Cutting it with the Fink

JONNY

Is that thing in the left-hand corner meant to be the new Tory Poster?
If so I don't like it.

Maggie

Why don't you have this conversation down the pub instead of inflicting it on the rest of us?

Rhoda Klapp

There's an unfortunate conflation in this argument between cuts aimed at kinda-balancing the budget and reducing unsustainable deficits, which is a mere tactical argument of how to do the inevitable and how to present it, and true small government conservatism, which is strategic and far more important in the long-term economic prospects of the country.

I don't much want 10% off everything, I want the government to just give up and get out of vast swathes of the economy and the life of the country. To get the damnable politicians OUT of our lives. It obviously cannot be done swiftly, but there is no reason not to have at least a concept of how to do it and how we shall manage doing things for ourselves without nurse. And the tactical nonsense of Fraser vs Danny is a distraction from this reall issue.

Ian C

Your lack of participation in 1997-2005 was like the Tory MP's in Parliament who were so dead sure that they could not lose any more seats that every Tory MP believed he had a job for life and did not need to risk it!

A real example negative effect of supermajorities in our parlamentary method.

That complacency that is so inbuilt confirms the need for reform of the House of Commons so that it is much more independent of the PM and holds gov't truly to account on our behalf.

Gawain

Now that we're all agreed that cuts are good can we move onto the topic that is now giving me the heebie jeebies; inflation. The BBC's favorite economist, Blanchflower, was saying that 4% inflation would be good for us. Having had 13 years of lax fiscal discipline are we now going soft on inflation and how does that affect economic management ?

Irene

When the Tories get in they have to GIVE something before all the pain - and that is a tax cut that most middle and working class people can identify with IMO

DavidDP

"Thatcher denied she was making cuts because she never did."

Hang on, weren't you arguing that Cameron had to be like Thatcher who did make radical cuts, rather than Heath who didn't?

Publius

Reality always intrudes in the end. And when it does, it's not the gobby "experts" and their commentariat hangers-on who suffer, it's the poor saps who were duped into believing that water can run uphill after all.

Yam Yam

Milton Friedman's dictum remains as true as ever: there's no such thing as a free lunch.

PuppetMaster

So it would be fair to say Cameron's team lack intellectual vigour, have a poor understanding of economics and don't intend to challenge the supremacy of financial power in British society.
Which means that the end result isn't going to be all that different from what the current rabble have produced.

HJ

I'm with Rhoda Klapp on this.

Well said!

Ian Walker

Personally speaking, as a net contributor to the state, it won't be painful for me, or at least not as painful as letting the slash-and-burn socialists carry on.

Austin Barry

Fraser

OT:

I don't want to be a monomaniacal bore, but will you ever give us your promised thoughts on Neather?

If not, why not?

Philip Walker

"This is a popular myth: that the Tories fought the last election promising tax cuts and fiscal conservatism."

Fraser, the IFS document you linked says, "Our interpretation of the Conservatives’ plans implies that current spending
would be around 0.4% of national income lower than under Labour in 2006–07
and 0.8% of national income lower in 2007–08." The conclusion is exactly that the Tories proposed lower public spending.

JONNY

Puppetmaster.
You don't seem to understand
all this stuff is preliminary.
Only another 3 months to wait and Cameron will be PM. The biggest test for any man.

Patience, my friend. And a bit of humility.
You cannot read the runes of history, or the beast's entrails quite yet.

Hysteria

what Rhoda said - with bells on

oh

and what Austin said too

DavidL

I agree with Rhoda and others. The priority must be selective cutting drawing the State back from areas it should never have got involved in and repealing excessive nannying legislation which has created bureaucracies to supervise us. This will need work because legislation will be required in many areas. It is not enough to say Quangos should be on a bonfire (why is that always the method?); thought needs to be given as to what does not need done: what can be done cheaper by someone else and what effect these changes are going to have elsewhere. The Tories should be identifying and talking about these issues now. The policy tidal wave promised in January didn't really happen but it is time to get to work.

Tim Carpenter LPUK

I see here a conflation of cuts in deliverables and cuts in expenditure.

There is also the delusion that the UK is a wealthy country and so can "afford" so much of the trappings of such a place borne out in the main parties tinkering around of 10% or so of cuts.

Naomi Muse

I'm with Rhoda.

