The numbers spoil Labour's narrative

Vulture

"Naturally by 'the right' he means David Cameron.."

Bruin may get his Euro-pals to believe David Cameron is on the right. No-one else will.

John Ware

Weasel words. You're trying to wiggle out of the inconvenient reality that the Government's fiscal position has more support among economists than the Conservatives' position, whatever that might be.

Titus Aduxas

The Q4/09 figures showed a very suspicious 0.1% growth. Q1/10 shows the most disastrous figures imaginable - first time that Britain has, ever, borrowed in January. It is inconceivable that Britain is out of recession and, when Q1/10 figures are published, they will be worse than believed possible.

Even those 60 economists would have to agree that Labour policies are not working, if they were not Labour supporters, that is.

As the Times says Brown is on borrowed time - it's something we've come to expect from him, he is addicted to borrowing.

AB

The British public aren't stupid. Thatcher cut through all this socialist hogwash with a simple appeal to common sense - government spending can never be the answer to generating economic growth. Governments can only spend money that they take off the rest of us through tax. If governments spend more money than they take in tax today, it just means higher taxes tomorrow. More debt cannot be the answer to a crisis caused by excessive borrowing. The fundamental dishonesty in socialist thinking is that this mess can be sorted out painlessly. The longer we avoid addressing the level of debt in this country, the bigger the hit we will eventually have to take to put the economy back on a sound footing. Brown can't admit this because it would involve having to face up to the error of his economic policies for the last 10 years so he's concocted some Keynesian sounding nonsense that suggests that by spending more money, the government can magically conjure up a higher level of sustainable growth. It merely demonstrates the irrelevance of the economics professional that 60 fools can be found to put their names to this twaddle.

Andy Leeds

Having to borrow over 4 billion in January - Tax collection month - just shows how bad the States finances actually are. And that was worse than we all thought. The Idiot Brown should be cutting spending now, not waiting and waffling. He should never have created this mess in the first place. The man is a disaster as history will record and we will all spend the next 30 years paying for.

welease woger

Vulture, I was intrigued by your election strategy you posted the other day.

You seemed to say (I hope this is fair, correct me if not) vote Conservative where they can unseat Labour even if the candidate is a Cameroon, vote UKIP where the Tories are strong and Labour weak, SNP in Scotland, and LibDem in various circumstances. This you think will produce a strong government of the type you would like to see.

I'm curious how in practical terms this would differ much from just voting Conservative to get rid of Brown? What government do you think this would result in?

Gawain

60 academic economists with salaries and departments funded by public borrowing sign a letter arguing that the cuts should be delayed. Quelle surprise ! Given the woeful performance of their discipline over the last three years perhaps it gives a hint as to where the axe should start falling. Perhaps if we had more science and engineering departments and fewer economics departments we would be in better shape.

Irene

This is too serious to be so childish.
One letter, then another letter - what is the saying put 2 economists in a room and you come up with three opinions!

michael m

Has anyone noticed what has happened to the pound since yesterday? A 2% fall and probably more to come

stephen

The sad thing is that however bad the economy gets Labour seem to be able to snatch the hign ground. Boy George is obessed with gimicks and gesture politics, first a green bank, then coops and then some economists. On the latter Osborne is so naive what do they say about economists? You always find contrary views. This election is about the economy[stewpid!] and Boy lacks experience and political maturity to put a ball through Brown's open goal. The economists argument is a Boy George generated red herring which will confuse the electorate. Can't the Tories send him on a fact finding mission to China by a slow boat for the next three months and put an experienced adult shadowing Darling?

Nash

Aren't these the guys that helped get us into all the trouble in the first place. Where were their letters to the press when Gordon Brown set the ridiculous "one dimensional" CPI target in the first place.

RKing

Did any of the "60 economists" have anything to do with running the us into the worst financial crisis in our history??

If any of you were then thanks for the advice chaps!!

welshy

When markets say "enough" is when this spending will stop. For now, there is a truce, markets assume tory govt cuts deficit post election. Any change in outlook for election may see markets push sooner - but not a lot we (those who think private sector has to drive recovery) can do til either markets move or brown runs out of parliament in may.

Growth in Q4 was pathetic - watch for dip in Q1 and continued high inflation... no recovery to save labour.

PS - why is brown trash talking leader of opposition to other left govts - do none of them have better things to do than listen to that!? Why haven't they sent cardboard cut outs to sit through it and actually do something useful with their time? Conference is a who's who of bad economies!!!

