Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
What's a mortgage, then?
|
As has been mentioned taking on debt to fund an asset, especially one which creates further value, is different to taking on debt to sustain day to day spending.
Taking on debt to fund investment in infrastructure is not what New Labour are criticised for. It was funding annual spending via increasing deficits. This was the 'bad state of the economy' people are referring too likewise when they say Labour didn't 'fix the roof whilst the run was shining'. The whole justification for austerity and the central project of the Conservative Government from 2010-2016 was to eliminate the deficit.
When people say 'balance the books' they mean the budget and not investment in things like HS2.
If Boris Johnson intends to fund social care via running higher deficits then this isn't a costed proposal, this isn't balancing the books and it is ultimately kicking the bill down the road until it's picked up by future governments.
If you count that as 'costed' then fine but it makes the discussion pointless because ultimately everything we spend will be funded by debt and the entire argument OB was making about the Labour government is undermined.
(There is an argument that running permeant deficits is sustainable so long as the economy grows faster but that's more a lefty vision of the world
)