Labour & the Conservatives

Devon_Sailor

I have been following this thread with interest as it spirals away from debate and down to the depths of hard-lined, immovable rhetoric and entrenched emotion.

I'm afraid the link to Victorian poverty, and claiming Socialism to be the panacea to it all, was the last straw. Where were the links to pictures of the horrendous poverty being experienced in Soviet Russia? Or Romania, Albania and all the other former (Socialist) Soviet Bloc countries - all of which were a darned sight closer to the current period of history than the mid-C19th....??

The fact is, poverty is a relative, and therefore moveable thing. To undertake to "abolish" child (or any other type) of poverty is a political slight of hand that will only end in failure. Unless absolutely everybody earns exactly the same amount of money, there will, by definition, always be a lowest 5, 10 or 15% of earners; these will, therefore, be living in "poverty".

To contextualise it a bit - in Mildredalien's post there was the link to Bernados. They define child poverty in the UK as those in families earning less than £12 per day (about $18). More than HALF the worlds population live on LESS THAN $2 a DAY (the international definition of Poverty). That is quite a staggering figure and one which the worlds leading nations should be doing more to help with.

Should we therefore ignore all claims of UK poverty because they are 9 times more well off than 50% of the world's population??

Of course not - but it shows just how poor the foundations are of such generic emotionalised stances.

Why not ditch the ideological/emotional mudslinging and get into a constructive debate about ideas as to how to fix the problems rather than degenerate into yet another dull thread of "rich toffs hate the poor" and "workshy benefits claimants deserve what they get"?

Regards,

D_S

StevieJ

PaulF81 wrote: »

THe uk service sector immigration statistics speak from themselves. the fact we have hundreds of thousands of people on the dole and other workshy benefits, yet hundreds of thousands of eastern Europeans working here in fields, in nursing homes and in other low paid work, tells me everything I already know. A significant minority of the UK are lazy, slothlike no hopers that are leeching off the productive side of our economy. They are killing it with their greed, ).

Interesting phrase

StevieJ

mildredalien wrote: »

No need to get personal Paul. Get back to me when you've read all the links I posted and given yourself time to reflect on them.

It amuses me that you try to defend the huge wealth inequality in the UK. The Daily Mail and the Tories have done their job well, demonising those who are poor, uneducated, unemployed or otherwise disadvantaged. I just hope you never go through anything that means you end up on the other side of the fence, wondering why people are looking down on you when all you want to do is find a job and feed your family.

I was talking to a Swedish guy in the pub, he just couldn't understand why we put up with such inequality Bring on a wealth tax.

grizzly1911

Devon_Sailor wrote: »

I
To contextualise it a bit - in Mildredalien's post there was the link to Bernados. They define child poverty in the UK as those in families earning less than £12 per day (about $18). More than HALF the worlds population live on LESS THAN $2 a DAY (the international definition of Poverty). That is quite a staggering figure and one which the worlds leading nations should be doing more to help with.

You are right it is a relative thing.

The commitments and cost of basics is may also be 90% lower in many developing countries. Actually giving them many things from the developed world may not actually make their life a better one. Giving them greater hope and aspiration may not help them if it comes with and unsustainable debt.

mildredalien

Devon_sailor I appreciate what you are saying and I guess I focused too much on the emotional, but my point was really that socialism has actually brought advances in how the UK operates that capitalism is slowly (not slowly enough) eroding. Of course there is horrific poverty across the world but that has nothing to do with current UK politics. Well except perhaps the debate about offering aid to countries in need but that's a topic in it's own right.

How to fix the problems? Hmm, I like to try and stay educated on what the problems are but how to fix them seems a very complicated issue! My suggestions would be further taxes on the wealthiest in the UK, pursuing corporate tax evasion with as much conviction as benefit fraud, renationalising many of the privatised services, start building houses on a huge scale and investing in transport and ur... replacing all politicians with humans who actually have souls?

Or we could just stop all benefits until all those nasty workshy poors are dead of hunger and disease (because they can't afford healthcare prices as we'll obviously start charging for those) then the population will be under control and everyone's a winner!

vivatifosi

StevieJ wrote: »

I was talking to a Swedish guy in the pub,

He was in your pub Stevie because he can't afford to drink in his own.

