Amount of homeless children in the UK rises by 11% - NIMBY success!

[aliceBB]

Polite correction re the thread title : you cannot have an amount of children. The term only applies to non-countable singular nouns, e.g cheese or sand. It makes them sound like one big clump or object, which of course they aren't. Please use 'a number of children'. Thank you.

 

Substantively, I find I have nothing to add as it's all been said by someone else, but for child poverty to be on the rise in this century in this country is appalling.

[MrSmith]

I'm describing something different, something that neither party will do. Productive public borrowing that will pay for itself, perhaps even pay for itself twice over.

 

Yet what you describe sounds the same as what as already been done many times before. Perhaps a little detail will sway me.

[I1L2T3]

Yet what you describe sounds the same as what as already been done many times before. Perhaps a little detail will sway me.

 

It has been done many times before. That is the point. It's the reason that we're surrounded by infrastructure that powers the economy.

 

We have a choice to invest or not to invest. If we choose the latter we'll become increasingly less competitive. Driving down wages and living standards to compensate will only go so far.

 

An interesting read. I'm not suggesting we build loads of new roads as there will be other infrastructure projects that suit us better but have a read

 

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2012/11/the-multiplier-is-at-least-two.html

[MrSmith]

It has been done many times before. That is the point. It's the reason that we're surrounded by infrastructure that powers the economy.

 

We have a choice to invest or not to invest. If we choose the latter we'll become increasingly less competitive. Driving down wages and living standards to compensate will only go so far.

 

An interesting read. I'm not suggesting we build loads of new roads as there will be other infrastructure projects that suit us better but have a read

 

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2012/11/the-multiplier-is-at-least-two.html

 

The mountains of unsustainable worldwide debt that this economic model created are the cause of the globule financial problems, decades of constant debt stimulus both private and governmental are the reason we are now in the mess we are in. It’s an unsustainable model, we live on a finite planet and perpetual economic and human expansion isn’t possible. Your idea is to make our life better now by passing the burden of these debts onto another generation.

[I1L2T3]

The mountains of unsustainable worldwide debt that this economic model created are the cause of the globule financial problems, decades of constant debt stimulus both private and governmental are the reason we are now in the mess we are in. It’s an unsustainable model, we live on a finite planet and perpetual economic and human expansion isn’t possible. Your idea is to make our life better now by passing the burden of these debts onto another generation.

 

No the plan is to switch spending to productive borrowing that will pay for itself. Borrowing to pay for infrastructure that we need and to keep existing infrastructure maintained.

 

Your argument carries little weight because we are borrowing now, passing debts to future generations from unproductive borrowing that will be much harder to repay, to pay for Osborne's policy failure. Creating debt to cut spending has to have been the worst economic idea ever.

[MrSmith]

No the plan is to switch spending to productive borrowing that will pay for itself. Borrowing to pay for infrastructure that we need and to keep existing infrastructure maintained.

 

Your argument carries little weight because we are borrowing now, passing debts to future generations from unproductive borrowing that will be much harder to repay, to pay for Osborne's policy failure. Creating debt to cut spending has to have been the worst economic idea ever.

 

You still haven't explained what this unproductive borrowing is, what it is being spent on and how we will cut it, to allow us to borrow for infrastructure.

[I1L2T3]

You still haven't explained what this unproductive borrowing is, what it is being spent on and how we will cut it, to allow us to borrow for infrastructure.

 

In basic terms it's the money Osborne has to borrow to compensate for a number of his policy failures:

 

Reduced growth

Reduced demand in the economy

Failure to reduce the welfare bill

Stubbornly high long-term unemployment

Failure to deliver spending cuts

Failure to get banks lending

Failure to invest in infrastructure

Failure to get companies to invest

Fostering of a general climate of fear regarding the economy

[MrSmith]

In basic terms it's the money Osborne has to borrow to compensate for a number of his policy failures:

 

Reduced growth

Reduced demand in the economy

Failure to reduce the welfare bill

Stubbornly high long-term unemployment

Failure to deliver spending cuts

Failure to get banks lending

Failure to invest in infrastructure

Failure to get companies to invest

Fostering of a general climate of fear regarding the economy

 

And those things have reduced because consumers are so indebted that they have reduced their consumption, this is a good thing which you want to reverse, you want people to consume more, what we should be doing is consuming less and borrowing less, his policy failing is that he hasn’t cut borrowing and public spending enough. This is in part because they are in a coalition and because consumers don’t want to feel the pain of their overindulgence of the past decades.

[I1L2T3]

And those things have reduced because consumers are so indebted that they have reduced their consumption, this is a good thing which you want to reverse, you want people to consume more, what we should be doing is consuming less and borrowing less, his policy failing is that he hasn’t cut borrowing and public spending enough. This is in part because they are in a coalition and because consumers don’t want to feel the pain of their overindulgence of the past decades.

 

His policies have failed by all his own measures and targets. People were in debt in 2010 - he could have factored that in but it rather looks like he got the sums wrong. And he has to borrow to pay for those mistakes.

[MrSmith]

His policies have failed by all his own measures and targets. People were in debt in 2010 - he could have factored that in but it rather looks like he got the sums wrong. And he has to borrow to pay for those mistakes.

 

That doesn't alter the fact that consumers aren’t spending as much as they did during the credit boom, if consumers aren’t spending then company profits will be lower and taxes will be lower, lower government income should be met by lower government spending, I agree the government are borrowing too much but that is just to keep pace with the commitments and over spend of the last government, Osborne should cut more, not borrow more.