Who believes austerity measures are brought in to destroy people and our economy?

So what you're saying is that the coalition have a secret suicide pact as opposed to trying to bring down the UK's £1 trillion debt figure, most of it the legacy of the last shower of sh!t that ran the country.

Interesting.

While I understand your anger and most certainly share it I do not believe the austerity measures were intended to destroy people and the economy.

We have to understand exactly what the government policy is. In essence it is simple, to save banks and the financial industry from bankruptcy on the one hand and to enable government to continue to borrow and spend with almost complete abandon. Do not forget that Osborne's stated aims are to cut the increase in spending to a 'manageable' level, then to share out the proceeds of future growth his miraculous policies have ensured. That these policies are destroying people and ruining the economy is more of an unintended consequence of misguided action. In fairness, I suppose, this is not a British problem alone, nor could a unilateral British response cure the underlying causes responsible for the global financial near collapse. Those causes are fiat money and fractional reserve banking, together they are a ponzi scheme predicated on continuous 'growth'. If 'growth' stops the entire edifice starts to crumble, exactly what is happening throughout the Western financial world. Another cause not precisely linked to those two but also undermining financial stability is government spending, sitting at around 40% of GDP in the UK and the West in general when it should be no more than 20% at best, assuming you want a free market economy.

The correct response should have been to let the banks fall, or more correctly, taken them into administration so that the entire senior managements could have been sacked without compensation and where indicated prosecuted as was the former prime minister in Iceland, while the interests of small depositors (you and me) and small businesses together with the banking system itself was protected until the underlying faults were addressed. The ones that suffered would have been the Goldman Saches and JP Morgans etc. who treat banking as their personal casino using a marked deck to boot. These people would, and probably did, scream that it can't be done, pension pots everywhere would be destroyed and governments would collapse because they would no longer have access to money. In reality pension pots would have taken a hit, probably on average losing 10 -15% of their value after the dust had settled. Governments wouldn't have found they had no access to money, they would have found they no longer had access to cheap money, which would have forced them to address that other great fault, government spending and overly generous welfare and entitlement.

Much of the failure to properly address these fundamental faults is because we are now ruled by a self-perpetuating political class. If you look at the likes of Cameron, Brown, Clegg, Osborne, Milipeed and the other scum that rises to the top of the political swamp, the common factor is that they are all good at the political process at accumulating personal power and position but have neither knowledge nor any real experience outside of it. Thus they have to rely on 'experts' and cronies for their policies and where do these people come from? Whether the politicians select them or they ensure their own selection matters very little, at the end of the day they promote policies and governance that panders to their interests, not the good of the country or the interests of the citizen.

There was an economic bubble and people spent more than they earned. Now we've got to pay. Austerity is a fact not a measure or a policy.

I'm guessing your general message is that austerity policy during recessions and anemic recoveries are misguided and revealing of ignorance of economic policy. I agree.

And your alternative is?

Nobody with any common sense l would have thought

Have you escaped from the hospital again?