<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.3" -->
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>The New York Times Doesn't Like the Welfare State in the UK</title>
		<description>Comments for The New York Times Doesn't Like the Welfare State in the UK at http://www.cepr.net , comment 1 to 8 out of 8 comments</description>
		<link>http://www.cepr.net</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 20:16:24 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.3</generator>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/the-new-york-times-doesnt-like-the-welfare-state-in-the-uk#comment-1739</link>
			<description>The print version had the title:

&quot;Britain's Leader Carves Identify As Slasher of Government Bloat,&quot;

Note the use of &quot;bloat&quot; rather than &quot;programs,&quot; a better description of the government education and health spending that will be cut. - Mark Maier</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 11:04:23 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/the-new-york-times-doesnt-like-the-welfare-state-in-the-uk#comment-1734</link>
			<description>It [i]is[/i] an interesting discrepancy.  If it's accurate, surely it would mean that government spending, at least in the UK, is far less efficient at creating jobs than private sector spending, by a factor of about 3.  Or else public sector salaries are triple those in the private sector.  Either conclusion is hard to believe. - ewener</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 05:40:30 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/the-new-york-times-doesnt-like-the-welfare-state-in-the-uk#comment-1645</link>
			<description>If the share of government expenditures is 47%, it would seem that approximately that proportion of employees should be paid by the government.  If only 21% are directly employed by government, this implies that the difference is being paid indirectly, that is government is paying private business to hire people.

Despite the much higher proportion of government in the economy in Europe, it seems that some people in the financial system, whether public or private, still have the freedom to create large bubbles.  Maybe they are doing it with government money - as they effectively do in the US now - and maybe &quot;independent but publicly financed&quot; is not generally a good idea.  When people go out of control it may be necessary to stifle them.

The theme that &quot;government is too intrusive&quot; is still being played in the media despite the obvious fact that the current crisis was due to insufficient oversight.  In the marketplace of public opinion, money crowds out learning from experience. - skeptonomist</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 03:31:55 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/the-new-york-times-doesnt-like-the-welfare-state-in-the-uk#comment-1642</link>
			<description>Dean, I guess you approve, then, of able-bodied people on welfare receiving more than $200,000 a year in cash benefits?  Is it maybe, just maybe, possible that the welfare system in the UK actually is too generous? - RichB</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 22:01:32 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/the-new-york-times-doesnt-like-the-welfare-state-in-the-uk#comment-1634</link>
			<description>Whatever. The best response to this is 'your MOM is sprawling.' I think that all mention of liberals and progressives should include the adjective 'slithering.'  - Ryan Toso</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:52:02 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/the-new-york-times-doesnt-like-the-welfare-state-in-the-uk#comment-1633</link>
			<description>Subjective Reporting Version:

The sprawling, stifling, suffocating suppression of government by swarming lobbyists stood out from the stench like circling vultures over a living corpse with campaign contributions.

Objective Reporting Version:

There's 100 lobbyists for each political representative, but since we have no idea what they do, we just report what they say.  Big government is so big its sprawling, stifling, suffocating spending and taxing is crippling the economy more every day ... - izzatzo</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:47:55 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/the-new-york-times-doesnt-like-the-welfare-state-in-the-uk#comment-1630</link>
			<description>Tony Blair?  Gordon Brown?  Welfare state?  We should have been so lucky. - PeonInChief</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:15:37 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>The income of the average working man flattened out in 1973 and never went up in spending ability.</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/the-new-york-times-doesnt-like-the-welfare-state-in-the-uk#comment-1627</link>
			<description>The income of the average working man flattened out in 1973 and never went up in spending ability. (paraphrase from the recent news)


&quot;A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right.' 
- Thomas Paine 
 - Scott ffolliott</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:03:46 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
