Everybody knows that common knowledge is always wrong

[unbeliever]

Because he was associated with socialism doesn't mean he was one (wasn't he, along with Beveridge a Liberal)?

 

I stand corrected. It was not really correct to describe Keynes as the father of socialist economics. It would have been better to say that his work forms the foundation of modern UK socialist/liberal economic policy.

[tzijlstra]

Excuse me, but in 2014/15 we paid £45bn on debt interest and in 2009/10 we paid £32bn. That's an increase of £13bn. Where do you suppose the rest of it went?

 

Easy, inflation and the health and welfare bills. As predicted by Osbourne which is why he wants to crack the welfare state even more, as a whole though the majority of public spending has gone down significantly. Pointing at two budgets that haven't collapsed in a firestorm of cuts and saying: Look, public spending is growing! Is naive and opinionated. Here is the clue why what you think are facts are in fact opinions... one fact can tell one story, the other a completely different one.

[Mister M]

I stand corrected. It was not really correct to describe Keynes as the father of socialist economics. It would have been better to say that his work forms the foundation of modern UK socialist/liberal economic policy.

 

Fair play to you

[unbeliever]

Easy, inflation and the health and welfare bills. As predicted by Osbourne which is why he wants to crack the welfare state even more, as a whole though the majority of public spending has gone down significantly. Pointing at two budgets that haven't collapsed in a firestorm of cuts and saying: Look, public spending is growing! Is naive and opinionated. Here is the clue why what you think are facts are in fact opinions... one fact can tell one story, the other a completely different one.

 

This was you right (my bold):

 

We are paying more as a country because we borrowed too much and the only increase in spending has been on interest. All the other spending, which is public spending, has been slashed. The fact that you think it has gone up shows how weak your economic knowledge is.

 

You said that all spending other than debt interest has been slashed. Slashed surely implies that it has gone down dramatically. You said nothing about health or welfare. Does health not count as public spending?

 

So if you deduct debt interest (which is still taxpayers money being spent on previous public spending so I don't see how that's legitimate), then you have the rate of public spending going up very slightly slower than inflation. That's "slashed" is it. Or should I be deducting health and welfare as well.

If you're going to twist the figures to this degree, then try and characterise a tiny fall after inflation in your twisted figures as "slashed" you can get them to say anything.

Edited August 21, 2015 by unbeliever

[Cyclone]

Easy, inflation and the health and welfare bills. As predicted by Osbourne which is why he wants to crack the welfare state even more, as a whole though the majority of public spending has gone down significantly. Pointing at two budgets that haven't collapsed in a firestorm of cuts and saying: Look, public spending is growing! Is naive and opinionated. Here is the clue why what you think are facts are in fact opinions... one fact can tell one story, the other a completely different one.

 

"Welfare state". The majority of that spend is on HB and pensions, not to mention in work benefits such as tax credits, which are just a ludicrous thing in themselves, they should be replaced with changes to the tax code for everyone, immediately slashing the "welfare budget" (whilst equally reducing tax revenue).

[unbeliever]

"Welfare state". The majority of that spend is on HB and pensions, not to mention in work benefits such as tax credits, which are just a ludicrous thing in themselves, they should be replaced with changes to the tax code for everyone, immediately slashing the "welfare budget" (whilst equally reducing tax revenue).

 

Couldn't agree more.

It makes no sense at all to be collecting thousands of pounds in taxes from people on low incomes only to stir it round government few times, then give it back. It would be much better just not to take it from them in the first place.

To be fair to The Coalition and the current government, raising the income tax threshold was a good step in this direction.