For the sake of this argument I’m going to open my mind. Its a hypothetical situation so bare with me. Perhaps the spending cuts are necessary. Perhaps their really is no other way. Perhaps its fair that we pay for the greed driven failure of the banking system. Perhaps it’s only coincidence that fits in perfectly with Thatcherite ideology. Perhaps David Cameron loves the welfare state is dismantling it reluctantly. (stay with me) Perhaps when they say ‘we’re cutting now to cut less later’ they’re right. The argument says that my cutting the deficit now we hold on to as many of our public services as possible because to do so later would be much more damaging because the deficit would be so much higher. So we sacrifice now to save (whats left of) our future. OK so that’s a good argument right?
The only thing wrong with it is that is seems to be exclusive to our debt. For decades we’ve been told by politicians, not least the cycling, wind turbine erecting David Cameron, that we most sacrifice economic growth to act on climate change because the consequences to not doing so would be more damaging later. But as George Osbourne swings the axe (for our future) the green agenda on which David Cameron branded himself on becoming leader of the opposition on 2005 seems to be, just like his bicycle, forgotten. The environment is an urgent issue, if we fail to act now then we will suffer in the future. Its funny that when issues that effect our long term future involve government saving we act fast but when they involve government spending we don’t. Its this lack of consistence that adds weight and credibility claims that these ravage spending cuts have an ulterior motive.
So when Cameron, Clegg or right-wing Taxpayers alliance director Alexander Heath (a man who cares so much about the use of British taxes that he moved to France to avoid paying them) say that we need to ‘cut now to save tomorrow’, tell them that until they apply that logic to the environment we’re just going to assume that this tory government is taking advantage of the deficit to do what they always wanted, to tear down the welfare state they never had to rely on.
