We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Plan B
Comments
-
Cuts in spoecnding isnt generally the issue. The issue is how the cuts are implemented.
Its so much easier to cut jobs, and handouts rather than finding where the waste in the system is. Its easier to cut 3 front line workers than one micro manager.
The public are seeing cuts to front line services and blaming the government - when they should be blaming tha managers of those sevices for taking the easy way out.
The other issue, is that people expect too much. Take the NHS. The costs of treatments, and the equiopment needed for modern medicine is HUGE compared to what is was when the NHS was set up. Top that up with the fact that the NHS was set up to provide BASIC medical facilities for all NOT Cutting edge ones.
We cant afford what people expect - but the problem isnt how to find the money, its how to lower peoples expectations. If you want cutting edge - then you have to go private.
It reall is all about managing expectation, but todays society as a whole expects far too much. While running a government isnt like running a family budget - the one thing that DOES correspond is that you cant have what you cant afford. Stimulating growth is one thing - paying for public services we cant afford is another issue completely.0 -
The Tories on here are a bit quiet.
I think you mistake quiet for quietly confident. Milliband and Balls have begun digging a hole in which they are standing. They will have great difficulty in either voting for, or against, the 1% limit on welfare increases. The credibility of their mantra "(still) more borrowing in order to stimulate growth" is wearing so thin as to be see-through, in every sense. They have no clue what to do about the EU relationship. They have no attractive answers to any of the key problems of the day. And their public image is poor. Things could be a lot worse for the Tories.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
That's because people won't pay for the public services they need.
That's because so many times they have seen extra money go to fund inflation-busting pay rises, over-staffing, inefficiency and waste, jobs for the boys, and endless layers of 'management' and bureaucracy.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
Yes you're quite correct. What we should do is increase public spending even more & use our special magic pot of endless money to pay for it. Child.
Many cuts are arbitrary, a thick marker pen line through a spread sheet. Many are impacted as a result of collateral damage. The real targets rarely get affected."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
GeorgeHowell wrote: »That's because so many times they have seen extra money go to fund inflation-busting pay rises, over-staffing, inefficiency and waste, jobs for the boys, and endless layers of 'management' and bureaucracy.
Many on the frontline haven't received pay increase for some time. those that were received 5 -6 years back probably didn't even match inflation and were a catch up for years of stagnation before.
There are no doubt a number of executive positions that have continued to benefit from continual increase regardless of performance. Jobs for the boys in endless management jobs is no doubt highly likely, more suits than boots. Those that have ben cleared out have gone with golden handshakes at the taxpayers expense.
It is important not to confuse the two."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
grizzly1911 wrote: »Many cuts are arbitrary, a thick marker pen line through a spread sheet. Many are impacted as a result of collateral damage. The real targets rarely get affected.
Someone benefits from almost all public expenditure -- even if its only civil servants or local government officers having an easier life. So whatever is cut someone won't like it, and may well scream blue murder and/or try to make political capital out of it. The government's job is to take responsibility -- if it took heed of every objection and hard luck story nothing would happen. In this country nobody need starve to death, or sleep on the streets, or die from hypothermia, or lack of ability to pay for medical care. These things do happen but due to !!!! ups not cuts. Beyond that people need to take responsibility for their own lives. There is a growing body of opinion that the European social democracies have taken on a burden of government spending and involvement which is unsustainable and unaffordable. Burying our heads in the sand about this will not help anyone in the long run.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
Andrew Neil on Daily politics spent the first 10 minutes slagging off the coalition for not reducing the national debt enough then without a pause moved directly on to slagging them off for cutting spending.
Neither the Lib or the Tory he was talking to even seemed to notice, they were so keen to rush to defend one then the other. And the Labour guy was so stupid he joined in with both attacks to. Sigh.0 -
Yes, the one called taxation. It's going to have to be done. The question is whether we do it while we've still got an economy left to tax, or whether we wait until we're Greece. Bankrupt businesses, boarded-up shops and unemployed workers don't pay much tax.Yes you're quite correct. What we should do is increase public spending even more & use our special magic pot of endless money to pay for it.."It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
Yes, the one called taxation. It's going to have to be done. The question is whether we do it while we've still got an economy left to tax, or whether we wait until we're Greece. Bankrupt businesses, boarded-up shops and unemployed workers don't pay much tax.
That's essentially what we had under 13 years of New Labour. Public services if anything deteriorated at a much higher cost, and the country was approaching bankruptcy in 2010 But it's what a large proportion of the electorate still want for a variety of reasons, though I don't think it's a majority -- not in England anyway. The trouble is a that lot of people are too stupid, ignorant, or detached to really understand what they are voting for, especially since many politicians are so dishonest is terms of portraying what they really stand for.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
Yes, the one called taxation. It's going to have to be done. The question is whether we do it while we've still got an economy left to tax, or whether we wait until we're Greece. Bankrupt businesses, boarded-up shops and unemployed workers don't pay much tax.
The fact that you think increasing taxation solves anything illustrates how little you understand about anything.
Let me try to explain it. The world get's better if we do more, produce more, make more, build more.
Increasing tax doesn't make anything better. It does however, kill the incentive to do more, produce more, make more, build more.
Imagine the world consisted of just two people: Myself, in Government, and yourself, a worker.
Tomorrow I announce that instead of keeping 50% of what you work for and giving me 50% to spend however I please, I'll be taking 60% & leaving you 40%. Not only will I be spending that 60% exactly how I please, but I'll probably be spending it on things you not only disagree with but actively hate. Also, the chances are you didn't vote for me.
Now, in those circumstances, would you feel inspired to go & work harder? After all You only have to work 10% more (so that's an extra 5 weeks a year) in order to remain exactly where you were before I raised your tax.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.7K Spending & Discounts
- 246K Work, Benefits & Business
- 602K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.8K Life & Family
- 259.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards