Sunday, October 24, 2010
Britain's Austerity Overdose
When we studied Britain, we looked at Thatcherism, the decrease in government spending during the 1980s. This post is a New York Times editorial explaining how the current British government is drastically reducing its deficit. While health services will not be cut, most government departments will have to cut spending on average 20%, half a million of Britain's 6 million government employees will be laid off, and long-term unemployment benefits will be limited to 12 months. While keeping deficits low is necessary for economic stability and growth in the long run, I agree with the editorial that a recovering economy with high unemployment is not the time to focus on deficit reduction. It looks like a major portion of the British population will be suffering in the next several years.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
While I would agree with Kyle and the article that now is not the appropriate timing for the British government to reduce the deficit spending, it seems to me that maybe the government is not cutting back in the correct places. The British government has for years pumped money into the NHS and yet there are many problems with the system. Now might be a good time to cut some spending in the health sector and put that money into jobs to help boost the economy.
I agree with Eshara! To cut down on government jobs during a recession will not help the British economy at all and it might take even longer for the country to roll out of it. The government should look into cutting spending on other sectors such as social security because by reducing both employment and its benefits the people of Britain are going to be hit hard.
Post a Comment