[Closed] EU Referendum - are you in or out?

Ooh,my early flounce radar just went off the scale.

THM cite.

If it helps you, Chambers (2014) defines austerity as"a lower standard of living associated with the curtailment of government spending"It certainly feels like that to a lot of us.

Those folks at the Cambridge University Press will be disappointed, but still - keep on with your "special" dictionary. As you say, it makes no difference to anything in the real world.

Have a look at real austerity - I have given you a good example which is linked to this thread (Europe)

If it offends our previous sensibilities that we are being left out if real austerity, then we can keep up abusing language. We don't want to be left out after all!

SO Chambers is wrong? It's not "real" austerity ? Are you the sole owner of the true definition ?

Or would you care to cite the dictionary you are using ?

I'm getting really confused.

Is it basically that while the government are no longer pursuing a program of austerity (in the strict economic definition) more people are experiencing actual austerity (in the common usage sense) than before due to knock on effects of the previous economic austerity lowering overall government spending coupled with changes in the direction of government spending?

Apparently only economists know what austerity is.

Most people are suffering because of a lack of wage growth

Wage growth is determined by productivity levels which are shite in the U.K. over a long period

Then inflation - made worse by Brexshit - hits us harder on top - hence crap real wage growth

None of this is related to the fact that we [s]dont [/s] have austerity in the U.K.

But let's not worry about what is really happening let's blame it on either Johnny Foreigner or Austerity - both are equally [s]in[/s]valid and hence very popular

My wife and I are both nurses,what helpful advice do you have for us on how to increase our productivity in order to earn more?

Right, I've read the article, I think I now understand what is meant by "economic austerity" and how it is very different from actual deprivation austerity that people are experiencing.

Quite why many people on here insist on being obtuse and deliberately unhelpful I really don't know.

THM - I sincerely hope that you are not involved in teaching others.....
EDIT - actually, your last post was informative.

EDIT2 - just to avoid arguments the definition of obtuse above is neither the one meaning blunt. nor an angle between 90 and 180 degree.

Lol

Try getting you head around a fiscal surplus and what that means for Greece

Then we can have proper discussion about austerity rather than rants

Have you found the dictionary yet?

So disabled people who had their benefits cut are suffering because they are not productive ?
Some of them can't even work in the first place.

I reckon productivity (in IT at least) is harmed by outsourcing, which is a response to the squeeze for efficiency.

So disabled people who had their benefits cut are suffering because they are not productive ?

Yes, they really need to try harder - those work shy disabled people.

THM - I sincerely hope that you are not involved in teaching others.....
EDIT - actually, your last post was informative.

Even worse - Imagine if I was involved in something that required reading, understanding and learning 😉

We do not need to imagine as we cannot compete with you on that front.

Then we can have proper discussion about austerity rather than rants

You must know this is irrelevant to what is happening here so I dont know why you keep saying it
IT HAS NO BEARING ON AUSTERITY HERE WHAT HAPPENS THERE - just to get the full rant in 😉 - does it lead to you accepting indisputable facts of logic?

Even worse - Imagine if I was involved in something that required reading, understanding and learning

I have no doubt that you can do that. It is transferring that knowledge to others without boiling their piss where things seem to break down. 😉

Well if people have the lack of shame to post things on a public forum like

its not true to say there is no common fiscal policy.

Then it's no surprise that the boiling point of their piss is so low - possibly below 0C?

Odd that having to click links, read what experts say, and buy the odd book is such a combustible mix

But bravo on "actual deprivation austerity " - I did have to look that one up. Good old Chambers....every day is a learning day

Shackleton - Member
I'm getting really confused.

Is it basically that while the government are no longer pursuing a program of austerity (in the strict economic definition) more people are experiencing actual austerity (in the common usage sense) than before due to knock on effects of the previous economic austerity lowering overall government spending [b]coupled with changes in the direction of government spending?[/b]

Exactly that. Apologies for the pedantry, it seems almost irrelevant and 'obtuse' for me to be doing this, but when people buy into the myth that this 'austerity' is some kind of necessary deficit reduction measure caused by an overgrowth in the public sector, they'll then support (tacitly or otherwise) a reduction in the state. Hence why I think its important to call it out for what it really is; a small-state land-grab.

when people buy into the myth that this 'austerity' is some kind of necessary deficit reduction measure caused by an overgrowth in the public sector, they'll then support (tacitly or otherwise) a reduction in the state.

True, but conversely (or in addition) other people say that as there is no (economic) austerity there can be nobody suffering from (real world) austerity.

Given that gov spending as % of GDP is only just getting back to pre crisis levels, these nasty Tories are not very good at this small state land grab idea are they?

Did anyone say that on here Dr or was that just made up ?

DrJ - Member
when people buy into the myth that this 'austerity' is some kind of necessary deficit reduction measure caused by an overgrowth in the public sector, they'll then support (tacitly or otherwise) a reduction in the state.
True, but conversely (or in addition) other people say that as there is no (economic) austerity there can be nobody suffering from (real world) austerity.

True. I'm probably not making my point very well, and coming across as arsey, so apols for beating this drum- but the general, joe-public accepted definition of 'austerity' as a fiscal measure hasn't been with us since '13, and more people need to know this. From this, they need to learn that what we've got now is wholly unnecessary and becoming dangerously close to irreversible.

Control the terms and you control the discourse. I take your point about the dictionary definitions of the word 'austerity', but would observe that it now means- something more technical- if you were to ask the man in the street.

That was it. I'm broadly in agreement with you on other matters....

Perfect excuse for the great Inigo Montoya

Language is dynamic, that narrow definition used by a handful of economists has long been supplanted by the modern usage,

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Austerity

ie the decimation* of local services by a bunch of Eton toffs

* In the same way that [url= https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimation_(Roman_army) ]decimation no longer means randomly selecting 10% of your army for execution as a form of collective punishment for desertion[/url]

How many members of the current cabinet went to Eton? All of them? More than 10? More than 5? Less than 2?

When was the last OE chancellor of the exchequer ?

When was the last OE chancellor of the exchequer ?

Heathcote-Amory under MacMillan

EDIT: the most common schools since then have both been Scottish on 2 each: Fettes and Loretto. The latter having two relatively recent Chancellors: Lamont and Darling.

Just BoJo I think in the current cabinet.

To be honest, whenever I see the phrase Etonian, it makes me think of an arch-tory attitude (JRMesque) rather than place of education.

Not that that seems to be the present government. They are ****ing things up through incompetence rather than contempt for the little people.

Perhaps we can leave the definition to some people who should probably know meanings and definitions along with common uses

The chancellor has warned that government finances remain vulnerable in the event of another financial shock and the Treasury’s task must remain to bring down the deficit over the next parliament.

Carl Emmerson, deputy director of the IFS, said: “An ‘end to austerity’ – as defined by no further net tax rises, benefit cuts or cuts to spending on public services – would require a very sharp change of direction.

“It would imply a £17bn boost to planned spending on public services alongside a £5bn net tax cut and an £11bn increase in planned benefit spending – ie a giveaway of £33bn a year. [That] would, on current forecasts, leave us with a deficit at its current level – 2.4% of GDP – in 2021-22.”

Emmerson said relaxing the spending squeeze was “an option in a way that it was not an option back in 2010”. But he warned that it would leave the chancellor with “less room for manoeuvre” if growth stalled as a result of Brexit.

Now fixing this will be a tricky game as all the indicators say Brexit will cost money (remember that is the stuff we don't have a lot of) cuts to the things the EU spends on like farming and development will either need to be matched or that money is gone from the economy.

Maybe Hammond should get the same dictionary as THM. Would be easier.

Don't worry Shakleton, I was teasing. From "reading" previous posts I knew not to expect precision .

The reason for asking the question was not just a mild tease, but to note how false the current narrative that shapes political debate is, be it it Etonions (how many people used to argue that Osbourne was an OE?!?), austerity, inequality etc. Indeed the party with the greatest current momentum is riding a wave of falsehood - anti-austerity and inequality - any whilst it is deceitful, it is brilliant politics because people are fooled by it, they are not interested in the truth (see above) and the winners are the side that wins the strategic communications (lying) war not the bearers of truth. Brexshit was just one good example of this. Perhaps the best alongside Scottish Indy supporters and Trump.

The reasons for "seeking" precision on austerity is a simple one. The current narrative and sloppy terminology merely ensures that people continue to misunderstand what is going on. Of course it is true that there have been cuts. What has happened is the gap between what our government spends and what it receives has gone down. But it remains high, indeed higher than in most other developed economies which is precisely why - as Krugman agrees with me - the UK recovered earlier and stronger. Of curse it was also helped as in Europe much later by central banks stealing off savers but that is another story.

The second reason that it is important is that the Cameron was 100% wrong when he said that you can't solve a debt crisis with more debt. When the private sector is deleveraging it is crucial that governments do the opposite. Contrary to the false but popular narrative, that is what happened in the UK. Of course Cameron was not alone in getting this wrong - most of Europe did too. Hence they imposed EXACTLY the wrong policy for Greece at EXACTLY the wrong time in order to avoid ciriticism of their structure (€) that was responsible for the crisis in the first place.

Truth is the first victim of crises. Failing to understanding what is going on means that we are doomed to repeat mistakes.

and Borris has just hit self destruct/leadership bid

In his interview with the Sun, he called for four conditions for Brexit, which were then described by the paper as his "four red lines":

Transition period must be a maximum of two years

UK must refuse to accept new EU rules during that period

No payments for access to the single market after the end of the transition period

UK must not agree to shadow EU rules to gain access to the single market

Johnson knows what he's doing, staking his claim as the champion of Brexit, so he can say if they'd done it his way, it wouldn't have been the painful compromise we will inevitably have to face.

His ego knows now bounds!

Tho channel 4 have a documentary about his gaffes as foreign sec this weekend 🙂

I don't know why May doesn't sack Boris, there aren't that many swivel eyed loons who support him. I don't know why Boris covets being PM so much, poisoned chalice for years to ome.

His ego is as monstrous as his public persona.

I don't know why Boris covets being PM so much, poisoned chalice for years to ome.

His ego is as monstrous as his public persona.

I think he has a decent level of support and it's exactly the SEL's that May needs to keep onside at this point. The are the ones who defect to UKIP, the middle basically have the Lib Dems as a deserting ground.

er you do

?????????

his ego is the answer, it's something they can't take from you

His ego is as monstrous as his public persona.

"Johnson’s impromptu recital was so embarrassing that the UK ambassador to Myanmar, Andrew Patrick, was forced to stop him. "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/sep/30/boris-johnson-caught-on-camera-reciting-kipling-in-myanmar-temple

Is he trying to get himself sacked so he can't have his feet held to the fire over this whole disaster he has brought about?

nah he gets fired/resigns so that he can step up with his my plan for the win only serious alternative to May & Electoral defeat

Mays dilemma is whether to have him in the tent pissing out or outside pissing in.whatever boris is doing it is well calculated and designed to serve nothing other than Boris- i think he wants out so he can say it was not down to him and he tried personally.

He also does have an inordinate ability to put his foot in his mouth as well so an ambassadorial role is the most stupid choice for him as he will show time and time again.

Why are they news?

Transition period must be a maximum of two years - ok, unrealistic but that's e current deal. So no news

UK must refuse to accept new EU rules during that period - largely irrelevant

No payments for access to the single market after the end of the transition period - NSS (although woukd be better to PV the future pension liabilies and then delay the actual payment over time)

UK must not agree to shadow EU rules to gain access to the single market - irrelevant, if you dont meet standards you can't acces the markets.

So largely non points from a vacuous politician

teamhurtmore - Member
Why are they news?

But Boris last night said anything longer than 24 months — effectively to March 30, 2021 — would be a mistake that would leave Brexit voters feeling betrayed.

Talking to The Sun in his vast room in the Foreign Office, overlooking St James’s Park, the 53-year-old Tory big beast said: “I got that from my own talking to people. Very strongly.

“What that teaches me is that really is it. Rien ne va plus. Finito la musica. Then we come out. There can be no monkeying around.