Are the middle classes going to bail out the rest of the country?

Sir_Humphrey

I think I can say without correction that the period of highest social mobility was the period of the post-war consensus.

That was certainly the time when the first member of my family went to University, and I am sure this is true of many other families. Both my grandfathers were intelligent enough to do so, but never had the opportunity.

I am disturbed by the 19th Century flavour of the current govt, but I do not see how their Whiggery can survive in the current era of full voting rights across all classes.

You have to remember that before 1918, not all men below 21 could vote. Many men were given the vote as well as women.

The_White_Horse

the govt needs to stop spending on EVERYTHING. Just draw aline. roads, buildings, whatever. just stop until they can work out the utter mess the cretinous lefts have gotten us into.

the trouble with lefts if they just wanty and want and don't care where the money comes from or even if it exists!!!

when GB kept on going on about cameron wanting to stop child trust funds, why didn't cameron just say - i don't WANT to stop them but there is NO money to pay for them you stuipid lefty filth.

look at uniute with BA. BA are in all sorts of trouble and still these hateful cretins want more. whether its more pay, less hours, more staff, whatever. BA needs to do what it needs to do. I just wish BA had the balls to sack ALL the cabin crew who are members of this union.

Thrugelmir

ninky wrote: »

yes it certainly looks that way. and cleggeron can pat itself on the back by saying they've reduced the wealth gap by making the middle class poorer.

given that out of the 160 billion deficit at least 60 billion is due to bailing out the banks i'd like to see what they are doing to get some pay back time from the financial sector rather than blame public spending and cutting the pay of public sector workers.

saving 15 million here or there in public service pay is nothing compared to the bank bailouts.

what has happened to the robin hood tax the lib dems were touting in their manifesto?

it seems cleggeron have dished out all the dirty jobs to the centre left to carry out whilst ring fencing and protecting the banking sector (and interests) under osborne.

The deficit does not include the money lent to the banks (which most likely be returned to the taxpayer with a profit).

The tax revenue from the financial sector was the engine for Gordon's spending plans in the public sector. So when the crash happened the tax revenue disappeared.

Interesting that 75% of civil servants get a bonus just for doing their job and that average public sector salaries are around 9% above private sector.

The UK economy is out of balance and needs realignment.

marklv

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Interesting that 75% of civil servants get a bonus just for doing their job and that average public sector salaries are around 9% above private sector.

The UK economy is out of balance and needs realignment.

First of all this refers to senior civil servants only, and as for public sector salarues being higher, this is a totally unweighted calculation, not taking account of different job functions etc. The private sector contains a larger number of toilet cleaners, etc.

chucky

marklv wrote: »

First of all this refers to senior civil servants only, and as for public sector salarues being higher, this is a totally unweighted calculation, not taking account of different job functions etc. The private sector contains a larger number of toilet cleaners, etc.

don't they have toilet cleaners in the public sector?

Sir_Humphrey

chucky wrote: »

don't they have toilet cleaners in the public sector?

Almost all outsourced.

chucky

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

Almost all outsourced.

i imagined

t'was a joke

ninky_2

Thrugelmir wrote: »

The deficit does not include the money lent to the banks (which most likely be returned to the taxpayer with a profit).

.

thanks. i didn't realise this. having had it pointed out i had a nose about and found this useful article on the difference between national debt and national deficit. worth having a look for those like me who don't really know these things.

http://www.opendemocracy.net/openeconomy/tony-curzon-price/how-to-tell-your-debt-from-your-deficit

drc

ninky wrote: »

you'd be thinking of the likes of baby p's parents there then? given the highly burdened local social services dept in harringey / tottenham i really don't think that all children in my area are lucky enough to have parents who are going to campaign for the best schooling for them.

and if it's such a failure of a nanny state system how do you account for the massive rise in children going on to HE from a previously highly deprived area?

It's not just children from poor backgrounds that are abused though and I'd hope that baby P was the exception to the rule concerning 'poor' families.

Funnily enough I live in Haringey, have done almost all my life and I have seen a lot of changes in the borough, some good some bad. I'm not saying everything Labour has done here is bad but the council does seem to be very badly managed when it comes to money and I'd of liked to have seen the Lib Dems take over (the council). In terms of HE it really depends whether the quality of results are being dumbed down or not. It's all very well sending loads more kids to college but if the standards of teaching have fallen then maybe throwing money at education, education, education isn't necessarily the answer. I'd also suspect some of the incentives towards higher education was to ensure older teenagers were kept off official umemployment statistics so Labour could claim to be reducing unemployment whilsts claiming more were in higher education.

Andy_L

marklv wrote: »

First of all this refers to senior civil servants only,

True, although a similar % of the lower echelons will have received bonus just for achieving their objectives.
However these bonus are contractual upon achieving those objectives and have been built up by holding back 1/4 or so of past pay rises to pay as "bonuses" instead of pay rises. This has resulted in reduced pension costs as the bonus isn't pensonable like a pay rise would be