-
Nah. This graph and the principle of it is the entire basis of their (shit/meaningless) fiscal rules. It is the point around which every spending decision is framed - which is why Evan Davis is so amazed that they are even having to debate what the numbers are or are not and why he is eventually unable to really ask his question - which is - given your forecast for debt as a % of GDP is only currently expected to be reducing at the end of the next parliament, and even then only slightly, how can you offer new tax cuts now and stay within your invented rule that debt must be falling by the end of the next parliament.
This is the most elementary aspects of their fiscal rules - which she talks so grandly of. He also explains the numbers perfectly, and the actual numbers don't even matter - just where they are relative to one another. By no single metric is debt falling now. Even in the figures quoted, debt is still rising in the 5th year - it is only as a percentage of GDP in which it is forecast to fall.
You are reading a single comment by @Scrabble and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Scrabble
I think if it was intentional bullshit then she'd be a bit more certain in her denial of what he's saying. I think it's mistaken bullshit, which is arguably worse