Spending cuts: how will the axe fall?

Quote

"Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds nineteen shillings and sixpence, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds, ought and sixpence, result misery."  Mr Micawber in Charles Dickens’ book, David Copperfield.

News

As the government debt crisis mounts in southern Europe, Britain’s government spending overshot by £163 billion last year – 11.6% of national income.  To avoid a crisis of Greek proportions, Britain has to cut this deficit dramatically over the next few years – but in the run up to next week’s general election, none of the party leaders is talking about that.  Instead they imply that “efficiency savings” might be enough – instead of the more realistic “age of austerity” that Conservative leader David Cameron spoke of briefly a few weeks back, before being advised to drop it as too “unpopular”. 

No intelligent person can look at the figures and avoid concluding that major cuts must be made; debt must be tackled at the national level the same way as at the household level – by spending less and earning more.  That requires an agreement by all that it’s for our common good to take these necessary measures.  Our problem in Britain is that people have lost the collective sense that the nation is theirs, and the government is theirs – so ultimately we all have to pick up the pieces when that government overspends – which makes participation in next week’s elections all the more critical.

Relationally speaking, government spending cuts should surely be done as fairly as possible.  The burden should not be made to fall mainly on lower paid workers, through redundancies; rather it should be shared as widely as possible.  Many private sector workers have accepted pay cuts over the last year; would it not be reasonable to expect public sector staff to do the same?

Read on...

We recommend Paul Mills’ paper contrasting the injustices and problems arising in modern debt-based economies with the Old Testament economic model in which interest was banned; to read these insights click here http://www.jubilee-centre.org/document.php?id=3

Walk the talk 

A problem shared is a problem halved; many arguments at the household level are to do with money, especially when the responsibility for getting into a mess belongs to one party more than the other.  However, if both partners manage to agree on steps to get out of the mess, and shoulder the burden together, then unity is restored and finances can be brought back under control.  Is there any way this could be applied in your situation?

The last word

From the Bible, Galatians 6 verse 2: “Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfil the law of Christ.”