Looks like guesswork again!

wymondham

I've been trying to fathom out how the parties will fill the hole once whoever gets in. I thought none had a decent plan (or one they wanted to share before the election!) - turns out I was not the only one wondering...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election/article-1269204/General-Election-2010-IFS-attacks-Labour-Lib-Dems-Tories-for-failing-come-clean-spending-cuts.html

This is pivital in how people vote as how a party copes with the massive debt will have big reprocusions for us all, yet none have detailed any credible plans .... so we have to guess!

Can't someone be adult about this and put the country before their party for once, as they all claim to do????

Optimist

wymondham wrote: »

I've been trying to fathom out how the parties will fill the hole once whoever gets in. I thought none had a decent plan (or one they wanted to share before the election!) - turns out I was not the only one wondering...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election/article-1269204/General-Election-2010-IFS-attacks-Labour-Lib-Dems-Tories-for-failing-come-clean-spending-cuts.html

This is pivital in how people vote as how a party copes with the massive debt will have big reprocusions for us all, yet none have detailed any credible plans .... so we have to guess!

Can't someone be adult about this and put the country before their party for once, as they all claim to do????

I'm sure someone will slate you for using a Daily Mail link so for balance a link from the Guardian

The problem as I see it is that the great British public dont want to hear the truth.

No matter who gets in there are going to be serious cuts but lets say David Cameron spells out everything that needs to be done. The next day you get Gordon screaming about how the nasty Tories are going to cut the NHS/Education/Benefits/Public Sector Jobs etc totally ignoring the fact that Labour will have to do the same. The exact same applies if Gordon comes clean.

So they are all going to lie their heads of until after the election then break their promises and remember Gordon went to court in 2008 to ensure that a manifesto promise wasn't legally binding !

Graham_Devon

Ok....Labour = Higher taxes, less cuts, lots more stealth taxes. Middle britain robbery. Personally I believe this would lead to an even worse situation of working for the same as someone not working in essence. Wouldn't cause riots, would just cause lots of silent moaning and resentment, and a class situation to arise again.

Tories = Harsh cuts, less tax rises, services suffering...stagnation in "development" terms. Active protests by the left. Violence and vandalism.

Lib dems = Everything. Spending, cuts, higher taxes, lower taxes, depending on what they wish to say at the time.

nickmason

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Lib dems = Everything. Spending, cuts, higher taxes, lower taxes, depending on what they wish to say at the time.

Ths is pretty accurate. The only bit that confuses me is that you're going to vote LD...

wymondham

Sorry for the mail link, it's my one guilty pleasure!!

This annoys me though, as we know the problem is enormous and will take drastic action, but nobody will 'come clean' and tell it like it really is. How are we expected to vote for these people if they don't tell us what we are voting for??

The fact that none of the parties have come close to coming up with how to make the necessary savings is alarming...

barrymoney

Glad this IFS report has come out, it said what most of us were thinking. Clegg still managed to skirt around it on the C4 News, these politicians are incredible at interviews. Each party can pick up the bits that criticize the other parties. Its gonna be a mess on thursdays TV debate on the economy.

I guess I cant vote for anyone if they wont say what they would do...?

kabayiri

How do you express the shortfall in terms which register with most people.

Imagine someone who takes home say £1,500 a month after tax. How do they equate a figure like £69bn to the amounts of money they are used to?

I believe one of the effects of the credit crunch was to make a lot of us punch drunk on the concept of a 'billion'. Figures like tens or even hundreds of billions were thrown around like confetti. There is no shock value in being short by £70bn or so now.

If you manage to shock people into the parlous state of our finances, how do you convince them to share the pain. It was only a few weeks ago that Goldman Sachs were setting aside yet more billions in bonus payments. There is a genuine feeling of us and them out there, where the many of 'us' have been well and truly shafted by the few of 'them'.

No party has the ability to address these 2 concerns, so they'd rather ignore them.

Graham_Devon

nickmason wrote: »

Ths is pretty accurate. The only bit that confuses me is that you're going to vote LD...

I am.

I would like to vote conservative, but that would mean putting my support behind the absolutely disgusting antics of my MP, who's not my MP, but kind of is my MP while he waits on his big fat cheque.

I can't do that.

And theres no way I could vote for labour, even though I wouldn't mind seeing them clean up their own mess, just so all this "tory nasty party" rubbish can be put to bed.

Therefore, lib dems. Give em a chance to have a go.

Old_Slaphead

Optimist wrote: »

The problem as I see it is that the great British public dont want to hear the truth.

Why do you think that?

I think that if politicians levelled with us instead of lying to protect their own vested interests - the public would be mature enough to accept that after several years of feast we now have to accept some years of famine (provided the famine was shared out equally)

Graham_Devon

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

Why do you think that?

I think that if politicians levelled with us instead of lying to protect their own vested interests - the public would be mature enough to accept that after several years of feast we now have to accept some years of famine (provided the famine was shared out equally)

Not so sure myself.

It would take all parties to admit the problems, and show us what we faced.

If one party did it, it would gain some respect from a very small percentage of the population. But they would be absolutely lambasted by the other parties, who would take their votes quite easily.

wymondham

How can you vote for someone when you don't know what your voting for (as they wont tell us!)....