Rhys

How about these for numbers? Labour haven't been ahead in the polls for 28 months. Are all those millions of people polled now supposed to get excited about 60 opinions coinciding with "eyebrows'"?

Ken

Economists with the political credentials of those signing in the FT eh, shiver in your boots.

The markets will expose the truth and it's going to naked, brutal and soon.

Willie de Peepul

If, as they do, all the major parties are agreed on the need for public spending cuts "after the election", yet the one party with the power to start making those cuts NOW refuses to do so, solely to avoid electoray disadvantage (and DON'T give me any of that B-S about it being necessary to "safeguard the recovery", because that's what it is, B-S) then aren't they guilty of a heinous crime against the British people, deserving only to be cast into the outer darkness for - - - well the, I'll say it, FOREVER.
If, as a resulty of this dilatory approach, the next government, of whatever colour, is forced to call in the IMF, we will all know on which doorstep to dump the ordure.

JONNY

Exactly what I wrote 3 says ago welease woger.

Vulture is now saying vote Conservative (aka Cameron) where it matters.
Do what you like where it doesn't.
And I duly applauded him for the strong lead he's giving us confused old Tories.

Holly ......

Purnell standing down at election.

Natasha

The fact that the entire economics profession (with a few honourable exceptions) failed to predict the global financial crisis and ensuing downturn means that we should not be overly deferential to their opinions now.

What does matter greatly is for the Conservatives to have a positive message for the electorate, rather than just banging on endlessly about the need for tough spending cuts. This is one area where they can learn from Mrs Thatcher (although the problems we face now are very different from the ones she faced in 1979). Thatcher built a broadly-based political consensus that embraced both private and public sector employees by persuading people that a free enterprise, low tax economy would in time deliver greater prosperity for everyone. This is the way to win over floating voters who might otherwise worry that voting Tory will threaten their job security and livelihood.

I don't discern any positive message in what the Tories are saying on the economy. It's all about pain, pain and more pain. OK, maybe this will earn them brownie points for honesty, but at the moment - with the economy still on life support - I think there is good evidence from the narrowing of the polls that it is scaring the hell out of a lot of uncommitted voters. It's time for a re-think.

Holly ......

Knowing the way things work at Labour HQ,I 'googled'the names who are on the letter.
Lord Skidelsky & Robert Solow have written a biography on John Maynard Keynes and is a major figure of the neo-Keynsion stuff.
Lord Layard is a Labour life peer along with his Mrs.
Joseph Stiglitz Advised Obama and has also been sharply critical of the Obama administration's financial-industrial rescue plan,saying that,"whoever designed the bank rescue plan is either in the pockets of the banks or they're incompetent"
After all,these folk have no bearing on the UK economy and we should wait to hear from the economists in charge of our credit rating.

Short the UK

Richard Branosn will have more resonance with the public than the FT (F****** Terrible) and their Keynesian wonderland.

denis cooper

Clearly government spending can generate economic growth, provided the money is spent wisely.

Just as a private investment fund can assemble a large capital sum from multiple small sources, maybe supplement it by borrowing, and then invest in productive and profitable projects, so can a government.

And as I recall, Brown's stated intention was that over an economic cycle he would only borrow to "invest", the implication being that the return on his investments would exceed the cost of borrowing.

Unfortunately while spending more money on services such as health and education may be presented as "investment" in the broadest sense, he hasn't achieved the required return in terms of hard cash.

In terms of votes, perhaps, but not in terms of the increased tax revenues needed to balance the books.

Nick

If it is so vital not to have any cuts now so as to safeguard the recovery (such as it is) as these economists and Labour claim then why did Darling raise VAT back to 17.5% on January 1st ?

This will take £12 bn out of the economy. A figure far higher than any of the supposed "savage" cuts Labour claim Osborne would introduce now.

stephen

I have now read the two economists letters in the FT, reminds me of the old joke about the best economist being a one handed one[so he can't say on the other hand!] That said Boy George's silly idea to rope in a few economists has back fired on him and just adds to the spurious credibilty of Brown/Darling.

Jonathan L

Natasha is right about the failnure of economists to recognise the 'great recession' was on its way. None of the economists were vocal enough about it, the government didnt see it coming - and understandably the opposition were probably a little lighter on knowledge than the treasury and monetary committee on FULL facts.

What is interesting is that with the ridiculous state of the country's finances we could ever begin to listen to this government on financing Britain. Its administration is in tatters. Its financial control has been catastrophic and for decades we will have to pay the price.