Devon_Sailor

mildredalien wrote: »

Devon_sailor I appreciate what you are saying and I guess I focused too much on the emotional, but my point was really that socialism has actually brought advances in how the UK operates that capitalism is slowly (not slowly enough) eroding.

I agree that the rise of the Labour Party since the 1930s has had a positive influence in a number of areas of UK life. I disagree (funny old thing...) that socialism should completely replace capitalism as the driving ideology of the country. As an "old school" One Nation Tory (not the new Millibandese b*stardised version), I think that the beauty of our current system is the way the two extremes of these ideologies are forced to meet somewhere in the middle.

Was this country changed for the better by capitalism? Yes. Did vast numbers of people (many of whom may have started life in one of those slum pictures you linked to) find themselves bursting into the burgeoning "middle classes" through their own hard work, innovation, industry and sheer grit? Yes. Are we as a Nation more able to meet the financial responsibilities that we have to those in our society who need it most, due to capitalism making us one of the worlds richest economies? Yes.

However, did the influence of socialist ideas such as National Health, minimum wage and more rights for workers make the system fairer? Yes, unreservedly.

The thing is, the two systems need each other. Im pretty sure nobody really wants to live in the might-is-right, dog eat dog, ruthless world that pure unrestrained capitalism would. Similarly, I for one wouldn't like to live in the world where Socialism is left unguarded; where a desire to get on in life, to innovate and break the mould to try and improve is crushed ruthlessly to preserve the "norm" and make sure everyone is blandly the same. Soviet Russia? Niet! :rotfl:

mildredalien wrote: »

How to fix the problems? Hmm, I like to try and stay educated on what the problems are but how to fix them seems a very complicated issue! My suggestions would be further taxes on the wealthiest in the UK, pursuing corporate tax evasion with as much conviction as benefit fraud, renationalising many of the privatised services, start building houses on a huge scale and investing in transport and ur... replacing all politicians with humans who actually have souls?

You've hit the nail on the head. It is devilishly difficult. The trouble is that the plain maths of the situation speaks for itself. We are spending vastly more than we are getting in.If I had been Chancellor in 2010 (perish the thought!! :eek:) I would have tried to tackle it on two fronts -stimulation (ooh er) and real cuts.

- Pushed through legislation to give immediate planning approval to any housing or commercial development wishing to utilise brown field sites (of which there are countless thousands of acres....) on condition that the developer began work within 3-6 months (thus avoiding them using it as 'land banks', trying to pick up cheap now and cash in during the economic upturn). This would stimulate the building sector and provide hopefully more affordable housing. Demanding that developers start construction within 3-6 months on projects already passed but not started (some 400,000 homes already have planning permission to be built!) or else their permission would be terminated, would also help.

- Terminate the High Speed 2 project, and re-invest the build costs in electrifying and upgrading the West Coast main line all the way from Penzance to Liverpool. Any leftover funds should be ploughed into other rail infrastructure improvements.

- Immediately raise the personal tax threshold to £10k to put money back into peoples pockets.

- Scrap child and other benefits to all households who have a combined salary of £45k.

- Cut the top rate of tax dramatically to 40p or lower. The 50p tax rate didn't bring in any money at all - proven fact. Attract more wealth from punitive overseas tax regimes (France, etc). Increase of circulation down into the economy as they spend spend spend...:T Simultaneously crack down ruthlessly on illegal tax avoidance and close all loopholes. If you are given the carrot of a more lucrative tax situation, any attempt to circumvent it should be clamped down on - with 100% recovery of the difference, PLUS a fine EQUAL TO THE AMOUNT EVADED. That would soon stop their antics. This would apply to corporations too. NO deals would be struck between HMRC and the likes of Vodaphone/Amazon. They get the breaks, but a responsibility comes with that to pay their dues.

- Investment into practical business winning infrastructure, such as high speed broadband, nationwide.

- A real terms 10% cut across the board in all Govt Depts, No sacred cows. No sane person could possibly think that there are no savings whatsoever that could be made across the £200billion a year NHS? Funding for DfID would be temporarily suspended for one Parliament, to help balance the books, with a commitment to reinstating it at it's full level after the next election.

