I think everyone wants to balance the budget Purple. The issue is how long you take to do it. Look at the effect that the gradual cuts are having on the economy. Growth prospects are very limited and that is by cutting about 5 billion from the economy each year. Now imagine cutting 20 billion in one go from the economy and imagine the impact on GDP. You would still have a deficit because the economy would be in the toilet and so revenues would have collapsed. You would also have social anarchy because you would have no functioning banking system, public services would probably grind to a halt and you would have huge social unrest.
The EU/IMF programme buys us time and allows us get our budget in shape before going to creditors and seeing what we can do about debt levels. We probably need to take larger bolder steps but there are consequences to everything.
I don’t accept the “no functioning banking system” argument; foreign banks would buy up the carcasses of AIB and BOI.
I do agree that we would have huge social unrest and many public services would grind to a halt but it is essential that we de-couple ourselves from debts run up by banking and if that means balancing the budget in 1-2 years then that’s what has to be done. While we are on a drip supplied by the guys we have to negotiate with they hold all the cards. As for the collapse in government revenue well as long our cuts in non-productive spending are chasing our shrinking economy we are in a downward spiral anyway.
Nobody would buy bankrupt banks in a bankrupt Country.
They wouldn’t be buying bankrupt banks, they’d be buying building s and employing the people who used to work in them. They’d then open up and sell their own products and services (since there would still be a demand for those products and services.
David Mc Williams on RTE radio this morning suggested that the government should issue 2 or 3 new banking licences.
I don’t accept the “no functioning banking system” argument; foreign banks would buy up the carcasses of AIB and BOI.
I do agree that we would have huge social unrest and many public services would grind to a halt but it is essential that we de-couple ourselves from debts run up by banking and if that means balancing the budget in 1-2 years then that’s what has to be done. While we are on a drip supplied by the guys we have to negotiate with they hold all the cards. As for the collapse in government revenue well as long our cuts in non-productive spending are chasing our shrinking economy we are in a downward spiral anyway.
My opinion on this is that we need to cut spending by 40% over an 18 to 24 month period in order to balance the budget. The general objections to such a move have already been touched on in this and other threads, i.e. that it would damage the economy even more. But such a theory does not stand up to economic history. I have posted on several occasions about what happened in the US depression of 1920/21. President Harding did the following:Purple,do you think that it will take just two years of severe cuts? If so, it would be worth it,if it means getting things back to some sort of normality..
To who? There are loads of foreign banks (some of largest in Europe and Canada and US) in the IFSC who hold bank licences and in theory could do a full banking business in Ireland. They aren't exactly rushing to do business.
So if we default we would not have access to the markets because we are not paying back the money they have already given us?
What about if we just default on the bank element of the debt?
My opinion on this is that we need to cut spending by 40% over an 18 to 24 month period in order to balance the budget. The general objections to such a move have already been touched on in this and other threads, i.e. that it would damage the economy even more. But such a theory does not stand up to economic history. I have posted on several occasions about what happened in the US depression of 1920/21. President Harding did the following:
1) reduction in taxation especially the marginal rate
2) cut the federal budget in half in 2 years
The depression that started worse than the Great Depression was over in 18 months and some of the most prosperous years in US history followed.
Quite the opposite to the doom and gloom effect of cutting government spending happened. What this country needs is less spending and less taxation in order to make it a more attractive business environment. Do I believe this is going to happen? No.
Chris;1165548) Quite the opposite to the doom and gloom effect of cutting government spending happened. What this country needs is less spending and less taxation in order to make it a more attractive business environment. Do I believe this is going to happen? No.[/QUOTE said:Why do you believe it will not happen?
And can I ask you what you think will happen?
I got a good laugh at that!For example, what do you think would happen if we announced that we dont like Sarkozy/Merkel and blame them for us getting a bad deal, so we will default if either or both ever get reelected?
No he didn't. WWI and its related military spending ended 14 months before the depression of 1920 began. Military spending was still included in the 1919 Federal budget which was $18.9b. The 1920 budget shows that military spending had already been cut out when the federal budget was a mere $6.8b (source: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year1918_0.html#usgs302).President Harding (not sure why we are going there) slashed military spending. He did not slash the general spending in one year to the extent that you are suggesting.
Let me rephrase, I do not believe any politician will have the guts to stand up to the public and introduce the severe cuts in the short time frame needed, as this will guarantee not being elected again. The public always wants something for nothing and that is what politicians promise.Why do you believe it will not happen?
And can I ask you what you think will happen?
Problems don't get fixed by monetary inflation they end up kicked down the road and exaggerated.I can't help thinking that the ECB should just write off what it is owed by piigs countries and simply print that figure in new euros (in the USA & UK do they not call printing money 'quantitative easing'?), the problem would be fixed at a key stroke.
I fully agree with you, the EU project has morphed into a disgusting bureaucratic glob of waste, but I think that is probably a topic for another thread.I much preferred the EEC, which was about ease of travel and trade, over the EU project which is about a United States of Europe by stealth.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?