generation, while lining the pockets of the gilt investing rich is another - it's disgusting and dishonest.

TBH though, the more private sector jobs we drive out, the more impoverished we will become. As it becomes more and more expensive to be entrepreneurial (in the non-BTL sense! ), the less wealthy we will become on a whole. It's a case of either taking a good amount of pain now or a horrible amount of pain in the future. We have no other choice.

[Traktion]

There are plenty of people not just on here that believe depression is inevitable. That doesn't mean we or they want it.

Exactly! We're in a fecking mess and we either keep making the same mistakes and save up agony for later or we take a degree of hardship now. IMO, if we carry on down the well trodden road towards failure, the great depression will look like a walk in the park.

[plummet expert]

I agree that banking reform is badly needed, but you can't live off public borrowing forever. Not only is public borrowing "regressive" (I hate those terms - they're loaded with spite), but it's unsustainable.

If Labour want to go into an election, saying they will tax everyone left working to death, in order to fill the country with non-jobs and scroungers, that's fair enough. I wouldn't vote for them and neither would loads of people working in the private sector, but it's a straight forward choice. Borrowing in order to fill the country with non-jobs and scroungers, giving the bill to the next generation, while lining the pockets of the gilt investing rich is another - it's disgusting and dishonest.

TBH though, the more private sector jobs we drive out, the more impoverished we will become. As it becomes more and more expensive to be entrepreneurial (in the non-BTL sense! ), the less wealthy we will become on a whole. It's a case of either taking a good amount of pain now or a horrible amount of pain in the future. We have no other choice.

Exactly so. Keynesianism has been proved time and again not to work, except in very modest amounts. You need sound money and we no longer have that! You will only get back to growth and real wealth creation if we take the pain required to put matters back to normal. Since we and others have borrowed so much over so many years and produced very little except high house prices, which we have remortgaged to live in a manner we did not earn, we are now being asked to pay up. Simple really. No good people moaning - the public sector is far too big and yes putting it right will involve a vile recession all over the western world. The last one was a mere prelude.

[Guest happy?]

Great first Budget from Osborne.

A man with the balls to cut out the crap from the public sector.

The realisation at last that private sector lead economies are the ones that survive over the longer term.

Bring on the austerity.

Short term pain for long term gain.

Nope.

If it worked in 1980 - how come so many people in the Midlands/North/North East/Wales/South West are dependent on the public sector for a living.

The Tories are excellent at cutting jobs (they've got a strong track record on this) but piss-poor at creating the environment in which new enterprise thrives.

[libspero]

Nope.

If it worked in 1980 - how come so many people in the Midlands/North/North East/Wales/South West are dependent on the public sector for a living.

The Tories are excellent at cutting jobs (they've got a strong track record on this) but piss-poor at creating the environment in which new enterprise thrives.

They introduced several measures in the budget for exactly that purpose. Reduced corporation tax. Less employer contribution to NI (new employees only I think).

This is in no way a silver bullet, but it starts to make us look more attractive to international business. I doubt you would argue that is a bad thing?

The cuts were kind of necessary to help rebalance the gaping budget deficit.. plus a lot of it is a real terms cut rather than an actual cut.. similar to that facing the private sector.

We are becoming poorer because our productivity turned out to be based on a mountain of malinvestment (no finger pointing at who's watch that happened under). For that reason I expect our standard of living to drop, which means price inflation will out strip wage inflation. It is going to happen in the private sector, and we can't afford to let it not happen in the public sector IMHO.

[Si1]

Nope.

If it worked in 1980 - how come so many people in the Midlands/North/North East/Wales/South West are dependent on the public sector for a living.

The Tories are excellent at cutting jobs (they've got a strong track record on this) but piss-poor at creating the environment in which new enterprise thrives.

what you on about? the M6 and M1 corrisors have done fine. Birmingham Warrington Manchester up past Preston and Lancaster. SMEs, some biggies. Manufacturing. Industry. Commerce.

overgeneralised, ill informed I'm afraid. Have a pot noodle. buy a Sony TV. Drive a Nissan Micra.

Edited June 27, 2010 by Si1

[ralphmalph]

Nope.

If it worked in 1980 - how come so many people in the Midlands/North/North East/Wales/South West are dependent on the public sector for a living.

The Tories are excellent at cutting jobs (they've got a strong track record on this) but piss-poor at creating the environment in which new enterprise thrives.

so many people are dependent on the public sector because that was Browns plan. He deliberately created all these public sector jobs in unemployment black spots because he did not want those people to better themselves and achieve but just to be dependent on the govt (Labour) teat. Do not forget that manufacturing output fell by more and faster under the last 13 years of labour than it did under the Tories.

On the subject of the tories can not create jobs Maggie realised that we needed modern manufacturing techniques and she worked tirelessly to get Honda, Nissan, Toyota, etc into the UK and it was done right because they are still here and still committing new investment. Contrast this with the competence of the Labour party that did a dodgy deal twice at Rover because and election was looming and that was all they cared about and it was a complete disaster twice.

Edited June 27, 2010 by ralphmalph

[ken_ichikawa]

what you on about? the M6 and M1 corrisors have done fine. Birmingham Warrington Manchester up past Preston and Lancaster. SMEs, some biggies. Manufacturing. Industry. Commerce.

overgeneralised, ill informed I'm afraid. Have a pot noodle. buy a Sony TV. Drive a Nissan Micra.

I dunno if thats right. Manchester lately has seemed to be a ghost town, my bicycle rides around where old factories used to be have been replaced by block after block of flats.

[Si1]

I dunno if thats right. Manchester lately has seemed to be a ghost town, my bicycle rides around where old factories used to be have been replaced by block after block of flats.

OK Manchester area, the Cheshire and suburban campuses for various tech firms and larger

however, it IS suffering right now, but I'm speaking more in terms of medium term - given its industrial heyday probably ended in the 1950s, it had regenerated well during 80s and 90s

[Analysis]

Great first Budget from Osborne.

A man with the balls to cut out the crap from the public sector.

The realisation at last that private sector lead economies are the ones that survive over the longer term.

Bring on the austerity.

Short term pain for long term gain.

Please start by privatising the NHS. Healthcare costs around $3000 per person per year in the nationally run NHS in the UK and France, compared to around $6000 in the USA (WHO figures). Someone doing my job earns a median salary of $190k in the USA, compared to £45k in the UK, so presumably most of the additional cost per head goes on salaries. In the last WHO healthcare rankings the French were in the number 1 slot, with the UK at 18 and the USA at 39.

NHS salaries will be huge. Demand for healthcare will go up enormously over the next few years as the population lives longer. So please privatise us now and start paying us all the salaries we really deserve. Expect standards to get worse as well - maybe the UK can enjoy a slip to 39th place after the NHS is privatised.

The NHS would also play an important part in private sector Britain - as a leading technology sector delivering huge profits to our rich shareholders, and all funded at double the current cost by the good old British public.

Thank you in advance.

[Si1]

Please start by privatising the NHS. Healthcare costs around $3000 per person per year in the nationally run NHS in the UK and France, compared to around $6000 in the USA (WHO figures). Someone doing my job earns a median salary of $190k in the USA, compared to £45k in the UK, so presumably most of the additional cost per head goes on salaries. In the last WHO healthcare rankings the French were in the number 1 slot, with the UK at 18 and the USA at 39.

NHS salaries will be huge. Demand for healthcare will go up enormously over the next few years as the population lives longer. So please privatise us now and start paying us all the salaries we really deserve. Expect standards to get worse as well - maybe the UK can enjoy a slip to 39th place after the NHS is privatised.

The NHS would also play an important part in private sector Britain - as a leading technology sector delivering huge profits to our rich shareholders, and all funded at double the current cost by the good old British public.

Thank you in advance.

I think it is widely recognised by all but the most ardent fanatical free market fetishists that healthcare is best kept in some kind of public ownership

[Analysis]

I think it is widely recognised by all but the most ardent fanatical free market fetishists that healthcare is best kept in some kind of public ownership

So then everyone needs to pay market rate wages to healthcare staff. You can cut NHS salaries + pensions as Osborne is suggesting but then you'll lose all the talent abroad and basically have a poor health service.

I came back from working abroad in 2007 along with 4 other clinical scientists, partly because of the decent pension. Wouldn't hesitate to go somewhere else if salaries and benefits in the UK got much worse.

[Traktion]

I think it is widely recognised by all but the most ardent fanatical free market fetishists that healthcare is best kept in some kind of public ownership

There are better systems than ours, which are a combination of both. If we could reconnect NI payments as an optional NHS subscription, with alternatives available in the private sector, we would certainly have more choice.

What annoys me about NHS debate, is that it can become very polarised. We seem scared about even having a debate about the nature of the NHS. In a similar way to the free schools have been suggested (where the money follows the child, wherever they are schooled), I think there could be more choice. No doubt NHS apologists would complain the competition would reflect poorly on the NHS (like the argument against the free schools), but that seems like a daft argument to me; if the alternatives are better, then let them flourish.

[Oliver Sutton]

Also the vast gargantuan non-productive parasite part of the private sector, like banks. Cut both of these and all will be well. Although unemployment will be about 45%

I really hope you like the depression you want so much. You must be very skilled at begging already.

And who was it who bailed out the banks with many hundreds of billions of guarantees?

I'll help you and reduce it to 3 options.

1) Tories

2) Liberals

3) Labour

[Alan B'Stard MP]

And who was it who bailed out the banks with many hundreds of billions of guarantees?

I'll help you and reduce it to 3 options.

1) Tories

2) Liberals

3) Labour

Can I ask the audience?

[Oliver Sutton]

What annoys me about NHS debate, is that it can become very polarised. We seem scared about even having a debate about the nature of the NHS.

Have to agree with you there.

The NHS is seen as sacrosant.

The European system is much better.In the Germanic countries the healthcare system is unbelievably good. The state runs the insurance scheme and the hospitals are private.

Everybody is covered. e.g. The unemployed get it paid by the state.

Edited June 28, 2010 by barry