Firstly, I do wish Brown would stop distinguishing between 'public sector borrowing' and 'borrowing for investment', it's plainly fraudulent. On the other hand, Britain's infrastructure was so gutted by the Tories, that a heck of a lot needed to be borrowed. Let him play his semantical games if he will (this acceptance may have something to do with spin being so much easier to swallow when it comes with a dour Fife accent than a high-pitched Fettesian/Etonian one). The main thing in the budget is that spending has slowed and this ties in nicely with the government getting tough on bailouts after the bonanza in the health service in a market-efficiency sort of way.
There is nothing like the crisis in public finances that Diddy Cameron are decrying: national debt is still pretty average by historical levels. I can't stand the way some (e.g.) talk as if the public sector doesn't actually do anything. What utter shit. How is it that social workers, nurses and teachers are thought to be wasteful while corporate lawyers and producers of iPods
are thought to be doing something worthwhile? If economies are to grow sustainably, they need a solid infrastructure, both social and economic. This is where dynamic efficiency comes from not an economy stripped to it bare arse by short run growth fetishism.*
*I recently mentioned a paper which analysed the correlation between poverty reduction programs and productivity. Guess what? It ain't negative! Okun must be rolling in his grave.