Wednesday, August 18, 2010
100 Days
There is nothing really key about 100 days. It is a purely arbitrary point at which to assess a government.
However, one key assessment is what the interest rate is on government debt. The figures from Bloomberg today are:
UK (10 year) 3.037
Ireland (10 year) 5.236
Greece (10 year) 10.692
Germany (10 year) 2.353
That affects in the long term how much money is available for public services. Labour's strategy of don't cut so much in the short term leads to larger cuts in the Long term.
In the mean time the Coalition government is working to make the UK a nicer place to live. The banning of demanding money with menaces (aka car clamping on private land) is a good example of that. Yes people may still have to pay penalty charges, but the behaviour of so many clamping operations has been totally unacceptable. posted by John Hemming ¶ 11:17 am
However, one key assessment is what the interest rate is on government debt. The figures from Bloomberg today are:
UK (10 year) 3.037
Ireland (10 year) 5.236
Greece (10 year) 10.692
Germany (10 year) 2.353
That affects in the long term how much money is available for public services. Labour's strategy of don't cut so much in the short term leads to larger cuts in the Long term.
In the mean time the Coalition government is working to make the UK a nicer place to live. The banning of demanding money with menaces (aka car clamping on private land) is a good example of that. Yes people may still have to pay penalty charges, but the behaviour of so many clamping operations has been totally unacceptable. posted by John Hemming ¶ 11:17 am
Comments:
<< Home
Actually, there's no evidence to support the assertion that no cuts now means deeper cuts in the long term. The cuts are to remove the structural deficit, which is itself a volatile figure based on modelling, rather than an actual, solid number. Should the recovery be faster and the tax take increase, then deeper cuts may not be necessary.
While I'm broadly supportive of removing the right of clamping firms to threaten people with demands for extortionate sums, we do need a balance that allows people to secure their own property.
It is good to know that the country is getting better every day. Thousands will lose their jobs, some their homes and people's income will decrease, but at least they won't be clamped in their cars (assuming they can still afford them).
While I'm broadly supportive of removing the right of clamping firms to threaten people with demands for extortionate sums, we do need a balance that allows people to secure their own property.
It is good to know that the country is getting better every day. Thousands will lose their jobs, some their homes and people's income will decrease, but at least they won't be clamped in their cars (assuming they can still afford them).
From an economic perspective there are slightly different approaches being taken in different countries so it will be possible to take a retrospective look at things as well as prospective.
However, the evidence is in the sovereign debt yields.
Obviously things are bad for some people, but that was inevitable even if your leader has stayed in power.
Post a Comment
However, the evidence is in the sovereign debt yields.
Obviously things are bad for some people, but that was inevitable even if your leader has stayed in power.
<< Home
