We have a claim in The Guardian. A strong one too:
The Reagan/Thatcher years began to change things, as neoliberal economics destabilised societies by slashing and burning the state.
That slashing and burning of the state in the US:
That slashing and burning of the state in the UK:
Yeah, I’m finding it difficult to see that too.
Likewise, the “existential threat to the nation” that everyone calls the Trump Presidency has increased military spending without ever arriving at the question, “Are we staying or are we leaving?” and has made no change to entitlement programs (the US laws that specify grounds for receiving Free Money, and leave actual required amounts as an exercise for clerks).
Trump will not pay a price for matching Obama’s monster deficits, as every single 2020 opponent, active and defunct, has campaigned to spend even more.
I guess putting some sort of marginally effective lid on growth is deemed by some to be slashing and burning. I wonder what that graph would look like if all government receipts including state, county and local were included. And of course, government expenditures may well exceed receipts.
Don’t forget to include payments-in-kind, the time spent learning about new regulations, complying with them, and documenting that you have complied with them.
It’s not the factual data stuff that grates – that’s expected – it’s the subjective nonsense about “destabilising society” because they know they can’t point to any real problems.
Actually, some states did slash and burn the state. New Zealand and the Scandinavian societies turned away from ever-increasing government and privatised all nationalised industries and hacked back government services.
Those countries have done much better for it too.