The UK economy: well on the road to recovery?

[beorhthelm]

Yet corporations have increased profits by millions hence the term "growth"

nice rant, but you let yourself down at the end. profits have little to do with growth, go and look up what GDP is.

So, why do we do it? I can never understand this.

we want things to be "better" over our life time and as the world has shrunk, each year. other than some well meaning hippies and a few lucky enough to have broken the cycle, most measure this by money. from labourer to CEO, charity, company or government, we assess ourselfs better if we have more money. from where we are now, slow sustanible growth over decades would be great, but that doesnt win elections and everyones their favored niche to do better than everyone else.

 

[Beach Hut]

And people who pay tax are happy for these companies to operate in a flawed manner using their taxes?
The world is mad.

All tax payers own effectively several banks and a train operating company

 

[Steve Foster]

As an employer with 11 employees, I definitely concur that the market has picked up.

I am not political however, in my opinion anyone who votes Labour must be stark crazy, bordering on mental (yes I have voted Labour in the past). Unless of course you are either an immigrant, work shy, a thicky or unemployable.

The coalition have done a good job in getting this country back on its feet after the Brown/Blair years.

 

[Ernest]

As an employer with 11 employees, I definitely concur that the market has picked up.

I am not political however, in my opinion anyone who votes Labour must be stark crazy, bordering on mental (yes I have voted Labour in the past). Unless of course you are either an immigrant, work shy, a thicky or unemployable.

The coalition have done a good job in getting this country back on its feet after the Brown/Blair years.

How many of your employees are on zero hour contracts ? minimum wage ? claim tax credits, housing benefits or other in work benefits ? If so why don't you pay them a living wage instead of expecting the state to subsidise you ?

 

[melias shoes]

Interesting question. I suppose it depends if you 'buy the mantra' invented by Andy coulson on day 1 of the coalition when all ministers were instructed to say 'the financial crisis we have inherited from labour is much worse than we had been led to believe'

If you believe that then you would assume that if labour had been left in charge then it would have been a disaster. Of course that would be ignoring that growth was at the level that Osborne is now heralding as success. Or indeed that the total cuts that Alistair darling had stated are leas than 5% different from that we now have.

The real issue is where the cuts have been made and at what pace.

If however you subscribe to the view that the conservatives have made cuts based on ideology rather than necessity and have targetted those in society less able to defend themselves then you may believe that the other lot would have done a better job albeit over a slower period

Good answer but were all ministers instructed to say that, or,was the economy in a far worse state than we had been led to believe? I believe it was.

 

[Ernest]

Good answer but were all ministers instructed to say that, or,was the economy in a far worse state than we had been led to believe? I believe it was.

If it was then it got worse under Osbornes control

 

[easynow]

How many of your employees are on zero hour contracts ? minimum wage ? claim tax credits, housing benefits or other in work benefits ? If so why don't you pay them a living wage instead of expecting the state to subsidise you ?

Make assumptions much?

 

[Creaky]

How many of your employees are on zero hour contracts ? minimum wage ? claim tax credits, housing benefits or other in work benefits ? If so why don't you pay them a living wage instead of expecting the state to subsidise you ?

But even if as you state an employee may be receiving state help does that mean that the employer is being subsidised?

In many instances if employees were paid more then they would be costing the employer more than they were producing for the company - the obvious outcome being that the job would cease to exist - so are the company subsidising the state or the state subsidising the employer?

 

[Cheggers]

nice rant, but you let yourself down at the end. profits have little to do with growth, go and look up what GDP is.



we want things to be "better" over our life time and as the world has shrunk, each year. other than some well meaning hippies and a few lucky enough to have broken the cycle, most measure this by money. from labourer to CEO, charity, company or government, we assess ourselfs better if we have more money. from where we are now, slow sustanible growth over decades would be great, but that doesnt win elections and everyones their favored niche to do better than everyone else.

Surely profits have everything to do with growth. Simple economic theory has it that profits are then invested - to produce more, to employ more staff, so that aggregate wages increase and more commodities can be bought. So GDP increases. No?!

 

[beorhthelm]

The real issue is where the cuts have been made and at what pace.

If however you subscribe to the view that the conservatives have made cuts based on ideology rather than necessity and have targetted those in society less able to defend themselves then you may believe that the other lot would have done a better job albeit over a slower period

the ringfencing of health and overseas aid, too politically toxic, have meant too much has had to be carried elsewhere. also theres strong arguement that deeper, quicker cuts in the first year or two would have seen a faster return to growth. as you point out Darlings plan of action was largly the same an have liitle doubt he'd had similar emergency budget had Labour been relected. so really there has been far less ideology going on than the left like to think (and welfare cost more up front and broadly follows Fields proposals). Osborne has sat on his hands hopeing the economy will sort itself out, done very little to help, hindered a fair bit, but will take credit. jammy barsteward.