I think a lot of things that have been done are in the right direction, and for the right reason, but have been badly sold to the public. The principle that no one should earn more on benefits than the average wage, is a good one, which the majority of people support. However, how about incentivising it further? So that no one can say they are worse off working, how about guaranteeing a top up of new wages, to the level of benefits they were on, for the first year of employment? It gives the person a chance to get back into work, not be worse off, get some current experience and, if it is a job they don't partic like, gives them a year to find other employment.

There are more ideas, but I have to go and hide Easter eggs for my lad... Im sure there is enough there to stimulate things

mildredalien wrote: »

Or we could just stop all benefits until all those nasty workshy poors are dead of hunger and disease (because they can't afford healthcare prices as we'll obviously start charging for those) then the population will be under control and everyone's a winner!

Ah, you got so close to the end without a little jibe :rotfl:Or we could adopt the approach of National Socialist Germany and The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and introduce concentration camps, gulags and mass executions to polish them off quicker? Let's never forget it was the dirty face of Socialism that killed off 60+ million people over the course of a mere decade.........

Moby

Devon_Sailor wrote: »

I agree that the rise of the Labour Party since the 1930s has had a positive influence in a number of areas of UK life. I disagree (funny old thing...) that socialism should completely replace capitalism as the driving ideology of the country. As an "old school" One Nation Tory (not the new Millibandese b*stardised version), I think that the beauty of our current system is the way the two extremes of these ideologies are forced to meet somewhere in the middle.

Was this country changed for the better by capitalism? Yes. Did vast numbers of people (many of whom may have started life in one of those slum pictures you linked to) find themselves bursting into the burgeoning "middle classes" through their own hard work, innovation, industry and sheer grit? Yes. Are we as a Nation more able to meet the financial responsibilities that we have to those in our society who need it most, due to capitalism making us one of the worlds richest economies? Yes.

However, did the influence of socialist ideas such as National Health, minimum wage and more rights for workers make the system fairer? Yes, unreservedly.

The thing is, the two systems need each other. Im pretty sure nobody really wants to live in the might-is-right, dog eat dog, ruthless world that pure unrestrained capitalism would. Similarly, I for one wouldn't like to live in the world where Socialism is left unguarded; where a desire to get on in life, to innovate and break the mould to try and improve is crushed ruthlessly to preserve the "norm" and make sure everyone is blandly the same. Soviet Russia? Niet! :rotfl:



You've hit the nail on the head. It is devilishly difficult. The trouble is that the plain maths of the situation speaks for itself. We are spending vastly more than we are getting in.If I had been Chancellor in 2010 (perish the thought!! :eek:) I would have tried to tackle it on two fronts -stimulation (ooh er) and real cuts.

- Pushed through legislation to give immediate planning approval to any housing or commercial development wishing to utilise brown field sites (of which there are countless thousands of acres....) on condition that the developer began work within 3-6 months (thus avoiding them using it as 'land banks', trying to pick up cheap now and cash in during the economic upturn). This would stimulate the building sector and provide hopefully more affordable housing. Demanding that developers start construction within 3-6 months on projects already passed but not started (some 400,000 homes already have planning permission to be built!) or else their permission would be terminated, would also help.

- Terminate the High Speed 2 project, and re-invest the build costs in electrifying and upgrading the West Coast main line all the way from Penzance to Liverpool. Any leftover funds should be ploughed into other rail infrastructure improvements.

- Immediately raise the personal tax threshold to £10k to put money back into peoples pockets.

- Scrap child and other benefits to all households who have a combined salary of £45k.

- Cut the top rate of tax dramatically to 40p or lower. The 50p tax rate didn't bring in any money at all - proven fact. Attract more wealth from punitive overseas tax regimes (France, etc). Increase of circulation down into the economy as they spend spend spend...:T Simultaneously crack down ruthlessly on illegal tax avoidance and close all loopholes. If you are given the carrot of a more lucrative tax situation, any attempt to circumvent it should be clamped down on - with 100% recovery of the difference, PLUS a fine EQUAL TO THE AMOUNT EVADED. That would soon stop their antics. This would apply to corporations too. NO deals would be struck between HMRC and the likes of Vodaphone/Amazon. They get the breaks, but a responsibility comes with that to pay their dues.

- Investment into practical business winning infrastructure, such as high speed broadband, nationwide.