Not only is care for the elderly a concern but our pensions crisis, our health service and the simple handing out of money, benefits, welfare payments, job seekers allowances etc seem a ridiculous outgoing for the government when many of these people have probably paid little into the system. It is the elderly that have contributed over their lifetime, they have worked, worked harder and given. It is the 18-40 somethings that shouldnt be entitled to handouts - each for themselves. Whilst S**burys or T**cos are recruiting there shouldnt be any handouts - let these people work for their living. Even help clean up the streets - the younger generation are tossing litter out of cars, in beautiful rural areas as well as towns - and if you get our economists to comment on how that could be improved I think they would agree that a coherent social policy that works (obviously not the current administration's)would be more effective than the current approach to the economy (that hasnt worked either!).

Bring it on Labour! You havent got a leg to stand on!

Michael Booth

Brown says the Tories are 'scaring voters' with their take on the deficit. Gordon is right to object - scaring the voters is his job...

Mr. Green

AB - I totally agree, but...

We need "Dave" to say as much. Currently he is saying very little.

Rhys

In our final year at uni, a housemate of mine studying economics said he thought Brown was a "genius". I've never really given much credence to the opinions of economists since.
In fact if you asked me what I would save in the event of nuclear holocaust; a room full of economists or a chocolate teapot.....who's for tea?

oldtimer

The opinions that count are those with the ability to vote with their skills and their cash. The measures are the value of sterling,the migration of businesses to lower tax countries and the ability to borrow. I do not see the FT letter writers persuading the Sovereign Wealth Funds to invest billions in the UK - the only money "raised" in the past year is the c£200 billion "printed" by the Bank of England. The pound is down. Just about each day we hear of a business quitting town or planning to do so unless there is a tax regime change. The gilts yield is now 4.1%. Forget the economists. Follow the money.

radgie gadgie

As far as policies are concerned, Broon, Dave and little Nick are just 3 little bluebottles frantically buzzing around in their own comfortable little jar while theres a big old world of economic options out here in the big wide world where the rest of us live.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Dont vote for any of the big 3 parties, as it only gives them the idea that we give them any credence - and we dont...... do we?

Olaf Rye

Oh, sixty economists support Labour's policies ? Well, those that really matter--the markets--obviously do not support them in the slightest as the pound is losing value and there are warnings of our credit rating being downgraded. Of course you can get academics to come out and support Labour, but they have no answer for why they support policies that the international markets hold in contempt. As ever, you can find an economist to tell you whatever you like, and Labour is somehow trying to imply that rampant borrowing and an exploding debt do less harm to the economy than reducing this as fast as possible. I wonder: how many Labour MPs run their household finances like this ? They are, along with their apologists, the worst sort of hypocrites.

THX1138

The numbers wouldn't be so bad if your proprietors, Lord Ashcroft & the Tories new buddy Branson paid their taxes in the UK.

Also I note that Osborne's much vaunted consensus of economists rather unravelled in today's FT

Dorothy Wilson

I heard one of the instigators of these letters on the Today programme this morning but didn't catch his name.

However, when asked about the need to take notice of the markets he said something the lines that we shouldn't worry too much - the markets had had their way for too long.

But he didn't offer - and wasn't pressed - over what would happen if the markets did take flight. Perhaps these supposed experts will tell us how we would finance continued borrowing if the markets declined to lend us the money or would only do so at high rates of interest.

PayDirt

AB and denis cooper comment on sources of money to pay for Govt spending, ie tax and govt investment which pays out (through taxation?), however the Govt also can print money. So it has been doing, so far apparently without much devaluation of Sterling relative to $ or Euro. Govt can also sell stuff (like railways or telephone licencing) but most of that has already been sold(?). Perhaps Govt will eventually have to sell licences to foreigners to build on British Green Belt or some such. We will see, the point of course is that Brown's economics has led to huge debt, Sovereign default anyone?

Pot Head

The numbers spoiling Dave's day

You Gov poll Just out in The Sun

CON 39%(nc), LAB 32%(+2), LDEM 18%(nc)

It's game on!

Vulture

@welease woger, JONNY

I was merely saying that people should vote tactically, either UKIP ( where it won't let in Liebour) or Tory (if there's any danger that it will)..but never vote Liebour under any circumstance.

In Scotland the main threat to Liebour is the SNP, and the Tories will be lucky toscrape a single seat, so people should vote SNP there.

