Something wrong with Ritchie\’s maths I think.

His estimates of the number that the baby eating Gideon will throw into the reserve army of the unemployed are based upon cash cuts from current cash spending.

When, of course, there are no cash cuts from current levels of spending. There are simply cuts in planned levels of spending in the future: actual cash spending (unadjusted for inflation to be sure) continues to rise.

3 thoughts on “Oh dear”

  1. “There are no cash cuts from current levels of spending.”
    Are you sure? Table C13 of the Budget shows departmental expenditure limits falling from £342.7bn in 2010-11 to £337.7bn in 2014-15, albeit rising thereafter.
    Granted, this isn’t enough to generate 1.6m job losses (unless the government wants it to), but it is a cash cut.

    Tim adds: I’m working from total expenditure rather than departmental numbers….

  2. There are countless basic concepts that this simple-minded man (aka village idiot) never understood, such as:
    – real (vs. nominal);
    – avoidance (vs. evasion);
    – domicile (vs. residence);
    etc, etc., etc.

    If he did not get it by now, the odds are very long that he ever will.

  3. Tim – about half the rise in total expenditure is because of higher debt interest payments (much of the rest is because of higher social security spending.) Surely, this doesn’t create jobs?

    Tim adds: SS spending adds to AD doesn’t it?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *