Actually, yes, the economy does grow when the state borrows and spends money. This is just absolutely basic macroeconomics, and I don’t think you can even begin to explain 20th century economic history if you deny it.
And now you’re just point-blank ignoring evidence that I’ve already covered in other parts above: you say that only private enterprise can grow the economy and that can only happen if taxes are low, for instance, but net profitability is more or less the same under Labour and the Conservatives, even having taking into account the effects of the recession.
We know what would have happened to nominal borrowing in 2010—I never denied that. What I said was that we don’t know how the economy would have changed from 2010 (because we don’t know what budget Labour would have set in 2013, for instance), and by that I mean not only how borrowing would have changed but also how growth would have changed, which also determines debt burden. If borrowing stays the same and GDP grows, then the debt burden (%GDP) goes down, and both the next year’s deficit and the overall debt are likely to be more manageable.
Your comments are largely partisan dead horse flogging and very right-wing economic theories stated as fact with no evidence. Sorry, but that’s not going to cut it.