Hacker News Reader

This. Never going to happen though

You would never even get agreement on what more prudently means.

This - to me prudently is something like prioritising: health care, infrastructure, social security, education, defence and policing.

I know that many people (even just across the UK), would either disagree with this list, or with the various % that should be attributed to each. One persons 'prudent' would be another persons too much/little etc.

That looks remarkably like the current UK spending allocation. But the detail matters.

Indeed, lots of people on both sides of the divide think that the current spending is wrong, and I would assume many from around the world wouldn't consider our priorities 'prudent'

This is the current expenditure distribution: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

By far the largest categories are Social protection and Health, followed by Education, Debt interest and Defense. I guess you want to increase infrastructure spending. So the question is, what are you going to deprioritize?

Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/spring-budget-202...

Tax evasion

Not treating infrastructure programs as kickbacks or jobs programs, for one

Why shouldn't infrastructure programs also be jobs programs?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com