Brits cut the budget 25%

[nonlnear]

nvm

 

[MotF Bane]

It's ALWAYS going to be the next administration's problem... until the SHTF. It's like playing Hot Potato.

This.

 

[her209]

20/17.5 - 1 = ~14.3%

 

[MotF Bane]

Everyone says that but when push comes to shove no one wants to give up anything.

The Baggers don't want to cut entitlements, except for the poors.

The hawks don't want to cut military spending because Raytheon and Boeing need their subsidies.

The libs don't want to cut education/entitlements.

The corporatists don't want to close all the tax loopholes...

I want them all cut. Where's my box?

 

[highland145]

3.141rr is where all that stimulus $$ went.

 

[soulcougher73]

Silly Brits, didn't Obama teach you yet that you need to just spend spend spend some more? That will fix it all, not this silly budget cutting. Just print some more and go waste more.

I think they learned that trait by watching Bush for 8 years Not that Obama is any better but dont forget who started it

 

[bfdd]

I wish we'd cut our budget 25%. I'd be ok with a 2.5% tax increase across the board too until we got ourselves out of this mess.

 

[ayabe]

I want them all cut. Where's my box?

Ok we've got a few on board, we just need to form our own ATPN Bagger PAC and water the tree of liberty......

 

[tk149]

I'm generally against big government, but cutting spending AND raising taxes during a recession...doesn't sound like a good idea. You're decreasing the available money for the private sector and government.

 

[highland145]

I'm generally against big government, but cutting spending AND raising taxes during a recession...doesn't sound like a good idea. You're decreasing the available money for the private sector and government.

The piper has got to be paid. Sucks greatly during a recession but foresight hasn't been anyone's strong suit.

 

[cubby1223]

I wonder how bad the "conservatives" posting here would squeal if we had a 20% tax increase. Extremely loudly, I expect.

Extremely loudly? You betcha!

'Cause if this administration raised taxes by 20%, they'd be doing it to try to finance unsustainable wealth redistribution programs, social security, medicaid, Obamacare. The taxes would be going towards covering public sector union pension programs. They get lost to waste and fraud, there was a new article out talking about prison inmates getting the home buyer tax credits. We're tired of our tax money paying for loser teachers sitting in rubber rooms doing nothing.

And if a tax increase were implemented, we would want it applied more evenly, not another "the rich are not paying enough" speech attached to it (and for the record I was one of those who received money back from Obama that I never paid in).

If the taxes are raised to pay for spending programs that have little use other than to help that congressman gain a few extra votes in his district, then I would loudly oppose tax increased.



But couple tax increases with a reduction in the size of government, makes them a little more tolerable.

 

[Thump553]

Extremely loudly? You betcha!

'Cause if this administration raised taxes by 20%, they'd be doing it to try to finance unsustainable wealth redistribution programs, social security, medicaid, Obamacare. The taxes would be going towards covering public sector union pension programs. They get lost to waste and fraud, there was a new article out talking about prison inmates getting the home buyer tax credits. We're tired of our tax money paying for loser teachers sitting in rubber rooms doing nothing.

And if a tax increase were implemented, we would want it applied more evenly, not another "the rich are not paying enough" speech attached to it (and for the record I was one of those who received money back from Obama that I never paid in).

If the taxes are raised to pay for spending programs that have little use other than to help that congressman gain a few extra votes in his district, then I would loudly oppose tax increased.



But couple tax increases with a reduction in the size of government, makes them a little more tolerable.

I did my math too hurriedly-as pointed out above this is a 14.3% tax increase, not a triffling 2.5% one.


But it is precisely this attitude you so clearly demonstrate which shows why we will NEVER undertake such a drastic correction here, at least until (long after) the sh*t hits the fan. "Conservatives" as that term is used here-will vehemently oppose ANY tax increase whatsoever and most will vehemently oppose any cuts to the military. The elderly will likewise vehemently oppose any cuts to Social Security or Medicare. Democrats will oppose any cuts to social programs they favor. The typical narrow view is all government spending is waste except that which I support.

