With the Government borrowing £175 billion a year the proposed £16 billion asset sales would keep them going for five weeks. It's like a drug addict selling the stereo to fund his habit.
It is suggested the Tote, the Dartford crossing, the student loan book, the Channel Tunnel rail link and the government's stake in URENCO, the nuclear fuel company operating several uranium enrichment plants, are all to be flogged off.
It is not that there is anything wrong with these sales. Despite the privatisations and Council house sales of the 1980s the state still owns far too much. Given its inherent inefficient and bureaucratic management it is pretty bonkers for it to own commercial assets.
Making the assets sweat is a task far better suited to the private sector - let them pursue their profit. The public interest can be protected by legal safeguards where necessary. The taxpayer will probably get a better deal with Corporation Tax on the profits – under nationalisation it is often a matter of picking up the bill for the losses.
It is common sense that if you are struggling with debt you look to sell superfluous assets. But even if the budget was balanced it is in the interests of a vibrant economy to lift the dead hand of the state wherever possible. Why for instance should the Government own a high street bookies? Absolutely bonkers.
The dishonesty comes in having a panic-induced fire sale to fund a borrowing habit and presenting it as some kind of easy, painless answer to the problem.
Last week in Manchester the Shadow Chancellor George Osborne began to face up to some of the tough choices: freezing public sector pay. Making us work a year longer before we get a pension. Cutting Incapacity Benefit for those who can work.
It was brave for a politician to tell millions of voters months before a General Election how they will lose out. 'Very courageous,' as Sir Humphrey might have said on Yes Minister.
Critics still had a point in saying that Osborne and his colleagues have not yet gone nearly far enough in identifying the scale of savings needed. But Gordon Brown reviving plans to sell off the Tote doesn't even get to first base. Even in terms of asset sales the amounts involved are peanuts compared to the scale of the challenge of Government borrowing.
Asset sales could make a contribution but they should be regarded as reducing National Debt and thus interest payments - not a wheeze to allow current borrowing to continue. To make a noticeable difference the asset sales would also need to be much bigger.
The state still owns over four million homes so reviving the right to buy scheme - effectively killed off by John Prescott - could bring in many billions. So could selling more of the hundred of billions' worth of state land. The Ministry of Defence and several county councils own hundred of thousands of acres of farms.
There is also vast amounts of scuzzy waste land - often in the 'green belt.' There will always be controversy about how much of this land, if any, should be allowed for property development. But it does not need to be owned by the state - which typically does a terrible job of looking after it. Certainly the state property portfolio is weird and wonderful. It's not just the state bookies. Many councils own pubs and shops.
Prising enterprises from the clutches of the state does make sense but not as a way to delay tackling a debt addiction.
Gordon Brown is like someone who faced with the bank bouncing his cheques decides to pawn his watch.
The real answer is a very big cut in spending. Ironically the British people appear more ready to face that reality that their politicians.