- A real terms 10% cut across the board in all Govt Depts, No sacred cows. No sane person could possibly think that there are no savings whatsoever that could be made across the £200billion a year NHS? Funding for DfID would be temporarily suspended for one Parliament, to help balance the books, with a commitment to reinstating it at it's full level after the next election.

I think a lot of things that have been done are in the right direction, and for the right reason, but have been badly sold to the public. The principle that no one should earn more on benefits than the average wage, is a good one, which the majority of people support. However, how about incentivising it further? So that no one can say they are worse off working, how about guaranteeing a top up of new wages, to the level of benefits they were on, for the first year of employment? It gives the person a chance to get back into work, not be worse off, get some current experience and, if it is a job they don't partic like, gives them a year to find other employment.

There are more ideas, but I have to go and hide Easter eggs for my lad... Im sure there is enough there to stimulate things



Ah, you got so close to the end without a little jibe :rotfl:Or we could adopt the approach of National Socialist Germany and The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and introduce concentration camps, gulags and mass executions to polish them off quicker? Let's never forget it was the dirty face of Socialism that killed off 60+ million people over the course of a mere decade.........

Not much to disagree with in your post. You sound more like a social democratic though than a thatcherite from what you have written above. Remember there was a post war concensus...although Wilson and Heath hated each other....it was Thatcher who destroyed that consensus. The govmt would claim that it is already doing what you say and Labour would have their own version if in power. The devil as always is in the detail and I hear valid arguments opposing all the things you propose ie planning permission for building,High Speed 2 etc. That doesn't make you wrong of course! Also a 10% cut across all depts is a meaningless proposal because it bears no relationship to where and what the waste is? That's what politics is...its an argument about priorities! People differ about this. I for one would get rid of trident for starters!

Of course no one should be worse off for working but its how such things are introduced....what is happening now is unacceptable.....listen to the comments made by the church today for example.

Also your last line....just because Stalin called himself a socialist doesn't mean he was one.. He was a tyrant dictator driven by his own personal cult. Why do you have to use his example and ignore the many west european versions of socialism as represented by people such as Willy Brandt and Olaf Palme. A Govmts job is to lead and represent everybody. This Govmt quite clearly doesn't. There is a despicable divide and rule subliminal ...at times not so subliminal message to divide between the deserving and undeserving. Of course how you define those things is subjective and it encourages the negative side in all of us to point the finger of blame at whatever the latest scapegoat is...whether it is Romanian/Bulgarian immigrants or the workshy and !!!!less. People like Richard Littlejohn then fund their own lives by writing articles in rubbish rags that pander to these prejudices. We deserve better than this....this country will get out of the gutter by being led by those with a positive message for all of us. I'm a realist...heads always have to be cracked......but the way to do this is not to put neighbour against neighbour.

CLAPTON

Just a few randon comments : ...

Devon_Sailor wrote: »

- Pushed through legislation to give immediate planning approval to any housing or commercial development wishing to utilise brown field sites (of which there are countless thousands of acres....) on condition that the developer began work within 3-6 months (thus avoiding them using it as 'land banks', trying to pick up cheap now and cash in during the economic upturn). This would stimulate the building sector and provide hopefully more affordable housing. Demanding that developers start construction within 3-6 months on projects already passed but not started (some 400,000 homes already have planning permission to be built!) or else their permission would be terminated, would also help.

Immediate planning permission for brown fill site for (say) housing estate in the middle of a flood plane with poor clean water and sewage and road infrastructure?

surely not in the real world

- Terminate the High Speed 2 project, and re-invest the build costs in electrifying and upgrading the West Coast main line all the way from Penzance to Liverpool. Any leftover funds should be ploughed into other rail infrastructure improvements.

The 'west coast line' is usually considered to be train line that runs from Euston (in London) to Glascow (in Scotland) vis the midlands and Manchester.

- Scrap child and other benefits to all households who have a combined salary of £45k.

a major incentive to either remain a 'single' parents or to disrupt existing families.

- Cut the top rate of tax dramatically to 40p or lower. The 50p tax rate didn't bring in any money at all - proven fact.

It certainly proved that if you give advance notice of a tax rise for the next tax year then people will bring as much income as possible forward to avoid the extra tax;

and it certainly shows that if you then give advance notice about reducing that tax increaase in the next financial year, then people will delay as much of their income as possible to that year.

It says nothing about Laffers curve.

