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

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

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…