Brown sticks his foot in his mouth

ivavoucher

chucky wrote: »

this is exactly my view and how i voted in 1997.

if people are moaning about Brown now they will be moaning much more under Cameron

I wouldn't trust any of them but one things for sure, Cameron will disappoint all but a few.

lvader

tomterm8 wrote: »

Don't trust anyone who goes on about 'efficiency savings'... they are not really possible. What they mean is spending less money on the services you use.

This is complete nonsense, private companies do it all the time without affecting income or customer service. Labour have put a ton of administartors and consultants in place to ensure service targets are met. Unfortunately the targets never really measure true performance. For example waiting with lists, instead of trying to help more people they just make sure that people don't stay on the waitiing list regardless if they get help or not.

ivavoucher

I do believe Cameron when he says they will make cuts, they will, on public spending which is the only way we ever get anything back.

tomterm8

lvader wrote: »

This is complete nonsense, private companies do it all the time without affecting income or customer service. .

No, actually they do not. Private companies decide what they want to do, hire the people to do it, and their decisions of this kind always DO always affect either income OR customer service.

ANY private company where sacking people DOES NOT affect either customer service or income is absolutly hopelessly run, and probably won't exist for much longer.

The point is, an honest discussion of public spending cuts would start from the perspective of 'what do we want/need to do' and 'why do we want/need to do it'.

There are a lot of things the state probably shouldn't do. A honest debate would be looking at these areas first. But the perception you can just save money through 'efficiency savings' with no effect on the average customer is nonsence.

ivavoucher

Cuts have to be made, so for me its a choice of those most likely to take from those who can afford it most.

Simples, comparethears*holes.com

ILW

ivavoucher wrote: »

Cuts have to be made, so for me its a choice of those most likely to take from those who can afford it most.

Simples, comparethears*holes.com

Any suggestions on "who can afford it"?

The_White_Horse

chucky wrote: »

this is exactly my view and how i voted in 1997.

if people are moaning about Brown now they will be moaning much more under Cameron

this is just utter nonsense.

the point is Dave will make the cuts necessary to get us out of the hole GB put us in. that will make him unpopular with the morons who don't understand things - like the BA union who want more and more.

Look at the Greek public sector - the country is utterly bankrupt and still they march for more and more and more.

Labour voters are generally idiots. or champagne socialists.

lvader

tomterm8 wrote: »

ANY private company where sacking people DOES NOT affect either customer service or income is absolutly hopelessly run, and probably won't exist for much longer..

I've worked for some of the biggest and most successful companies in the world, they do it all the time. It's simple a case of changing priorities.

tomterm8

lvader wrote: »

I've worked for some of the biggest and most successful companies in the world, they do it all the time. It's simple a case of changing priorities.

'Changing priorities' by definition means deciding not to do something that you are doing now. Simple.

ivavoucher

Aren’t we all just after a bit of the pie?

The unions wanted to reduce working week while the employers wanted us to start at age 14 and work 60 hours.
The Bankers just want as much as they can legally (sometimes) get.

The MP’s are fiddling expenses right left and centre and are mostly power mad experts at evading the question of what exactly is going to get cut, (first TV debate Cameron) or preach family values to their doting working class snob followers while humping colleagues. (no yolking)

Cameron will pass wealth up to promote the trickle down effect.
Brown will continue to give directly via public spending.

Trust no one but go for the direct payment method of increased public spending.