Budget 2009 in figures

#6
Health and Education spending COMBINED isn't much more than Benefits spending in its entirety..... That's disgraceful.

I wonder if they class all the "back to work" education schemes and their Ilk under the Education budget rather than Benefits?
 
#7
More to the point, spending on welfare is greater than receipts from income tax and spending on health is greater than NI contributions!

OK, it's just a manipulation of the statistics, but the working class can no longer support the welfare class.
 
#8
Do these figures really mean anything anyway? The borrowing figures that the Chancellor quoted for the last budget were revised straospherically upwards almost as soon as he'd finished speaking. As a result the PSBR was recalculated to be an astronomical £78 billion. Yet the latest figures from the Office of National Statistics show that at the end of February, a month in which the Government borrowed £9 billion, the running total for 11 months had already reached £75.2 billion. The true borrowing figure for the last FY is more likely to be nearer £90 billion.

Add that level of debt to the fact that the Government can't even seem to sell gilts anymore and we really are in trouble.
 
#9
It's funny to see Corporations tax so low, no wonder Gordon and his gang are actually starting to look at the whole tax avoidance and tax havens, especially since the UK are in charge of most of these places.
 
#10
I'm not sure how the IFS squares the projected debt continuing to rise at the same rate from 2011-2014 when they expect the budget deficit to halve over the same period.
 
#11
parapauk said:
I'm not sure how the IFS squares the projected debt continuing to rise at the same rate from 2011-2014 when they expect the budget deficit to halve over the same period.
Maybe this will help. http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn83.pdf

Alternatively, maybe they haven't got a clue what they're talking about. :)
 
#14
parapauk said:
whitecity said:
parapauk said:
I'm not sure how the IFS squares the projected debt continuing to rise at the same rate from 2011-2014 when they expect the budget deficit to halve over the same period.
Maybe this will help. http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn83.pdf

Alternatively, maybe they haven't got a clue what they're talking about. :)
Next you'll be telling me the banks didn't know what they were doing... :wink:
No, the banks knew perfectly well what they were doing. They just deluded themselves to the risk involved.

So, have you decided whether there is some merit in the IFS data or are they talking out of their ARRSE?
 
#15
The wonderful thing about all of this is who is liable.
Yup, its us taxpayers. So we get the least from the system but must spend the next 20 years not only paying for the system put paying off the debts of mis-adventure.
The whole mess has been massively mis-managed by government and now we must pay.
I'm not entirely convinced I want to spend the rest of my working life paying for this mess. Depending on what the next 18 months or so brings to this country will dictate wether I stay or not.
Now, the big problem is that there are hundreds of thousands more just like me. If we all jump ship the hole in the country's finances will get bigger. When will government realise they can only rape so much money from the nett contibutors before they all say enough and bugger off to greener pastures?
 
#16
whitecity said:
parapauk said:
whitecity said:
parapauk said:
I'm not sure how the IFS squares the projected debt continuing to rise at the same rate from 2011-2014 when they expect the budget deficit to halve over the same period.
Maybe this will help. http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn83.pdf

Alternatively, maybe they haven't got a clue what they're talking about. :)
Next you'll be telling me the banks didn't know what they were doing... :wink:
No, the banks knew perfectly well what they were doing. They just deluded themselves to the risk involved.

So, have you decided whether there is some merit in the IFS data or are they talking out of their ARRSE?
It looks wrong because the BBC have added on an IMF guestimate of a the overall losses of the financial crisis to the public purse that will push up national debt by about 9% without anotating the graph. Given that we can't know the profit or loss we'll make on the bank rescues (as it says in the report), as well as the IMF's track record on forcasts, I'd take that add-on with a pinch of salt. It's not chump-change either, that add on works out at about £130bln of extra debt.
 
#18
parapauk said:
It looks wrong because the BBC have added on an IMF guestimate of a the overall losses of the financial crisis to the public purse that will push up national debt by about 9% without anotating the graph. Given that we can't know the profit or loss we'll make on the bank rescues (as it says in the report), as well as the IMF's track record on forcasts, I'd take that add-on with a pinch of salt. It's not chump-change either, that add on works out at about £130bln of extra debt.
I'm not sure I understand what point you're trying to make.

Are you saying that the current financial bailouts should simply be ignored on the basis that they may result in a profit (on sale) at some point in the future?

Secondly, even if that "9%" were ignored, does it really alter the general message underlying the data?
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Litotes Current Affairs, News and Analysis 345
msr Army Reserve 0
G Current Affairs, News and Analysis 13

Similar threads

Latest Threads