In summary no politician, Dem or GOP, is going to commit political suicide by seriously adovcating such a program here. Perhaps the bastard child government Britain got after their last election was a blessing in disguise.

 

[gingermeggs]

It astounds me sometimes that people think that the government creates wealth.

Same can be said for the banking and finance industries.
Money should represent productive value.

Lets face it without weapons sales and ownership of foreign resources the USA would be junk now.
So the two monkeys on the back of the US economy is the public sector and financial sector, both way out of proportion to their productive value.
It's nothing like socialism, not even close- it's more like a flea circus.

 

[Jaskalas]

It's ALWAYS going to be the next administration's problem... until the SHTF. It's like playing Hot Potato.

So why is Bernie Madoff in jail? Our President and Congress are doing the same thing, imagine the devastation when it finally hits.

 

[Narmer]

They seem to be going about it the right and wrong way: reducing welfare payments and increasing taxes on bank profits (good) and increasing VAT (very bad).

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...get+deficits+1996&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

 

[theeedude]

Austerity policies = Great Depression 2.0

 

[cubby1223]

The typical narrow view is all government spending is waste except that which I support.

It's not so much about "wasteful" spending as it is about certain government spending is unsustainable under *any* situation.

 

[Zebo]

You should have to work for a check. I don't mind a welfare state but it should not be a permanent paid vacation as that has proven unsustainable since many people decide to take advantage. Face it - there are some people who can get by with very little and be just happy about it when balanced out with doing nothing. We need to remove the doing nothing part and I think you'd find a boon because people will either decide "hey if a gotta work I may as well work for more"...won't be long sweeping streets for .gov before they become something.

 

[StageLeft]

The math in this thread is an embarrassment, as is the reading comprehension, beginning with the claim that England is cutting by 25%, which it is not even coming close to doing.

 

[lothar]

Austerity policies = Great Depression 2.0

It is possible to slash budgets and maintain economic growth.

 

[highland145]

The math in this thread is an embarrassment, as is the reading comprehension, beginning with the claim that England is cutting by 25%, which it is not even coming close to doing.

Typical that I can't find the link that took me to the article that said the 25%.

But here you go.

Britain has now joined other European countries in entering an era of austerity. The new center-right coalition government has announced a budget that aims to slash public spending by 25 percent over the next four years, increase the sales tax to 20 percent, cut welfare spending, and shrink the role of the state in British economic life.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128013833

25% /year or 25% divided by 4 years for 6.25% per year? Don't know, could be read either way.

This implies the 25%/year.
http://www.deadline.com/2010/06/uk-film-council-faces-25-budget-cut/

Thoughts?

Edit: I'd take the 6.25% as a start.

 

[Jaskalas]

It is possible to slash budgets and maintain economic growth.

Not if your economic growth IS government growth as they intend it to be.

 

[JTsyo]

We have enough credit left that we can get through this recession before we consider balancing the budget. It's something that needs to be done but I don't think now is the time.
It's better to cut entitlements earlier than later since you don't want people getting used to them. They should be low enough as to encourage the recipients to seek a job, at least part-time.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Probably would, but that is not what is happening in the UK. The VAT is going from 17.5% to 20%. I believe it was already at 20% before the crisis, and it got lowered.

No. It was raised from 15% in the 90's to 17.5% and stayed that way until last year when it was lowered by the previous Govt. to 15% to stimulate the economy. It then went back to 17.5% Jan 1 2010, and now it's going to be20% on Jan 1 2011.

VAT does not apply to certain goods and services, e.g., food, childrens clothes, etc. Business is exempt from VAT on goods and services.

 

[tk149]

The piper has got to be paid. Sucks greatly during a recession but foresight hasn't been anyone's strong suit.

The problem is that you're shrinking the available pool of money that is needed to lift the economy out of the recession. In other words, I'd expect the recession to last longer.

Didn't the Japanese or some other country try this? I can't remember.