What a load of old bollocks.
I'm no expert, but can someone tell me if they think these two assumptions are correct/if they agree with them:
1 - In times of good economic health, reasonably high public spending is good as it creates a positive feedback loop, increasing jobs, increasing education, increasing public happiness, etc. But in times of bad economic health, regardless of whether you are normally left or right, it must seem prudent to cut back spending to create a more lean economy until you are out of the bad patch.
2 - Most people marching and protesting are doing so on ideological grounds - they talk in very broad terms about how public spending is good, but regret to confront the fact that high public spending might not be the best idea when you don't have a great deal of money. Instead they make it into a class issue, and push an agenda which supports this belief.
1) History has shown us that slashing public spending in the bad times simply causes a recession to become a depression. You can't create growth by making more people unemployed, nor by driving down wages in an attempt to make the economy more "competitive" ( whatever that means ). You just supress domestic demand even further.
2) The cuts themselves are ideological, just one glance at the targets of the coalition cuts entirely supports that view. Some people will be marching because they are scared, some because they don't agree this is a policy that can drive growth back into the economy.
Personally I don't know how people accepting lower wages, worse terms and conditions and a reduced safety net through the welfare state can fix the long term imbalances within the economy. Unless of course you want a race to the bottom so the labour market can compete with Chinese or Indian manufacturers.
Sometimes I think the Tories really do want to turn back the clock 200 years. Cunts.