 

[Lifelong Supporter]

The vast majority of people in this country are living well. Blame whoever and whatever if it suits but life would be much happier if people would be positive. Too many people want too much and have too much greed. Appreciate what you have.

The economy is clearly on the way to recovery but there is more to life that money and wealth creation. Is Roman Abramovich a happier person that TB. I reckon not.

 

[drew]

To be fair to the Tories, we are all in it together. All those that have had their salaries frozen for the last few years, or have had their benefits cut so they have to move, or have taken part time jobs when they need full time work to look after their family don't worry because George is going to ensure that it isn't just his peer group that are going to benefit from the growth in the UK. We'll see the end of food banks and you won't see anyone on job seekers because everyone will be in work. George has it all in hand and as we all suffered with the recession (George and his family probably suffered more than most) we will all reap the bounty from this wondrous recovery.

 

[beorhthelm]

Surely profits have everything to do with growth. Simple economic theory has it that profits are then invested - to produce more, to employ more staff, so that aggregate wages increase and more commodities can be bought. So GDP increases. No?!

GDP measures the market value of goods services, not howmuch it cost to create them. profit is a factor of course for feedback, but corporate profits do not equal growth. a company could produce less, do so more with less cost and therefore increase its profits, likewise it could make more contributing to growth but make less profit due to higher costs.

 

[Ernest]

To be fair to the Tories, we are all in it together. All those that have had their salaries frozen for the last few years, or have had their benefits cut so they have to move, or have taken part time jobs when they need full time work to look after their family don't worry because George is going to ensure that it isn't just his peer group that are going to benefit from the growth in the UK. We'll see the end of food banks and you won't see anyone on job seekers because everyone will be in work. George has it all in hand and as we all suffered with the recession (George and his family probably suffered more than most) we will all reap the bounty from this wondrous recovery.

Exactly

 

[drew]

the ringfencing of health and overseas aid, too politically toxic, have meant too much has had to be carried elsewhere. also theres strong arguement that deeper, quicker cuts in the first year or two would have seen a faster return to growth. as you point out Darlings plan of action was largly the same an have liitle doubt he'd had similar emergency budget had Labour been relected. so really there has been far less ideology going on than the left like to think (and welfare cost more up front and broadly follows Fields proposals). Osborne has sat on his hands hopeing the economy will sort itself out, done very little to help, hindered a fair bit, but will take credit. jammy barsteward.

Far less ideology? Money for the health service may have been 'ring-fenced' but are you seriously saying that top down reorganisation, costing billions, was not motivated by ideology?
I take it that deeper faster cuts in the first year wouldn't have seriously impacted on you, ie you wouldn't have been forced out of your home or lost your job.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Yes, undoubtedly. Rising house prices confirms it. Gideon has saved us all.

But rising house prices are putting first-time buyers off - which will, of course, lead to a collapse in house prices.

Meanwhile ... the real economy ticks along, undisturbed by the headline-seeking efforts of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. If he hits lucky with a one-off, apparently upwardly mobile statistic, he will, of course, claim the credit.

 

[easynow]

To be fair to the Tories, we are all in it together. All those that have had their salaries frozen for the last few years, or have had their benefits cut so they have to move, or have taken part time jobs when they need full time work to look after their family don't worry because George is going to ensure that it isn't just his peer group that are going to benefit from the growth in the UK. We'll see the end of food banks and you won't see anyone on job seekers because everyone will be in work. George has it all in hand and as we all suffered with the recession (George and his family probably suffered more than most) we will all reap the bounty from this wondrous recovery.

I do hope one day this country will rise to match the great economies of Greece, Spain, Portugal and Ireland. There's just so much suffering here in the UK. It's getting ridiculous.

 

[Cheggers]

GDP measures the market value of goods services, not howmuch it cost to create them. profit is a factor of course for feedback, but corporate profits do not equal growth. a company could produce less, do so more with less cost and therefore increase its profits, likewise it could make more contributing to growth but make less profit due to higher costs.

I do agree. But Keynesian economics, which still tends to be the method for measuring such things dictates that income = output. Therefore, if marginal costs remain constant and we have a constant propensity to invest (arguable I know, but most economic theory is) and thus increase output, then GDP will increase.

However, cutting to the chase, I wouldn't trust a word CallmeDave and smarmy George say. And don't believe for a second that health expenditure has been "ring-fenced". This is one of the biggest myths projected by the Tories.

 

[Lifelong Supporter]

I do hope one day this country will rise to match the great economies of Greece, Spain, Portugal and Ireland. There's just so much suffering here in the UK. It's getting ridiculous.

This for sure

 

[melias shoes]

But rising house prices are putting first-time buyers off - which will, of course, lead to a collapse in house prices.

Meanwhile ... the real economy ticks along, undisturbed by the headline-seeking efforts of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. If he hits lucky with a one-off, apparently upwardly mobile statistic, he will, of course, claim the credit.

As All politicians would and do.