Sure although I found these and none of this is digestible in a meaningful way. The best figure on the second link is a graph on disposable income, which says n

Sure although I found these and none of this is digestible in a meaningful way. The best figure on the second link is a graph on disposable income, which says nothing about the claims of spending reduction. Similarly, the first page, which I also found, has "numbers" on it but nothing to give context to relative spending, as in, to prior years. The closest thing to what I am looking for is apparently here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_Uni.... To find it, you have to search for UK budget without mention of "austerity". I assume this gets to the heart of why anyone would 'downvote' me here for asking for simple information, there's a strict anti-intellectual force on HN that has a problem with anyone digging in to what "austerity" actually means. When you search for anything specifically related to "austerity" in the UK, unsurprisingly, you're met with articles containing photographs, but no real numbers to give you an idea of what "austerity" means in terms of relative changes to the government's budget. What would be REALLY nice is a chart like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget#/media/File:US_Federal_Budget_Comparison_2016_vs._2015.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget#/... (but for the UK, and with more years to compare, or remove the comparison aspect and just give me raw numbers, year by year). Presumably, I could find this on some UK government website in PDF form, but why didn't NYT do this instead of some puff piece about a kewl, hip young socialist.