Spending Cuts: When ministers talk of lynch mobs, you know they're scared

[marmar]

from the Guardian UK:




The cabinet minister leant back into his chair and took a fortifying swig of his drink. Then, in a voice that blended bravado with fatalism, he said: "It's going to be absolutely horrendous. We're doomed to be extremely unpopular. Doooomed."

He was anticipating the public reaction to the ferocity of the spending squeeze that George Osborne will unveil in just five weeks' time. Put aside everything else that has occurred in the life of the coalition to date. None of it amounts to anything more than foreplay compared with the comprehensive spending review, the results of which are scheduled to be announced on 20 October. All other activity within Whitehall has now virtually ceased as cabinet ministers who are trying to protect their budgets do battle with the Treasury which is demanding cuts the like of which have not been seen since… well, that raises an interesting question.

Just how far back do you need to reach to find a squeeze of comparable severity? Will it be as bad as the 1980s? It will be much worse than that. There is a smattering of ministers and officials who have been around long enough to remember what it was like in the time of Margaret Thatcher. These veterans say the coalition's cuts will be much, much deeper than anything implemented by the Iron Lady and Sir Geoffrey Howe. One seasoned figure reports that ministers are having to agree to cuts which involve a level of political risk he has never known in his long career.

The 1930s then? Is that how far back we should go? This is disputed by Nick Clegg. "We are not going back to the 1930s," he insisted in a speech last week before frankly admitting that voters are "confused and frightened" and public sector managers are already in a "panic" even before they know precisely what is in store. That reflected panic and fright on his own part, and that of other cabinet members, about how the public is going to react. ............(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/sep/12/spending-cuts-minsters-coalition

[leveymg]

1. Go not quietly into the long night. Rage, rage . . . make this so ugly no one will try it again.

The world is watching. This time, go not gently . . . put fear of the long night into the darkest, most private corners of their souls.

[KakistocracyHater]

2. looks like the wealthiest everywhere are cutting down civilization as fast as

they can, making way for what? Feudalism? Racing to reach 3rd World status? & why are they doing this?

[leveymg]

3. They know the jig is up. They're socking it away, because the getting won't be so good later.

That's why they're doing this. The die is cast.

[dixiegrrrrl]

4. Why???? you ask?

Clash of the Titans, apparently.

If you and I, mere mortals, do not contribute to the corpocracy bottom line, we have no value.

Business has always been so much better than government at looking into the future and planning accordingly.
And spending money on social contracts is not the way it works for the rulers, historically speaking.