Kicking the can

Graham_Devon

David Cameron has today said:

"Endlessly putting off what needs to be done doesn't help, infact it makes the problems worse".

Now, I'll be the first to say that's pretty high on the hypocritical radar for him to be stating that, considering the time frames and extensions they keep putting on "doing stuff".

But does it show a turning point? Will he, and his party now look at doing things instead of putting them off? I.e. benefits? Will they now impose the cap, instead of extending it for another year? Will they impose retirement levels instead of leaving the discussion until 2013? Will they actually stop things like referrals for car insurance, or will they stick to their talk hard, but leave it till next year before we look at it?

I somehow doubt it. So does it mean anything at all, or is it just another political soundbite which politicians all over the world are happy to suggest, but less happy to implement?

He was of course talking about the EU and their fiddling around with problems.

The_White_Horse

they are borrowing more now than when they came in. all this "austerity" talk is nonsense. they have cut nothing. they need to do what greece is doing or we will soon be the same as them. what is the long term game plan here? keep paying the public sector until in 100 yrs time the deficit is £10trn. In 300 years time £100trn??? when does it end? when does it stop???? the public sector needs to be massively trimmed. 50% cuts to staff numbers and pay. 50% cuts to pensions. We must only have the most basic of state provisions from now on. The public sector have killed the goose that laid the golden egg.

from now on, we must balance our books and spend no more than is collected in tax revenues. if tax revenues don't cover it - cut spending, don't increase taxes.

as a tax payer, and non-benefit receiver, i don't pay my taxes to help out the benefit brigade or pay for 5 a day diversity street scene co-ordinators. I pay my tax so the country i live in can (a) be policed (b) have a legal system (c) have a road system, (d) have an army and (e) have basic provisions for citizens such as street lighting and waste disposal. Lastly, I accept that there a few unfortunates that do need assistance, but there are few genuine cases, and these real cases should get more than they currently do.

I don't pay tax to pay for massive pensions to overpaid public sector staff or fund the lifestyles of teenage mothers in their own flats or sending criminals to alton towers.

tax payers need to revolt. the money we spend on tax should be only used to assist the tax payer (and the very unfortunate few).

you know it makes sense.

ILW

Difficult to disagree.

tina01904

well said White Horse!!

wotsthat

It's a soundbite (clue: what's his occupation).

Remember the pensions black hole and the rising pension age? Some women found they wouldn't get a state pension when they thought (even though this was announced in the 1990's). Tough t**ts said the politicians "there's a pensions black hole and it's the right thing to do". Well these women moaned and complained and moaned a bit more - the government are now considering compensating them. I'm a bit cheesed off about my pension age rising to 67 - I think the government should compensate me by giving me two years pension payments. It's the right thing to do.

The_White_Horse

really the state should provide nothing (except law and order) and people should just be left to fend for themselves - with the support of their families.

Xiderpunk

The_White_Horse wrote: »

really the state should provide nothing (except law and order) and people should just be left to fend for themselves - with the support of their families.

I agree whole heartedly with what you have said however we must also be aware of the consequences. There will always be an underclass of poor people who have no desire to work. They harbour no ambition and live from day too day. They were around in the time of Shakespeare and they will be around till the end of humanity.

By removal of the benefits system we condemn these people to absolute destitution and poverty of which there is no escape. Crime will naturally soar as a result and the prisons will be seen as a viable way of getting a roof over their heads and a meal a day.

Having travelled I have seen extreme poverty in africa first hand and it is not a pretty sight. Watching it on television does not convey how dire their situation is.

Life expectancy for these people will be very low, late 20's if they are lucky (see Shakespeare).

Now, what we currently do is pay for the problem to disappear.

I think we need a middle road solution, the work houses of the 19th century perhaps.

The_White_Horse

agreed. these people should not have their own houses, cars, televisions, internet. it's a joke. if you don't work you should receive just enough to eat and have a roof over your head (not necessarily your own roof, why can these people not share?????? students share because they have little money). any "luxuries" and you must work for.

these people have had it too good for too long.

if people want to be idle that is their choice. but i should not have to pay for it.

Jimmy_31

The_White_Horse wrote: »

they are borrowing more now than when they came in. all this "austerity" talk is nonsense. they have cut nothing. they need to do what greece is doing or we will soon be the same as them. what is the long term game plan here? keep paying the public sector until in 100 yrs time the deficit is £10trn. In 300 years time £100trn??? when does it end? when does it stop???? the public sector needs to be massively trimmed. 50% cuts to staff numbers and pay. 50% cuts to pensions. We must only have the most basic of state provisions from now on. The public sector have killed the goose that laid the golden egg.

from now on, we must balance our books and spend no more than is collected in tax revenues. if tax revenues don't cover it - cut spending, don't increase taxes.

as a tax payer, and non-benefit receiver, i don't pay my taxes to help out the benefit brigade or pay for 5 a day diversity street scene co-ordinators. I pay my tax so the country i live in can (a) be policed (b) have a legal system (c) have a road system, (d) have an army and (e) have basic provisions for citizens such as street lighting and waste disposal. Lastly, I accept that there a few unfortunates that do need assistance, but there are few genuine cases, and these real cases should get more than they currently do.

I don't pay tax to pay for massive pensions to overpaid public sector staff or fund the lifestyles of teenage mothers in their own flats or sending criminals to alton towers.

tax payers need to revolt. the money we spend on tax should be only used to assist the tax payer (and the very unfortunate few).

you know it makes sense.

Same way of thinking as me, I think the revolt is coming because it is just pointless going to work anymore for some people.

I know plenty of lads who work alongside me who do not stand a chance of owning a home unless they buy one outright with no mortgage. As i see it the government now has to start taxing us less not more because lots of people are now at the stage were their income does not cover their basic needs bills.

I will be having my own little revolt once i buy a house because i really cant see me settling for the 25% council tax single person discount, I would accept a 50% discount seeing as there will only be one wage coming into my house but seeing as they probably wont accept part of the payment due, i may as well not bother paying it at all:)

Going4TheDream

The_White_Horse wrote: »

I don't pay tax to pay for massive pensions to overpaid public sector staff or fund the lifestyles of teenage mothers in their own flats or sending criminals to alton towers. /QUOTE]

It is not just the pension, it is the perks. Someone I know works in a government agency and they operate a flexi time system, you can accrue up to 2 days off a month by working extra hours but equally you can actually owe up to 2 days a month by working shorter hours. As many work shorter hours they have to pay overtime on a Saturday to catch up with the work that could have been done in the week. The first time this person did overtime (being only on a fixed contract needs the money) they were amazed at how full the office was at 7am - said it was busier than a normal work day. What she said was crazy was that most people who were there doing over time had probably only worked 25hrs in the previous week and hadnt even done their contractual 35hrs, and were being paid double time at £25 an hour to do work that could have been done during the week s part of their normal salary. Having come from the private sector she was astounded. Needless to say so was I

ILW

Rather than kicking the can down the road, it does seem that waht has been going on for sometime has been more like sticking a plaster on a tumour.