Are the Lib Dems' policies really credible?

lynzpower

I didnt call you a liar, I asked if you had made it up. Not quite the same. If it helps you feel better of course im sorry for hurting your feelings I would never ever want to upset anyone by asking a question.

:grouphug: :A

adr0ck

lynzpower wrote: »

I didnt call you a liar, I asked if you had made it up. Not quite the same. If it helps you feel better of course im sorry for hurting your feelings I would never ever want to upset anyone by asking a question.

:grouphug: :A

lynz asking if someone has made something up is effectivly calling them a liar

rl290

Regarding the VAT questions, the plan has been somewhat misunderstood. At the moment, new builds have a VAT holiday which renovations do not receive. The result in my local area is that health centres that are overwhelmingly popular are under pressure to be closed (as it is more cost effective under current tax rules to build something new) instead of being refurbished. I have attended several local hustings between our local candidates, and it is universally accepted that the tax system is at fault in this area. The Lib Dem policy equalises refurbishments and new builds. It won't please everyone, but in my area it would help the community greatly.

Regarding James' points:

JamesU wrote: »

Q1: So how do you intend to pay for the £160 billion/yr deficit? 90% of the annual deficit is still not covered for by the proposed spending cuts of £3.5 billion in year 1, rising to £16 billion in year 5.

Q2: And how are you going to pay off the £950 billion government debt (a conservative estimate, rising to approx £1500 billion in 5 years)?

Q3: Have I missed the full details related to Q1 and Q2 somewhere? And if so, could I have a link to these please?

JamesU

The plan is to halve the deficit in 5 years. You are right: it doesn't get rid of the deficit or begin to tackle debt. However, it is a better plan than either of the other 2 parties has offered. In order to try anything more ambitious than this, we would either have to slash public spending (and we are talking horrific slashing!) or hike tax up to the highest levels ever seen. The plan after this 5 year period is impossible to predict: the hope would be that we see decent economic growth and then begin to pay off debt. It'll take a LONG time (perhaps a generation to really get things sorted) but that's how bad the problem is. Would love to know if you think the Labour or Tory plans are better - they certainly won't tackle the debt problem any quicker!

I don't understand your third question - please let me know exactly what you mean. (Q1 and Q2 2010? No new economic plans will take effect till Q3. The numbers start with the best estimates as are)

R

JamesU

rl290 wrote: »

Regarding James' points:

The plan is to halve the deficit in 5 years. You are right: it doesn't get rid of the deficit or begin to tackle debt. However, it is a better plan than either of the other 2 parties has offered. In order to try anything more ambitious than this, we would either have to slash public spending (and we are talking horrific slashing!) or hike tax up to the highest levels ever seen. The plan after this 5 year period is impossible to predict: the hope would be that we see decent economic growth and then begin to pay off debt. It'll take a LONG time (perhaps a generation to really get things sorted) but that's how bad the problem is. Would love to know if you think the Labour or Tory plans are better - they certainly won't tackle the debt problem any quicker!

I don't understand your third question - please let me know exactly what you mean. (Q1 and Q2 2010? No new economic plans will take effect till Q3. The numbers start with the best estimates as are) R

rl290, Thanks for your reply. Q3 = Question3. In your previous post you said:

The actual deficit /debt plans are totally costed by the Lib Dems - they are the only party to come close to explaining it, and the Institute for Fiscal Studies has independently agreed with the figures!

So you effectively made this up? And you mislead me in your last post?

Following my rough calculations and your last post, I answered Q3 myself thanks, and here it is: Paragraph 6 in the Times article "Voting for Lib Dem would be a vote for chaos" link below.

The verdict of the Institute for Fiscal Studies is that the Lib Dem plans are actually no more ambitious than Labour’s in tackling the deficit. All three parties have failed to account for £30 billion of what is needed to bring the £176 billion deficit under control, says the IFS, with the Lib Dems relying less on spending cuts than Labour and Labour less than Conservatives.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/camilla_cavendish/article7100169.ece

In answer to your question, I can agree the Tory and Labour plans to deal with the annual deficit and government debt are no better, but that does not give you the right to mislead me on the points “debt plans are totally costed by the Lib Dems - they are the only party to come close to explaining it, and the Institute for Fiscal Studies has independently agreed with the figures!”


You sent me the following PM:

"James, Interesting questions on the Debate forum re: the Lib Dems policies. I've posted a reply which I think should answer your questions! Would love to know what you think. R”

I have told you what I think, I do not like to be mislead and do not PM me again.


Agree with TomTerm8: "We are going to cut the deficit by wizzardie-dizzardie-doo..."


JamesU