While there&#x27;s no doubt that there&#x27;s a lot of fluff that has built up simply because we can&#x2F;could afford it, this article doesn&#x27;t really touch on any of them. Instead it seems to, among other things, bash state-owned corporations that are doing very well and are in no need of reform.<p>In general, it&#x27;s a very weak article. Someone opened Wikipedia and saw some numbers that don&#x27;t agree with how they think economies should be run, and then wrote about that. It&#x27;s hard to fire employees who are slacking off, especially in government, but there&#x27;s not a mention of it. But I guess that wasn&#x27;t on Wikipedia, but the work-week was.<p>The turn to the left is mostly aa swinging pendulum thing, but I don&#x27;t dread it, as the Labour party usually has a better grasp of economics than anyone else.<p>What&#x27;s happening is a restructuring born of the decline in one sector with a time-delay until the others can absorb the sacked employees. It&#x27;s not a crisis in government.