Britain's Austerity Experiment Didn't Work

That slight dip in 2009? Gosh, cut to the bone there.

And all those other countries that didn't try this super-austere austerity, they all had hunky-dory 2009-present economic performance, right?

Honestly, I think those desperate to disprove "austerity" do protest too much. "Austerity" is not going up to 47.7% of the GDP in spending from 41%.

If any recovery is in housing prices and speculation as opposed to business and invetstment, that is even worse for the long run. A nation cannot house-build its way to prosperity. Dwellings are primarily a consumable item, and mich harder to export than tractors or cars.

Of course then the people suffer as all their food and education are cut, and the New Yorker writes articles saying "Austerity Doesn't Work."

But in fact what they should be saying is, "Coercing Money From People Is Wrong." That money never should have been coerced in the first place. Then the people would have been able to spend it however they wanted, instead of having to get all upset that a bunch of politicians and bankers blew the money (surprise, surprise.)

The people should also be ashamed of themselves to whatever degree they voted for coercion in the first place. They were bribed into doing so by promises of services -- services they didn't get -- the promise of which was enough for them to justify in their minds the robbing of their fellow man.

Well when everybody is robbing everybody, only poverty can result. The moral of the story isn't that austerity failed -- it's that we shouldn't be violating people's property rights in the first place, and we certainly shouldn't be bribing others to vote for it.

Greece and Portugal simply have irresponsible taxation systems that were pushed too far, so their debt accumulated. Greece has people driving million dollar cars paying the same tax as common people.

(I'm NOT trying to take sides here, just trying to summarize the thesis of a long article)