The micromanaging by the government which has become so pervasive needs to stop.

And, this article seems also to possibly be losing its objective... the objective is surely not that you and Daniel Finkelstein are as one, but that the country gets some good politicians who will do what is best for the country rather than themselves?

strapworld

Austin Barry. It was me that Mr Nelson promise, on two occasions in writing, that he would be posting on Neather. The second post was to inform me that he was researching figures.

In those days he always responded to people who made comments directly to him. Now he is an editor and that, it appears, takes him into a higher authority which means he has not got to deal with those 'orrible ordinary people who make comments.

Personally I just call it ignorance and bad manners!

Austin Barry

Strapworld

Mr Nelson doesn't seem a churlish character, so I suspect that the reasons for his odd silence are somewhat more intriguing than bad manners.

The Neather Report is like a football placed on the penalty spot in front of the Labour goal where a monocular, lumbering goalkeeper rumoured to be on sedatives, is unlikely to make a save.

But there's no one on the Tory team with the bottle to take the kick.

strapworld

Austin Barry.

I couldn't agree with you more. Others have made a similar point. But with so many candidates from the politically correct class, I suppose Cameron is afraid of upsetting them! and I am now of the opinion that Mr Nelson, once of this parish, has his eyes on ermine!!

TrevorsDen

The object is to get elected (then you can have erudite philosophical arguments) - Brown has not persuaded the tories of anything. But the political mischief that could be made of loose talk about 'cuts' is immense.

THe tories need tom hold their fire - the budget is to come - the real cuts in the pipeline need to be exposed.

In any event the Tories have already quoted what Canada did in reassessing what govt does and how it is delivered in 'cutting'' by 20%

Tom Freeman

"This is a popular myth: that the Tories fought the last election promising tax cuts and fiscal conservatism. IFS analysed the Tories spending plan, and found they wanted to outspend Labour and raise ­ yes, Danny, raise - the tax burden"

Without having the details to hand I'm sceptical of this claim. But even if it is completely accurate, how many of the public had absorbed the details of an IFS analysis? Danny's point is that at previous elections, the (failed) Tory position had been seen as lower tax and lower spend than Labour.

Major Plonquer

This is a poor substitute for modern political arguement. You two have been dinging and donging back and forth now for several months. And not once have either of you called the other a toff.

Fraser, whether Neather? If you have time to write this rubbish maybe you have the time to fulfill your manifesto pledge?

Anonymongrel

Danny is not a cutter now. He is a stubborn fool.

Rob Havard

The huge, gaping, unforseen error in trying to copy the "New Labour strategy of 1997" is that the New Labour message was an inherently popular one.

It was very positive, it was about opportunity, Mandelson talked of not worrying about people making obscene amounts of money. It was about seeing a future for the Country where no matter where you came from you had a chance to get on. In short it was the English version of the American Dream.

Team Cameron have been so well out manouvered that they are trapped in a cycle of whether they talk about cuts or don't talk about cuts. Which is on the surface a negative argument about a negative point.

If the Cameroon really wanted to emulate the success of Blair and Mandelson's campaign they should have followed the line Cameron took at the start of his leadership. That he was the Future, that New Labour had failed to deliver what it had promised and the Tory party were now the party of opportunity not New Labour.

Unfortunately DC has listened to over cautious people like Fink and are now not even emulating New Labour in '97. They just wallow in a sea of uncertainty.

TGF UKIP

"One of Oliver Letwin's theories" and isn't Loopy ic policy for Dave, Fraser? No wonder there's such a procession of daft half-baked ideas.

"Danny and I can be united now." Bollocks, Fraser! Razz you I may from time to time over your strange reluctance to boot Dave up the arse, but one thing I will say in your favour is that you are a very long way from being as deluded as arch Cameron arse-licker, Daft Danny.

logdon

Rhoda's right. And Austin.

After a mere year of state intrusion, racking up a trillions deficit, talk of giving illegals healthcare, crawling to potentates and dictators, devious unilateral deals, union bale outs and deals, secrecy and obfuscation, blind eyes to home grown islamists, useless security and Obama is tanking.

We endure precisely the same and twelve years later we're still arguing the toss.

And thus the great British Chihuahua roars.

logdon

Major Plonquer
February 17th, 2010 3:31am

Never Neather I suspect from Cast Iron Frazer.