The UK Triple Dip Recession

[Warren Dew]

When you have a government that insists on continuing with harsh austerity measures, despite the data upon which their analysis is based having been shown to be flawed, what do you expect?

Just out of curiosity, what are some the harsh austerity measures?

As I recall, there was a big tax rate increase a few years ago, among other things.

[Coito ergo sum]

When you have a government that insists on continuing with harsh austerity measures, despite the data upon which their analysis is based having been shown to be flawed, what do you expect?

Just out of curiosity, what are some the harsh austerity measures?

As I recall, there was a big tax rate increase a few years ago, among other things.

Ah, tax increases. Those are supposed to be good for the economy, aren't they? I hear that from time to time, anyway...

[MrJonno]

Don't think minor tinkering on taxes actually makes that much difference in the economy, but does make a big difference on whether you get elected or not.

On a personal level how much tax I pay makes little difference to my personal economics compared to whether I actually have a job, what its salary is and how likely I am to keep it. Whether I pay 20% ,22% or 25% isn't what keeps me awake at night. Of course if someone said they were going to double it I might be concerned but changing it by a couple of percent nah not important

[Rum]

Turns out not. 0.3% growth for the last quarter.

OK - tear this to shreds now...

[Hermit]

Private business selling to government is as important if not more important than selling to the consumer or other businesses. Government is or at least was a reliable customer.

I don't know the situation in the UK, but in Australia Gross National Consumption outstrips government expenditure by a huge margin. Also, suppliers' government contracts are not set in stone. They need to be won or retained on a regular basis when they are put up for re-tender. Businesses in Australia need to be no less competitive if they want to sell their offerings to our governments than when they want to sell to other businesses or to an individual.

[Hermit]

When you have a government that insists on continuing with harsh austerity measures, despite the data upon which their analysis is based having been shown to be flawed, what do you expect?

Just out of curiosity, what are some the harsh austerity measures?

Here in the US, a "cut" in something is not normally a cut, but rather is generally a slower rise in growth or spending.

Under John Howard - and Malcolm Fraser before him - spending kept growing, but the funds were diverted from things like social welfare, education and medicine to subsidies for businesses and especially agriculture. The profits of banks and big pastoral and agricultural corporations reaped hugely increased profits, but ordinary wage earners experienced no trickle down effect. The reduction of government funds aimed at them is a very real austerity measure even if overall government spending increases.

[Rum]

Oz had a huge natural resources sector which we don't any more of course. We borrow more every year to keep things afloat. Gordon Brown had a theory that as long as growth (and therefore taxes) outgrew borrowing that would be OK. He famously announced the 'end of boom and bust'.

For a long while now the above has not been the case.

[En_Route]

Turns out not. 0.3% growth for the last quarter.

OK - tear this to shreds now...

The UK economy is stagnant at best and still hobbled by, inter alia, a broken banking sector and spiralling national debt. These tiny quarterly fluctuations are just statistical noise.

[Svartalf]

Have you tried sacrificing a goat to it?

Thatcher is dead already

[Hermit]

Oz had a huge natural resources sector...

Yes, and that makes Australia's welfare subject to the state of economies elsewhere on this globe. Not only have several projects worth several hundred billion dollars to expand the quarry that is Australia been cancelled recently, which put a stop to employment growth, but major metal production, as well as coal and ore exporting companies are operating at multi-million dollar losses. Arrium just posted something like a 1 billion loss, for example, and Onesteel were somewhat sanguine about having lost only $333 million a short while earlier.

Businesses have to increase their borrowings, of course, to tide them over loss-making periods. Which is a suitable occasion to point out that most national debt is incurred by private enterprise.

[Coito ergo sum]

Turns out not. 0.3% growth for the last quarter.

OK - tear this to shreds now...

Well, that's good. We need fewer recessions...

[PsychoSerenity]

Even where there is growth it's primarily in parts of the economy that bear no relation to reality an only serve to make the rich even richer. I fail to see why we should continue to care. Neoliberal economics were a shit idea to begin with and have demonstrably failed the vast majority of the population. Until we get a government willing to scrap it and start organising the long term infrastructure investments the country needs, nothing will really change.

[Coito ergo sum]

Even where there is growth it's primarily in parts of the economy that bear no relation to reality an only serve to make the rich even richer. I fail to see why we should continue to care. Neoliberal economics were a shit idea to begin with and have demonstrably failed the vast majority of the population. Until we get a government willing to scrap it and start organising the long term infrastructure investments the country needs, nothing will really change.

LOL - ok., I'll bite, which economic theory is a good idea and have demonstrably succeeded in benefiting the vast majority of the population?

And, you're suggesting that the United Kingdom has followed neoliberal economic theory for a substantial period of time?

[rainbow]

That, to me, is a dangerous situation, and demonstrates the need for a vibrant, competitive private sector economy. The private sector reacts "on the ground" to economic conditions. They move quicker than government. Government waits until the next law or regulation is passed after months of debate and public comment -- a private sector makes a decision.

Having just a few very large entities means that there is no market incentive to be better, faster, more efficient, and there is the false subsidy of a "bailout" when the large entities are deemed "too big to fail." That phrase is exactly two words too long. The reality is that they are "too big." Period. They should not be allowed to be that big, because it operates as a distortion on the market.

Unfortunately, when countries "nationalize" industries, those countries that want to have free markets in those industries are incentivized to allow their private businesses to grow to tremendous size to compete on the global level...

90% of all human activity is pointless regardless of public or private management.

Yes, but making up statistics is its own reward.

...in 77.38% of the cases examined.

[PsychoSerenity]

LOL - ok., I'll bite,

I wasn't fishing.