Will severe cuts surrounded by public spending put us posterior into recession?

"The Con-Dems' latest cuts bombshell targeting welfare and public-sector spending will hurl Britain hindmost into recession, the Unison union has warn."
http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/index…
Answers:
No, that phrase "severe cuts will put the UK rear legs into recession" is just a line of spin (aka bull****) created by Labour and their little Union friends to try and trademark themselves look clever on the economy (when in certainty they don't have a clue) and because they can't get their head round the fact that the "economy" doesn't revolve entirely around the public (government) sector.

Further reading:
http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/?p=6210
http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/?p=6381
http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/?p=6376
Without a doubt. Severe cuts will.

He's says he's going to listen and consult beside local communities. Let's see if he does. If he does carry out a slash and burn policy, by the time the second dip comes along, he won't be able to slash and burn in a hurry enough to keep up.

I of late wish to see the Condems stand up to the banks. They're the ones who should pay cheque when they get back on their foot, not us. Well not me anyway as I never use credit. No, never ever. What's the point of using credit? Impatience??
Your site won't open. Anyways how does welfare cuts and public sector related to such public benefits throw a country into a recession? Sure the poor who can't support themselves (or essentially refuse to) will have it harder bad but there is less of a debt to the nation. Less debt on the nation way more foreign confidence which in turn helps to stabilize the currency along near keep foreign investors interested in business. NOT doing this would surely put Britain wager on into recession as no country and continue indefinitely to feed the society working the system and not putting anything into it. The recession would hit everyone else instead of just hurting the welfare recipients who could simply do what others do and find a employment even if its not their preferred job. Welfare states are meant to help out get people wager on on their feet to be a productive part of society paying off what they cost 10 fold by being a productive member of society. However they grasp to comfortable getting something for nothing and never pay the system subsidise creating a black hole type burden on the system and the government which can't be sustained.

2 choices cut spending and hope to avoid another recession, or go ruined do a deal with the IMF and the cuts will be 10 times harder after what we are about to face. Labours financial mismanagement hold put us in this situation. I am glad you think that a Union near their own interest in Public spending are more knowledgeable next the IMF, European Central Bank and many other leading financial experts.
Yes. but it has to occur. That money is false. it does not produce new items the economy does not grow from it. its a band-aide on a severed appendage.
Ah the 'Morning Star', that middle-of-the-road,unbiased to the far-left publication.
No. The reverse.

Civil servants are not productive.
They do not really remuneration taxes because their income comes from taxes paid by productive working people.
It is cheaper to fire them because the state solely has to pay dismissal benefit and not their inflated wages and pensions. A win , win situation.

Fact. The deficit would be quickly cancelled by reducing public expenditure by 10%.

Unison is against this because their income will slim down and like all civil service organisations, they believe within their right to live on the fat of the land while we suffer.
1,000's of people with smaller amount money to spend that will mean recession. Source(s): Tory policy 1979 - 1997 I agree. Cameron is sailing into a storm and Thatchers Poll Tax riots are set to return. It's the poorest and less capably off who always own to pay the most when it comes to Tory policies.
yes


Related Questions: