Skip to main content

The nonsense of Tory economic madness

Taking the Tory narrative on the economy you would be forgiven for thinking that current problems with the economy are due to 'out of control' spending on welfare.  It is a false narrative. It is a dangerous narrative because it means we are not learning from history.

The Tories set up this narrative of welfare spending so that they can do what they are ideologically good at doing - cutting social investment.  But it is more sinister.  It is a political trick that shifts the burden of the financial crisis to the poorest and enables the government to 'keep taxes low'. It aims at 'middle England'.  

But it is a false narrative. If you want to see graphically what went wrong you can do no better than consider household debt.  The massive and rapid increase in household debt as percentage of incomes fuelled an unsustainable boom.  


Household debt-to-income shot up over the course of a decade to 170% of household income before the financial crash.  In large part it fuelled, and was in turn fuelled by rising house prices. 


Not only was more and more money pumped into the housing market, house price inflation was fuelled by the growing shortage of housing.  It was also a 'boom' fuelled by an unfettered market. Distorted market economics pushed housing increasingly out of reach of first-time buyers.  This was a social crisis. 

In the three decades following the war, construction of local government housing increased supply. It took people out of slums and provided affordable housing. It was a critical factor in the welfare state and in providing opportunities for hard working families. Home builds reached over 400,00 a year in the late 1960s. However,  with the advent of 'free market' politics from the 1980s, the government retreated from building houses, leaving it to the private sector, with only a small contribution from housing associations.  The consequences are now stark.  Families are forced now into inadequate rented homes in a relatively unfettered rented sector.  Landlords income have been fuelled by the need to support such families with rent allowances.

The Tory government seeks to solve this, not by building more social housing but by trying to force people to move with the 'bedroom tax' or simply putting a cap on rent allowance making it impossible for families to go on living in the areas where they have jobs.  

No, it isn't public investment that brought about the crisis. It was the lack of it. Welfare bills rise because more and more people are forced into low paid jobs often on zero hour contracts. The welfare bill is high because rents are high and pay is low. Yet the government seeks to solve this by cutting welfare.  As well as being socially unjust, it is economic madness.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba
7 comments
Read more

Prioritising people in nursing care.

There has been in recent years concern that care in the NHS has not been sufficiently 'patient centred', or responsive to the needs of the patient on a case basis. It has been felt in care that it as been the patient who has had to adapt to the regime of care, rather than the other way around. Putting patients at the centre of care means being responsive to their needs and supporting them through the process of health care delivery.  Patients should not become identikit sausages in a production line. The nurses body, the Nursing and Midwifery Council has responded to this challenge with a revised code of practice reflection get changes in health and social care since the previous code was published in 2008. The Code describes the professional standards of practice and behaviour for nurses and midwives. Four themes describe what nurses and midwives are expected to do: prioritise people practise effectively preserve safety, and promote professionalism and trust. The
Post a Comment
Read more

The unethical language of 'welfare dependency'

It is unethical to stigmatise people without foundation. Creating a stereotype, a generalised brand, in order to  demonize a group regardless of the individual and without regard for the potential harm it may do is unfair and prejudicial. It is one reason, and a major one, why racism is unethical; it fails to give a fair consideration of interest to a group of people simply because they are branded in this way. They are not worthy of equal consideration because they are different.  It seeks also to influence the attitudes of others to those stereotyped. If I said 'the Irish are lazy'; you would rightly respond that this is a ridiculous and unfounded stereotype. It brands all Irish on the basis of a prejudice. It is harmful certainly; but it is worse if I intend it to be harmful. If I intend to influence the attitude of others. And so it is with 'the unemployed'. All I need do is substitute 'work-shy' and use it in an injudicious way; to imply that it applies to
2 comments
Read more