I don't howl against (at least some of) that reasoning at all.

What I was saying is that cutting spending this dramatically is basically going to take billions out of the economy over a 5 year period. That money which would have been spent in the public sector will simply not be borrowed as it would have been.

The fact of the matter is that the UK's finances were not at all bad before the banking crisis. Our national debt was at around 52% of GDP which isn't that high when compared with other countries such as America and Japan. However the bailout (which should not have happened) put us at 147% of GDP.

These cuts are occurring for one reason only and that is to pay for RBS, Lloyds and all of the other failed business' we had to pay for caused by the deregulation you argue for.

No doubt the public sector is too big and manufacturing is non-existent; as are exports. But Britain is now a serviced based economy. It's short-sightedness in the past lost us our best industries to foreign competitors. Just look at Royal Mail for squandered success.

Though I'm not a big believer in capitalism so I think I'll stop here...

So give me the solution. Russia tried one and it didn't work. They had to build a wall around the entire Eastern Block to keep people and businesses in. And it failed miserably.

Strange to hear a person in business talking like a Communist.

Industry kept in the UK. = 10 x the current price for clothing and loads of other goods. Plus overseas companies not coming to the UK to do or invest in businesses.

Plus full employment = Low wages for every one. They had full employment in Czech. They were earning less than $300 a month.

Enron and those who did the same should be in prison and some are or were. But the rich robber barons as you think, are making vast profits that makes the heels turn around and will repay the debts.

The public sector are there to keep the streets clean, cure the sick, teach children, etc. Not repay the massive debts Gordon Brown ran up.

Look at Greece, Portugal, Eire and there might be Spain to add to the list for the consequences of what you propose.

And where do you think public sector revenues come from to buy the iPhones? :1orglaugh

There are only 3 places it can come from, printing money, borrowing and private sector. Even Gordon Brown couldn't get it from anywhere else.

Some of the economics here is laughable and an indication of business prowess.

There is an easy answer to all of the UK's problems - Drop out of the EU now.

Britain seems desperate to export money in anyway it can, be it handouts to other nations, almost unlimited immigration, unwarrented wars and even that crock 'o shite Comic Relief.

The harsh truth is keeping someone employed in a job that doesn't produce a direct profit is expensive. It costs more than putting them onto the dole queue.

You have to pay them, supervise them, manage them, tool them up, locate them in an office, hospital, etc and give them something to do.

There's a strict rule in business. If it costs $100 on the wage bill it needs to return $300 to make it worthwhile. It can vary accordingly to industry.

So if you have council workers building roads the costs are high. As are all other workers. And at present the UK cant afford those costs, it's far better economics to put those people out of work than give them jobs. Yes I know it's tough, but there is no alternative.

Unless Private income can generate the money to pay them they have to go on the dole line. That has other costs, but not as much as having them employed in non direct profit producing jobs.

Simple economics.

But one of the replies shows the level of economic thinking.

Keep borrowing money to pay non essential public sector workers, so they can buy iPads.

A product made in China and owned by an American company.

The reason the UK economy is in the shitter is that these UK workers are buying cheap imported goods. Filling their shopping baskets with goods from China, India, Philippines, driving Japanese cars and keeping workers overseas employed in productive jobs.

If British workers boycotted buying Cadbury's chocolate and all the other products made by the owners. The jobs would of stayed in the UK. They don't, they buy products made overseas all the time.

UK Subsidy to financial services

£47,000,000,000

This is due not to wealth production but to sell products with a AAA rating which had little or no value.

Wealth is made by humans working, and the workers that are most useful make the products we can't live without, food, building materials, clothes, porn, medicines etc...

Capitalism was found to fail at making a lot of products, housing, health service, transport, military, so these at times have to be run by the state.

A lot of products are not needed by society, cinema, art, war, space exploration and it is the choice of society to spend its surplus wealth on these products.

When a capitalist moves a factory to Poland to save money, he makes the UK economy worst but increases his profit, when lots of capitalists do it (making financial sense for themselves) they de industralise the country destroying the capacity of the pop to buy his products.

If Polish wages rise he will be in dire trouble.

no kidding, they are all acting like a bunch of shortsighted uneducated animals...

I said that Paul. I know governments borrow money in order to cover their deficits, it's necessary when you need to fund big projects like building hospitals or schools.

My argument is that the Conservative coalition is cutting huge in amounts in a 5 year term and expecting growth at the end. This frankly will not happen.

Then they'll move to China, because that's what capitalists do. They squeeze the only commodity that they can which is labour. They also lobby governments for subsidies to reduce costs. The resulting profits of the above are paid to shareholders and the board as bonuses.

I don't think capitalism should never have existed, we needed it in order to pass onto the next stage of economic evolution, which is, stateless socialism. Russia has been mentioned as a failure of Communism but they went from a backwards feudal farming country to the superpower of the world in less than 50 years whilst fighting in 2 major wars. It was far from perfect and ran by a complete tyrant but I wouldn't point to it and say "look communism fails", because it wasn't even a true communist state.

"Worker owned means of production" this phrase is always dropped when critiques of communism talked about how it has failed. Show me the Russians that were in charge of their own factories. That's right you can't because Stalin ran them all.

Wait, in the UK, they pay how much in taxes and idiots in the US want to pay more in taxes to fix things? LMAO

When I lived in a communist country I did not pay any tax at all...

Or should I say State Socialist, as it was not a democratic state as envisaged by Marx etc...

But people did not live without rights or a say in there lives...

The institution where I was had meeting called by the Communist Party to discuss how it ran and people said what they thought.

The ruling party was open for all to join, if you wanted a political career. True only one party, but Britain and US are pretty much the same two or three capitalist parties.

It had full employment, housing for all, free education, health service, and culture for all, it had culture, films and theatre from all over the world. A much more open society than the UK or the US. Hell here in the UK we don't even see French culture.

But the the lack of freedom and democracy - and the hostile west, and the revolutionary approach of capitalism to production, won out...

I look to the US for the next attempt at a socialist revolution, I think it may just work there

But I still remember those days as 5 years when I did not worry about money ...

OMG this thread is still going ?? lol

It's 20% in my city so they need to quit their bitching