More executives back Tory National Insurance plans

Rochdale_Pioneers

whathavewedone wrote: »

Rochdale, Labour have messed this up. It was a bad idea, the tories said all along they disliked it and wanted to avoid it. They've managed to do so and for a change they've also managed to present it well to the media.

Labour, usually ahead of the tories in the media presentation stakes, have been utterly woeful. Instead of neutralising a positive news story for the tories, they managed to give it more legs than a spider.

Having planned to base their election campaign on the uselessness of Osborne, it's a little unfortunate that all of a sudden he's gaining the respect of these influential people who don't take kindly to being called deluded by a man who can't even fill in a mortgage application form properly.

Labour would do well to leave this alone now. All the sniping about Gershon and references to tory businessmen will just keep a positive news cycle for the Conservatives running for longer over the Easter break.

I completely agree - Labour have once again fallen foul of a piece of tactical brilliance by Osborne. We all know he is a great political strategist. Its his skills as Chancellor that has the same businessmen lining up behind his policies calling for Clarke to replace him.

So yes, a period of quiet from Labour would help - lets move onto the next storm. My points about strategy still stand however - once the dust settles the Tory argument is far less coherent and if anything only adds fuel to the fire already burning that they are likely to take that swingeing axe to the public sector.

Its very simple. The need to cut the deficit hasn't gone away, its just making less noise than the NI issue at the moment. When it comes back the Tories are stuck with their commitment to pay off more of the deficit with less tax revenues. That means bigger cuts. And threats of big cuts is what slashed the Tories lead in the first place. Unless the deficit is no longer an issue, this particular albatross is going to weight heavily on Osborne as the campaign goes on. Brilliant short term tactic this NI announcement has been, its going to hurt once the hangover kicks in.

lvader

Increasing taxes, especially NI is just a bad idea fullstop, far worse than any cuts that might need to be made.

StevieJ

lvader wrote: »

Isn't it funny how many private companies are able to make big efficiency savings with ease and without affecting revenue, yet the the gorvernment can't make a few small savings without affecting services?

I thought Brownie made savings of 21.5 bil?

From kohoutek post.
Given Gershon has achieved making £21.5 billion in savings in the recent past, I see no reason to dismiss his advice for the Tories out of hand, however badly Osborne presented it.

Kohoutek

£21.5 billion is sadly a mere drop in the ocean for someone with a capacity to spend other people's money as immense as Gordon Brown. And now he needs to find 'efficiency savings' of £167 billion... I hope Brown gives Mr Gershon a call ASAP! Think of the character of 'Mr. Wolf" in Pulp Fiction!

lvader

Did they really cut spending by £21.5bn? The thing is if Labour make cuts it just shows they have been wasting money. That is why they would rather increase taxes, nothing to do with helping the economy.

Pennywise

StevieJ wrote: »

I never realised NuLabour had been so successful at cutting waste.

They created the waste in the first place!

What exactly have Labour been doing for 13 years? If they can cut the deficit by increasing efficiency now, why on earth didn't they do it years ago? It's a bit late in the day!

Same way they're talking about fairness, improved education, better public services, tough on crime, etc - they've had 13 years to do something about all those. Why on earth should the electorate trust them for another term when they've had three already and most things have got worse under their "control"?

treliac

Pennywise wrote: »

They created the waste in the first place!

What exactly have Labour been doing for 13 years? If they can cut the deficit by increasing efficiency now, why on earth didn't they do it years ago? It's a bit late in the day!

Same way they're talking about fairness, improved education, better public services, tough on crime, etc - they've had 13 years to do something about all those. Why on earth should the electorate trust them for another term when they've had three already and most things have got worse under their "control"?

And I find it despicable the way Brown is starting to speak on immigration now, as we near the election, when previously it was that subject 'we dare not speak its name.'

I don't believe a word of their spin. Whatever they say now on subjects they know concern the public, they'll forget it all and do exactly what they want if they get back in. Their integrity is entirely discredited.

Before someone asks.... I dunno about the Conservatives, but we sure as hell need a change from what we've got now.

StevieJ

Pennywise wrote: »

Same way they're talking about fairness, improved education, better public services, tough on crime, etc - they've had 13 years to do something about all those. Why on earth should the electorate trust them for another term when they've had three already and most things have got worse under their "control"?

But people tell me they have noticed improvements in some of the areas you mention.

Money_Grabber13579

lvader wrote: »

Did they really cut spending by £21.5bn? The thing is if Labour make cuts it just shows they have been wasting money. That is why they would rather increase taxes, nothing to do with helping the economy.

No Labour realise there's waste. But they think it's a good idea to waste the money for another year before cutting it. Keeps the deficit up, you see.

Whereas the Tories realise waste is waste and should be cut now.

bigheadxx

The real difference between the parties is simple. Labour thinks it knows best how to spend your money rather than you spending it yourself. This was well demonstrated by Alan Johnsons answer on QT last week when he was trying to defend the increase in NI.

He simply reeled off a host of government "initiatives" that have allegedly reduced the level of unemployment. He is blissfully unaware that this money he is spending comes from ordinary taxpayers and businesses. I am pretty sure that a business is far more able to create a long term stable job that the government so it makes sense that this particular rise does not go ahead.