Skip to main content

Greece implements further cuts

Anyone who wishes to look at what would happen with Labour's financial strategy need look no further than Greece. They have had to implement greater and greater cuts in an attempt to bring their finances under control.

Looking at bond yields today:
Country Debt interest rate
Germany 10 year 2.64%
Greece 10 year 10.447%
Ireland 10 year 5.268%
UK 10 year 3.373%

This shows how greece is paying an interest rate of four times that of Germany on its debt. Having a higher deficit leads not only to a higher debt, but also a higher rate of interest on the debt.

Greece is a good comparison to Labour's policy as it was the Socialist party in Greece that pretended that little action was needed and then found itself in a really big mess.

Comments

Jerry said…
What worries me about all this debt and intrest is the scale of it all and the urgency to reduce the overall debt.

Slicing all the public services and making 100,000's of people out of work along with lord only knows what else, while it might be a quick fix for now, the long term I feel has not been fully thought out yet.

Take schools for instance, stopping all the funding to improve the schools network will only lead to a massive problem in five years time or so. Labour underfunded the education system for years, the crumbling schools in need of desperate repair will undoubtably be worse and as a consequence will need twice as much funding to put right somewhere down the line, an issue that cannot be brushed aside.

Addressing the debt issue head on is the most practical way forward by the Coalition so far.

Just put the breaks on all these cuts before we enevatably end up in a worse mess in five years time.
john said…
The urgency arises from the need to keep interest rates low.

The cuts in spending are needed so we don't have to borrow as much money.
Jerry said…
What happens when the debt and intrest is reduced but the country is on its knees with the lack of an infrastructure sustainable to the needs of the people, clearing the debt is by all means a priority however history shows the problems that will arise, look at the 80's when the country was sold down the river, or the three day week in the mid 70's, come to think of it the 90's were boom and bust which I feel is where this overall problem started.

While it's all bells and whistles now, I fear this government will only last its 5 years, then labour will be back in and have to sort the whole mess out again. its just a horrible cycle I don't see being prevented.

As the cuts are necessary to avoid more borrowing, this is where I struggle with the issue, yes, no borrowing is the best result for all, but John, what happens when the country is so delapidated due to loss of services the Government has to borrow twice as much more again just to get the country back on our feet.

I had a letter from the Job centre through the door the other day saying "we are not helping you find work" as the programme I was on was withdrawn (Gov. cuts), now I have to wait till early next year for some other programme, So how will it help the rest who end up loosing their jobs because of the cuts but then the Jobcentre (balfour beatty) are not able to help either.
john said…
Without reducing the deficit, however, the country would face much more serious financial problems and have to implement greater cuts.
PoliticalHack said…
Greece is a good example because it had a socialist government? That's a rather daft comparison. Greece is not a good comparison at all - they have very specific structural problems not present in the UK economy. The UK debt does not need refinancing in the immediate future and there has not been a problem in selling UK debt at these low rates - even in advance of the election. It is grossly simplistic to equate Greece and the UK when they are self-evidently in different economic straits.

Still, if it keeps you and your colleagues happy...

Popular posts from this blog

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…

Gender Issues comparison of candidates

John Hemming believes that an MP should represent everyone in their constituency.  This should be regardless of their race, religion, gender, abledness, sexual orientation or anything else.  It should be everyone.

When he was an MP he worked on issues relating to men, those relating to women and those relating to non-binary people. Everyone.

For example here is John Hemming on a demonstration outside the courts with the campaign group Women Against Rape (it related to the case of a mother who had her child removed from her because the mother was raped).




Jess Phillips, who campaigns on women's issues, notwithstanding the questions asked about her appointments in her parliamentary office, had the following response when asked for a debate on issues specifically relating to men:

The Labour Candidate's Book Promotion Tour and Why It Matters

In the 2015 General Election the Labour Candidate criticised John Hemming for having an external interest and made a pledge that she would be a "Full Time MP for Yardley and my only other job will be mom & carer ...".  Here is a copy of that pledge:


Since that point she has been working on paid Television Programmes and has also written a book. John Hemming has made no secret of the fact that he chairs the board of the company he founded in 1983. This involves one meeting a month. When he was the MP for Yardley he was a full time MP and the Job of being MP for Yardley came first. The Labour candidate has reported 1,274 hours of work other than being an MP in the two years she has been elected and her income in the last year was over £131,000.

Ignoring the question as to how she reconciles that with her "pledge" the question is raised as to what extent her external activity conflicts with the role of Member of Parliament for Yardley. She is supposed to de…