How deep is the hole we are in

 

Subject: How deep is the hole we are in.



Hang on guys it’s only a job. I’m not the messiah with a magic potent to distribute, I’m just a bloke like you who reads the meter and looks in the teapot to see if there’s any change.

So it must be for our new PM as he too reads the meter The so called abysmal finances and the danger we are in is  the result of our profligacy and inability to be straight with the people. Whilst it rained we simply printed money to plug the gaps instead of having the roof fixed properly and now we have squandered our good will and credit with the lender it’s hardly time to ask for a loan.

The inability of politicians to listen to advice and rather would keep the voter sweet with promises is one of the major failings of democracy, it strikes against any long term decision making and elevates people with both narcissistic and charismatic tendencies to seek the job of politician.

We need a belt and braces approach, where technocrats, economists scientists have an equal seat around the decision making table as do the political representative. The technocrats provide the long term business opinionated view, the politician reflect the views of the general public but this public view has to validated with facts and figures. All decisions have an economic component. Even if a society has the death penalty and wishes to abolish it the incarceration of a murderer is expensive. This balance sheet evaluation would filter out the more populist demands and lead to a balance sheet of what’s affordable. Soundbite economics in which the population is led to believe something is attainable and which offers up unrealistic hope should be squashed, not because to dream isn’t nice but if our lives were run on the hope of winning the lottery we would be in a far worse state than we are.

Pork barrel projects, like the high speed link to the North of which it was accepted from the start that the cost amylases assumptions on which its validity was judged was hopelessly overestimated to get it through into the planning stage. The only real beneficiaries will be the investors and contractors, many of whom have murky links to the decision takers. If on one side of the boardroom table sat the equivalent of the Office of Budget Responsibility on who’s say projects went ahead or were modified by cost constraints and not boasted through solely by ideology.

Ideology gets in the way. It’s important to give the initial impetus for travel but the realism required to achieve the objective must never be lost.

1.  Can we afford to continue to treat everyone on the NHS as if they hadn’t the means to pay for themselves.

2.  Should we offer inducements to cover the cost of raising children to people who can well afford to pay themselves.

3.  This idea of universality across the board as a right, has to be challenged.

4.  Should the national pension be paid to those who have, through generous employment contracts have obtained a private pension perhaps 3 x the  ‘national basic pension  

5.  Should benefits be paid to families who continue to expand beyond the norm of 3/4.

6.  Should immigrants be given assistance beyond that of the local inhabitant.

The list is long and many will be sacred cows,  inviolate, apparently unchangeable but as many people this winter will find out those sacred cows are no longer so sacred.  Should we abolish the ‘charitable status’ given to Independent Schools or the tax advantages given to non-doms and the tax havens for the rich.

7.  If we aren’t making sufficient profit to pay for the exigencies then we must consider stopping them.

Not living within its means has been the death-nell to many so called established dynasties throughout the history of mankind and there’s no reason to believe we should be any different.