Nanny Knows Best

Nanny Knows Best
Dedicated to exposing, and resisting, the all pervasive nanny state that is corroding the way of life and the freedom of the people of Britain.

Tuesday, January 09, 2007

Throwing Money at a Problem


Throwing Money at a Problem

Nanny believes that if she throws enough money at all of life's problems, then they will simply go away.

In theory that might work, sometimes. However, she ignores three fundamental problems with her theory:

1 The money she is using is not hers, it's ours.

2 Money spent, without proper oversight and control is very often wasted.

3 Throwing money at issues more often than not causes inflation and corruption, look at the damage done to Africa by UN and international "aid" programmes.

As it is in Africa, so it is in the North of England. Nanny was informed a few weeks ago that the enormous amount of public money (I love the euphemism "public money"...it's not "public" it's our money!) on northern cities has only made them poorer.

Nanny's 263 page report, the Competitive Economic Performance of English Cities, noted that not one city north of Derby has an economy that is performing better than the national average.

The report went on to note that state efforts to improve business, productivity and earnings in northern regions have only managed to make things worse!

The conclusion of the report is that Nanny's spending, at levels equivalent to the now defunct Soviet bloc, have in fact done more harm than good.

Quote:

"The overt policies followed so far and the unintended consequences

of others have either failed to close this gap or actually made it worse.

This is a major, persistent and long-term problem

for the English economy as a whole
."

An initial study for the programme, which was published in the spring, was hailed by the Smooth Talking Bar Steward, John Prescott, as showing "remarkable progress" and an "urban renaissance".

Seems to me Prescott has been telling porkies, or didn't read the initial study too well.

The main author of the report, Professor James Simmie of Oxford Brookes University, summed it up rather well:

"There is not enough private sector expenditure.

The north is far too dependent on public services expenditure
."

In other words, a culture of dependency has set in; which in turn erodes and debilitates the region and the people.

Public spending in London is 33% of the economy, compared to over 50% in much of the north. In fact London contributes around £11BN a year to other regions.

State domination of the economy has throttled private business, and increased dependence on the taxpayer and on benefits.

The Institute of Economic Affairs and the Centre for Economic and Business Research showed that 65% of the economy in the North East depends on the state, and 57% in the North West.

The lesson here is simple; the state is destroying the country and its people.

The enemy of the people is the state.

8 comments:

  1. Anonymous12:41 PM

    You're missing a vital point here... consider which constituencies nanny's mob represent. Squandering money in your own areas equals enhanced reelection prospects.

    No surprise then that 55% of Scotland's GDP is public sector.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Grant3:03 PM

    See above comments.

    The FBS, being from Hull at the southern end of the Northern Soviet Bloc, must be delighted with progress - which is what he said previously.

    I don't suppose he needed to read the report. He probably specified what it should say.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous9:10 PM

    Hang about here, I have no truck with Nanny but it does this blog and a few others to keep flogging this

    “The Institute of Economic Affairs and the Centre for Economic and Business Research showed that 65% of the economy in the North East depends on the state, and 57% in the North West.”

    It has been proven to be wrong on many counts

    That there is some pork barrel politics going on I am in no doubt, it’s something the Tories never got up to, come off it, for 20 years they were busy propping up their rural seats whilst the urban areas were left to rot!

    A trip up north might tell a different tale for many of the southern readers of this blog, all the major cities are very vibrant in particular Manchester, the areas that have suffered the most are the small towns and areas away from the major cities, the Tories heaped devastation on them and this lot is not doing much else to aid long term recovery. These areas on the whole to not need some of the pork barrel projects apart from infrastructure modernization (road and rail links) but in order to really revitalize these areas they need huge tax breaks for companies that are there already and for attracting new investors

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous9:28 PM

    As a northerner i can categorically say that this is so true. I am frustrated beyond belief with the waste and inefficiency and outright corruption up here which is holidng everything back the sooner we get a regime change in Westminster the better and if that doesnt happen I am off - not to the South though but out of UK altogether

    ReplyDelete
  5. Just wondering - have you actually read this report, or you going by the thoroughly dishonest story on it in the Daily Mail? Your lines about spending 'at levels equivalent to the now defunct Soviet bloc' suggest you're just plagiarising the latter.

    You also repeat the quote "The overt policies followed so far and the unintended consequences of others have either failed to close this gap or actually made it worse" omitting the crucial qualifier from the report "for many decades" - ie, the problem long predates the current Labour government, contrary to the Mail's implication. The problem is lack of investment, particularly from the private sector, not too much public investment.

    At least get your basic facts straight.

    ReplyDelete
  6. No Tim, the problem is excess public spending

    http://www.iea.org.uk/record.jsp?ID=115&type=release

    ReplyDelete
  7. Yes, the usual stuff from the IEA. That doesn't justify your misrepresentation of the "Competitive Economic Performance" report.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes, the usual stuff from the IEA. That doesn't justify your misrepresentation of the "Competitive Economic Performance" report.

    ReplyDelete