Attract more wealth from punitive overseas tax regimes (France, etc). Increase of circulation down into the economy as they spend spend spend...:T Simultaneously crack down ruthlessly on illegal tax avoidance and close all loopholes. If you are given the carrot of a more lucrative tax situation, any attempt to circumvent it should be clamped down on - with 100% recovery of the difference, PLUS a fine EQUAL TO THE AMOUNT EVADED. That would soon stop their antics. This would apply to corporations too.

I believe the penalties are already as you describe.

However, I don't see how this will affect Starbucks, Google, Amazon and a host of other companies as it appears they weren't breaking any laws.

Devon_Sailor

Afternoon Moby,

Hope you enjoyed your day in the sun yesterday!

Wrt the Stalin line, it was a little facetious I admit; but I was using it as an example of how all sides have things to be ashamed of. It was in response to the general impression on this board and others that Conservatives are all evil baby eating scum, only held in check by the righteous upstanding fluffy members of the Left.

I entirely agree that the waste must be targeted - my 10% across the board cut would be a starting point, not an end. The State is too large. Whilst the media, Unions and the Opposition have been keen to portray the Coalition as being savage and ruthless, the fact is that very little real term cutting has been done to any budgets - certainly not as much as is/was required. Im more of a sticking plaster approach man. Short, sharp pain and then let the recovery start in earnest. By fudging the first couple of budgets, Osborne managed to loose the grudging acceptance of the population that "something" needed to be done.

Would we be in a better place now if that first 2010 budget had been more radical? Who knows. But it is clear that the constant drip of bad news, trimming at the edges and u-turns on policy has hurt the Government badly. One could also hypothesise about how things would have turned out if the media hadn't got it's knickers in such a twist after the first election debate; blowing Nick Clegg up from mediocre political leader into the new Gladstone overnight! A coalition naturally fudges through necessity.

I also agree there have been massive problems about how to introduce changes - hence my idea to publicise or create carrots, just as much as the stick.

Having met the man in person on a couple of occasions, I genuinely believe that Iain Duncan Smith is a good man at heart; and actually he is a champion for the less well off and socially disadvantaged. The Left may vilify him because of the post he now holds, but I bet all the money in my pocket (of which there is not a lot! :rotfl:) that he is more on the side of proper social equality than any other Cabinet minister.

I also disagree with your idea of Parliament: "A Govmts job is to lead and represent everybody." No, it isn't. That may be an ideal, but the role of the elected Govnt is to represent the interest of the country. We live in a Parliamentary democracy - we vote for MPs who we then trust (perhaps naively) to take the important (often hard or controversial) decisions on our behalf, for the greater good.

To end on a conciliatory note, I couldn't agree more about the abominable "deserving v undeserving" poor. I think this is more a product of an archly extreme media and 'talking heads' industry. Lets face it, after the election, NOONE was happy; The Cons were cheesed off because they somehow managed to blow a near dead cert majority Govnt. Labour were equally shell shocked that the Libs went in with the Tories. The Libs were just shocked that they actually had to put their money where their mouth was for a change and open themselves up to public approval/disapproval of their ideas rather than just snipe from the sidelines from their ivory towers...... traditional Left leaning papers hated what the Libs did, and then the weakness of an Opposition leadership in the face of a weak Govnt. The Right wing ones are apoplectic that they could be looking at another period of opposition in just a few years, and blame a weak Con leadership and of course the Libs.

Without a strong leader in ANY of the parties, the various "wings" are able to let loose without fear of being slapped down. Both sides are dog whistling and whipping up their hardcore loyalists....

My own personal view is that the whole deserving/undeserving mantra is decidedly un-Conservative. The vast majority of people I know feel that the social safety net should not only remain in place, but indeed be strengthened for those that truly need it. It is unfortunate however that we are hated and abused for being the only Party who will willingly stand up and say - enough. It is not working. We need to rethink this, re-vamp it and make darned sure that only those who truly need it (for whatever reason) are claiming it, so that those who do, might get enough.

If a Labour leader got up and said he would reform the welfare system so that it's archaic, dysfunctional, inefficient and patently unfair way of doing things was consigned to history, he would be feted as a radical social thinker. Any Tory who opens their mouth on welfare reform is labelled Toff scum.

Crazy world, but its the one we appear stuck with! :rotfl:

Regards,

D_S