Having said all that, today's Daily Mail scoop of a secret paper by Michael Gove on how to parachute Camerloons ( especially if they are gay, wimmin, ethnic minority and not local) into safe seats by 'Stealth' (his word) makes me think that Dave really doesn't want to win. The only thing going for him is that he's not Bruin. In all other respects he's a detestable disaster.
I really loathe him more than I can say.

welease woger

Thanks Vulture, I understand your advice but where would that leave things after May 6th?

I would suggest a very strong Tory government under Cameron which suits me fine but how about you?

Ghengis

The saddest aspect of the situation facing the taxpayer is that 30% of them who also enjoy the right to vote have been rendered incapable of realising that to spend more than one earns is a certain recipe for disaster. Brainwashing of this order should be considered criminal.

Vulture

@WW

No Dave Govt. is going to be 'strong' let alone 'very strong'. In some cases, a person's features betray their personality. Dave is one such. His face resembles a dripping jelly just before dropping off a wall and congealing in a shapeless heap.

He oozes slipperiness, mendacity, and carries the arseprints of Steve Hilton and whatever focus group has just sat on him. He combines all the qualities of his hero Bliar and that other Tory traitor, Heath.

This weakness is combined with over-weening arrogance, snobbery and a conviction that his party should be composed only of his school chums and their wives.

He's already stirred up savage resentment and resistance in his party which is only held in check by the prospect of office.
Strong? No, I don't think so.

Blofeld's Cat

Pot Head - Silly boy - it's a daily tracker poll and it will bounce around every day until Gordon grows a pair and calls an election (just like it did during Conference Season). Then it will be game on, at last.

Polls remain at 40-30-20-10 (within margin of error) as they have been for 6-12 months.

JONNY

I think the object is to block out old farts like Winterton
who are a dinosaur embassment to the Tory Party and the entire Human Race.
Do you really object so much?

JONNY

'His face resembles a dripping jelly just before dropping off a wall and congealing in a shapeless heap.'

Sometimes I get a wee bit worried about Friend Vulture.

Pot Head

Blofeld's Cat I think the Heir needs a bit more clear blue water in the polls than this to get a good nights sleep..

Now remind me where was the gap in the polls before the genuine TB put the rancid Major government out of it's misery?

Nicholas

THX 1138, wibble-wibble, puff, puff, blow.

The Michael Winner of the Coffee House.

Blofeld's Cat

Pot Head - If you want to discuss all things poll-related, pop over to Political Betting where you'll be enlightened (and put back in your box)

Marcher Baron

Economists can write all the letters they like expressing their opinions, political or otherwise. Ultimately, the markets will decide. When we lose our AAA rating and we can't borrow any more money (or only do so at prohibitive cost) the game will be up.

logdon

Fluff and mere aspiration on Co-ops, u-turn on cuts, still banging on about green, nothing on immigration, nothing on the growing Muslim problem, parachuting female PC candidates equals a dip to a seven point divide.

Where's the spine?

Olaf Rye

Are there really people that believe our current deficit, much less debt, is a better alternative to reducing spending ? Perhaps they ought to be reminded that the deficit leads to an annual increase in DEBT. We are not even in a position to begin reducing the £1.3 trillion debt that this government has accumulated. And what do we have to show for it ? The last G8 nation to emerge from the recession, and with only a 0.1% growth in the last quarter; a stagnant economy, an international market that is worried about Britain defaulting on its loans and asking three to five times as much to insure our gilts, the looming threat of our credit rating being lowered, and a bureaucracy out of control. Any economist that feels this is preferable to reducing the deficit as soon as possible is an imbecile. Look at other nations that faced fiscal crises in the 1990s: Sweden immediately cut its spending by 10%, followed by another 10% in the succeeding year. Even socialists in Europe can see the untenability of such large deficits and debts, but the Labour apologists in Britain rally around their darling party and have sufficient contempt for us that they expect us to trust in their authority. To hell with all of them ... I hope the cuts to their university departments are disproportionately fierce so that they might learn their lesson for being so stupid and venal.

Ghengis

Surely, Cameron should disassociate himself from Winterton and remove from the Conservative party completely.

Bloody Bill Brock

@BLOFELDS CAT
Good advice to Pot Head puss.These Labourites get one slightly encouraging poll and have an orgasm.

Percy

Economics, quite interesting but without doubt the biggest hocus pocus of all the pseudo-sciences.