Refer a friend and get % off! They'll get % off too.

Austerity is a lie - Rules for the rich. Cuts cuts cuts

Foreward:

I wanted to write a publication highlighting my favorite articles and research on the cuts culture which is wreaking so much suffering on the poorest and most vulnerable in the UK and indeed globally. We now have governments with a profit over people mentality and very little personal social responsibility for their safety, security and future. Cuts to critical services such as education, health, welfare and housing alongside incredible greed and profiteering have ensured that frontline staff who are genuinely doing their best are struggling while incredible wealth is being accumulating for a few against the many. To finish I’ve included my infographic edits I’ve done at retroreloader.com to highlight visually the level of impact these irresponsible cuts have caused nationally  and globally..

Hope it helps your journey.

Two parliaments of pain: the UK public finances 2010 to 2017
This briefing note provides background material for the 2017 General Election.

IFS Election 2017 analysis is being produced with funding from the Nuffield Foundation as part of its work to ensure public debate in the run-up to the general election is informed by independent and rigorous evidence. For more information, go to http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org.

Key findings

·         The financial crisis led to a sharp reduction in national income. Even more striking is the weakness of the subsequent recovery. Official forecasts suggest that GDP per adult in 2022 will be 18% lower than it would have been had it grown by 2% a year since 2008 – broadly the expected rate of growth at that time. This downgrade in expected income has adversely affected the finances of households and of the government.

·         The deficit has fallen considerably since its peak in 2009–10. It is now back to the level it was at prior to the crisis, although this is still above the UK’s pre-crisis average. Current forecasts imply the deficit falling in line with what was implied by Labour’s 2015 election manifesto. Eliminating the deficit before a May 2022 general election would require a combination of further net tax rises and spending cuts worth £15 billion on top of what is already planned.

·         Both tax revenues and spending are slightly above their pre-crisis shares of national income. Revenues are forecast to continue growing to their highest level since 1986–87. Non-investment spending is forecast to continue being cut as a share of national income, while investment spending – which was cut during the first half of the 2010s – is forecast to increase.

·         The UK’s public finances compare unfavourably with those of other advanced economies, although this is also the case for other very large economies such as France, Japan and the United States. In 2016, the UK had the fifth-largest deficit out of 35 advanced economies and the sixth-largest debt out of 26 advanced economies

·         The increase in revenues as a share of national income since 2009–10 has been driven by tax rises announced since May 2010. Fiscal events in the 2010–15 parliament contained measures that had the net effect of boosting revenues in 2017–18 by an estimated £10 billion. This figure arises from £60 billion of tax rises being offset by £50 billion of tax cuts. The net effect of measures announced since May 2015 has also been to increase tax. They are estimated to raise £15 billion (in today’s terms) in 2021–22. This figure arises from tax-raising measures worth £35 billion being offset by tax cuts worth £20 billion

·         On the spending side, the striking fact is that after seven years of austerity, public spending is only broadly back at pre-crisis levels as a fraction of national income. Cuts to large parts of government spending have only resulted in the size of the state being broadly unchanged for three reasons. First, the financial crisis pushed spending as a share of national income up sharply, and this increase has been undone. Second, continued weak economic growth in recent years has meant that a given real-terms cut to spending has delivered a smaller reduction in spending as a share of national income relative to both history and expectation. Third, some elements of spending have risen as a fraction of national income – most notably, spending on health, pensions and overseas aid – and so cuts have been required elsewhere.

You will get a PDF (12MB) file

£ 0.00

Pay what you want:
(minimum £0.00)

£
Buy Now

Discount has been applied.

Added to cart
or
Add to Cart
Adding ...