[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 585: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 641: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
Austerity : A Modern Day Ideology Or Something More Sinister ? - Carers UK Forum

Austerity : A Modern Day Ideology Or Something More Sinister ?

Discuss news stories and political issues that affect carers.
Interesting take on Austerity from today's edition of the Mourning / Morning Star.

If the figures are correct , a blissful ignorance is exposed ?

https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/art ... al-project

A third of Britons see austerity as 'an ideological project.'

A THIRD of the British public believe that austerity is an “ideological project,” a new poll reports today.

Two-thirds of people believe that the government’s massive rollback of public-sector investment, which has resulted in drastic spending cuts across most of the country, is an intentional act.

A similar proportion of people, 31 per cent, also said that austerity was damaging the economy and the Daily Mail and the Sun were ranked as the least trustworthy sources for news on the country’s finances.

The Survation poll, which has been commissioned by left-of-centre think tank Class, intends to highlight the level of economic illiteracy that exists in Britain.

Politically, Labour were neck and neck with the Tories on the question of overall political trust, though Labour scored significantly better on being trusted to tell the truth about the economy.

The poll also reveals that two-thirds of people do not understand what a “government deficit” is.

This is despite the fact that eight out of 10 people consider themselves knowledgeable on economic questions and three-quarters of those surveyed will vote at the next general election based on their perceptions of economic competence of political parties.

A group of respected economists will gather in Parliament later this week to urge the government to make economics more widely accessible to the general public.

The Progressive Economy Forum, which is spearheaded by notables such as Ann Pettifor and Lord Robert Skidelsky, intends to a shape a new programme of progressive policies founded on equality and sustainability as an alternative to austerity.

Class director Faiza Shaheen said that the poll raises serious concerns about the political culture in Britain and how the British public understand economic questions.

“Economic illiteracy undermines the ability of our democracy to function,” she said.

“It is not just the general public that lack understanding. Our leading journalists and political leaders often present economic arguments without debate.”

Progressive Economy Forum chairman Patrick Allen insisted that austerity has caused the biggest growth in inequality in Britain since the Napoleonic wars.

He said that it was “shocking” that the public were unaware of the widespread concerns over austerity that many leading economists have.

There's quite a bit spinning off from the above article.

" Ideological project " ... love that phrase.

Social war more apt ... I have used that phrase since 2005 ... even more apt today.

Provided they are not caught up in it ... inadequate housing / finances , food banks etc. ... most cannot see it for what it really is.

Suffice to say ... the " 1 in 4 " are growing ... those close / at / below the official poverty line ... might even reach 2 in 7 ... 14 MILLION or so ... by the year end.

Ignorance is bliss ... not in CarerLand / CareeLand I trust ?

You are ALL seeing it's effects on both world's on a daily basis !!!!
Of course 'austerity' is intentional! I dont' see why anyone would think otherwise, frankly. The government is in control of what it spends its revenues on, so every decision is 'intentional'.

Right now, the government is choosing not to spend on social welfare what some folk think it should. It has, after all, got a lot of other expenses to consider - such as the cost of Brexit, HS2 blah blah blah.

The question is, SHOULD the government change what it spends its (er, OUR!!!!) money on (whther that is tax money, or money borrowed via gilts etc)

I'm not sure folk need much economic education, do they? We all know we pay taxes, whetehr on our earned income, or on any other commercial transaction (whether it's buying or selling things), and the precise detaisl don't matter too much ,do they (eg, comparing government revnues from, say VAT, with Capital Gains Tax, and Stamp Duty).

It's important they understand that governmetns 'get money from 'we the people' ( 'ie, taxes) or from 'investors' (ie, those who lend the governemtn money by buying gilts - ie, government debt bonds), but those are the only two sources of government income.

After that, the only issue is how 'redistributive' tax income is - whether those who PAY the taxes actually get them back at all in any way (eg, in the provision of, say, 'free health care at the point of delivery' etc), or whether the government takes from those who don't have much, and gives it to those who already have a great deal..

The only other factor is 'time scale' - for example, our NI is a tax that WE should receive BACK, but not right now, but rather when we are old and get our state pensions.
Unlike most countries, the UK has totally missed out on a vital alternative, third source of income, namely, sovereight funds, whereby governmetns take tax revnue and invest it in commercial enterprises. THis is done by most countries, but our government has always just spent the money.

Norway, for example, took its oil revenues taxes, and invested it in highly profitable commercial enterprises in a sovereign fund, the profits of which now pay the state pensions of the population.

We, of course, simply wasted ours and never invested oil revenues tax at all.
The traditional " Answer " would be the ballot box.

In Carerland , one could equally argue , quite correctly , that a change of Government would be no answer.

Only by changing society , and our role within it , would any benefit be seen in CarerLand.

Trouble is , no political party currently exists with a mandate to create the conditions needed.

Therein lies the conundrum ... if the politcal route is the only option available ?