Noting that the economy "has flatlined for nearly a year," report that "Cameron provides defenses before the storm on growth [lack of]" (July 26). Instead of fighting it, it is not a time that the Government, opposition and trade unions began to plan how flatline with social justice?
Illustration: Gary Kempston
Put an end to the economic growth? Yes, it is inevitable. In 2000 the Labour Government set up a Commission of sustainable development. In 2009 Professor Tim Jackson, Member of the SDC report prosperity without growth. He wrote: "every society clings to a myth in which he lives." Ours is the myth of economic growth... "It is totally at odds with our scientific knowledge of the basis of finite resources and the fragile ecology all depend for their survival". The SDC was closed by the Government in March.
There are a lot of ideas about how flatline: income of citizens to protect the people out of work; a take home pay differential of 1 to 10 (severe taxation of the opulent) to cut the deficit; a week for four days for the majority of workers share in the available work; development of the community to protect the vulnerable and sick; a massive development of allotments to move towards self-sufficiency in food; reduction of energy as "most uses, the greater the burden of unit" to move towards energy self-sufficiency; and all this supported by adult education through the media that explains the dire situation of "a finite resource base" and "fragile ecology".
These measures can disrupt the lives of most of us, especially the rich, but we are preparing for serious uncertainties in the near future and make sense of the statement of the Prime Minister that "we are all in this together".
Michael Bassey
Newark, Nottinghamshire
? Economy of supply of Julian Glover claims is of little help in the current crisis because it takes years to provide an economic rebound (comment, 25 July). In fact, offer economy is useless because the problem is not with the economy's supply. Rules of procedure of the Court and business taxes is not necessary because there is excess in the economy's supply capacity. The problem is with the demand: consumers are jittery and the Government is cutting its own spending drastically, thus taking a huge piece of liquidity demand in the economy. It is not surprising that the growth in the second quarter figures are close to zero. Nor was the current crisis caused by excessive demands: financial or regulatory: the economy's supply side; quite the contrary: was the lax regulation of financial services that allow our banks to assume risks that ultimately, the taxpayer rescue them to. The economic slowdown was not caused by the "bureaucracy". However, the party came to Office with a doctrinaire commitment to offer economy and is using this crisis to that programme, whatever the cost to the rest of us.
Mary Ryan
Nottingham
? Larry Elliott recommends five steps to a growth of United Kingdom (Great Britain cannot grow if the North lags, 25 July), but need to add a sixth: a tax of solidarity from the North: a 5% tax on higher incomes, with the product used to treat the weak infrastructure and poor housingincrease competitiveness and the attraction of life/work "towards the North". Far-fetched under the Coalition? Germany conservatives introduced this tax for 20 years to deal with their differences East/West. €200Bn has raised so far. Given the rate of growth of Germany, 3.5% last year and forecast even greater this year, hasn't done much damage.
John Rigby
Berlin
? Vince Cable is right to call for a use "more imaginative" of quantitative easing (report, 25 July). In our report Green quantitative easing propose that the next batch of billions of printed e pounds invested in a carefully budgeted programme of energy efficiency and renewable energy that covers all the buildings in the UK. The policy can create hundreds of thousands of green jobs. It is also one of the best ways to ensure the eventual reduction of public debt through the taking of an increase in tax and benefit less than bill.
Colin Hines and Richard Murphy
New Green Deal
? The resolution Foundation report on living conditions unequivocally demolishes the myth of the "trickle-down". It clearly demonstrates that the loss of purchasing power has become much longer than since the last recession. In fact it was diverting money from the pockets of the vast majority of the population and those of the richest 1 per cent and particularly the financial corporate sector, for the whole of the first decade of this century. A more egalitarian society, I suggest, would be much more resilient totally avoidable crisis we are experiencing. Rather than acknowledge this and set a course for a more equitable distribution of income and wealth, creating feeds us with claptrap about us are all in together. It is not true now, and it has not been true for a long time.
Neil Blackshaw
Little Easton, Essex
? David Cameron and George Osborne may say what they want, but the truth is that the British economy is dying as a direct and inevitable consequence of its policy of public spending cuts. Does Cameron says "the path of growth will be difficult", while Osborne said that "there are risks for current and future growth", so it does not take defence of Murdoch's "I didn't know", you can? But revealing, Osborne said that he has "become Great Britain a safe port in a storm". A safe harbor for those who: financial agiotistas that made us all into this mess?
The truth is: United States and the euro area also in difficulties due to the stupidity of these financial markets: bond dealers and various other financial fiddlers have no where going. What you can do is the unity of the world into recession, with the help and instigated by Cameron, Osborne and the Tories. Court is not the way of growth. Vince Cable is correct, but are the other Lib do the right thing and throw the switch to this disastrous Coalition? That could and should be - and if they don't, we know that they are part of the problem.
David Reed
London
View the original article here
Illustration: Gillian Blease