"UK needs extra spending cuts"

[badgerx16]

In business he'd be the computer technician.

 

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Sure, Im not knocking him. Hes achieved so much considering his background. From South London council estate to a scholarship at Harvard takes something pretty special. We need a lot more politicians like him and less Millibands / Camerons / Cleggs. Davis' record speaks for itself, he doesnt need to be bigged up by spin.

 

Politicians should have to have at least five years working in the real world.

[pap]

Before money you would have had to fight for your food and shelter. Would that be a better system?

 

First of all, we're not constrained to two systems; rampant capitalism or killing each other. Those systems aren't even mutually exclusive. We manage to run both at the same time extremely well. Even if we forget our recent imperialist adventures in the Middle East, domestically you have people killing each other over resources. Check out any drug turf war as an example.

 

We're not cavemen anymore, Sergei. I believe we've developed our ideas and technology to the point where world hunger shouldn't be an issue, energy isn't a problem and disease could be massively curtailed. If we're not there yet, we soon will be; with stuff like the LHC and the ITER fusion reactor project going on, we're on the brink of major technological advancement in addition to the relentless pace of refinement that we see on our existing techs. I know that a load on the right like to spout Malthusian theories about world population, but those theories are founded on the premise that people will be fighting for resources, not co-operating to make the best use of them.

 

Our system is little more than a hierarchical pyramid scheme that funnels power to an unelected elite. Verbal made a point recently concerning the provenance of representative government. I don't remember it word for word, but it was something along the lines of "stopping the have-nots from rising up and killing the haves". Governments of all colours are all placing the survival of the financial system over the welfare of their citizens, so I would argue that they're presently ineffective for this purpose.

 

It's really not a case of "this system" or "that system". It's more about setting your priorities out and working out how to achieve them. The priorities are all wrong at the moment, and in a century's time, after the system has eventually crashed and been rebuilt, our descendants are going to look at us and think "what a bunch of mugs". Perhaps this thread will be the subject of a history lesson, eh

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

First of all, we're not constrained to two systems; rampant capitalism or killing each other. Those systems aren't even mutually exclusive. We manage to run both at the same time extremely well. Even if we forget our recent imperialist adventures in the Middle East, domestically you have people killing each other over resources. Check out any drug turf war as an example.

 

We're not cavemen anymore, Sergei. I believe we've developed our ideas and technology to the point where world hunger shouldn't be an issue, energy isn't a problem and disease could be massively curtailed. If we're not there yet, we soon will be; with stuff like the LHC and the ITER fusion reactor project going on, we're on the brink of major technological advancement in addition to the relentless pace of refinement that we see on our existing techs. I know that a load on the right like to spout Malthusian theories about world population, but those theories are founded on the premise that people will be fighting for resources, not co-operating to make the best use of them.

 

Our system is little more than a hierarchical pyramid scheme that funnels power to an unelected elite. Verbal made a point recently concerning the provenance of representative government. I don't remember it word for word, but it was something along the lines of "stopping the have-nots from rising up and killing the haves". Governments of all colours are all placing the survival of the financial system over the welfare of their citizens, so I would argue that they're presently ineffective for this purpose.

 

It's really not a case of "this system" or "that system". It's more about setting your priorities out and working out how to achieve them. The priorities are all wrong at the moment, and in a century's time, after the system has eventually crashed and been rebuilt, our descendants are going to look at us and think "what a bunch of mugs". Perhaps this thread will be the subject of a history lesson, eh

 

You really do live in another world. Do you think China will buy into your cosy little world vision. Not if you see what they are doing in Africa.

[pap]

You really do live in another world. Do you think China will buy into your cosy little world vision. Not if you see what they are doing in Africa.

 

Yeah, alright mate - I'm posting this from Mars.

 

Oh? You didn't mean literally another world? It was merely a crap way to try and diminish my argument without making any points?

 

Even your little bit about China is throwaway, Sergei - basically because you're not explaining much of it. It's a good job I know that the Chinese are heavily investing in Africa, in pursuit of rare earths and other raw materials, otherwise I'd be none the wiser. I'm not exactly sure how that's any different from what Western corporations are doing in the rainforest. In either case, you have corporate might coming in to plunder the resources of another country, often with enthusiastic invitations from corrupt leaders who stand to trouser billions in backhanders.

 

 

 

Perhaps you'd like to explain the difference.

[JPTCount]

To be fair to him his life story is a good one. The lad from the council estate that worked his way up through hard graft. Far better to have a leader like him than a limp wristed geek like Ed Milliband. Only in politics would someone like Ed ever stand a chance of leading. In business he'd be the computer technician.

 

admittedly he's a **** leader but he's not just a geek, if ur going to do a business analogy uve gotta say his dad was Keynes, and I'm sure ol' jmks kids would be running at least one large financial institution.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Yeah, alright mate - I'm posting this from Mars.

 

Oh? You didn't mean literally another world? It was merely a crap way to try and diminish my argument without making any points?

 

Even your little bit about China is throwaway, Sergei - basically because you're not explaining much of it. It's a good job I know that the Chinese are heavily investing in Africa, in pursuit of rare earths and other raw materials, otherwise I'd be none the wiser. I'm not exactly sure how that's any different from what Western corporations are doing in the rainforest. In either case, you have corporate might coming in to plunder the resources of another country, often with enthusiastic invitations from corrupt leaders who stand to trouser billions in backhanders.

 

 

 

Perhaps you'd like to explain the difference.

 

Yes welcome to the real world.

[pap]

Yes welcome to the real world.

 

I think I'm going to have start charging a fee for dragging your arguments into the cold light of day. Just a shame they turn to dust like the vampires in Buffy, and not shine like the vampires in Twilight.

 

(if you're going to accuse me of not living in the real world, may as well spice it up with a bit of fantasy).

[Lord Duckhunter]

Anybody who doesn't think we need deep spending cuts is living in cloud cuckoo. Our present spending levels are unsustainable.

 

Not one of our major parties is being honest and the public are not prepared to accept any cuts in living standards despite the obvious hole we're in. We are just passing the debt down to future generations.

 

Government spending is 50% higher in real terms than it was 10 years ago, the cut in expenditure in 2011-12 is just 1.5% of GDP.

 

I read an article that chilled me to the bone. Our debt is at about 75 per cent of GDP. But if public sector pension liabilities are included, the private finance initiative is included and the guarantees given to the banking sector were ever called upon, it would rise to more than 240 per cent.

 

It's Skate economics. Our political leaders are the Peter Storrie's, never telling us the truth and and carrying on spending someone elses money (ours).And the public are the Blue Few, putting our head in the sand and trying to convince ourselves that it really is sustainable.

[pap]

Have you ever considered that some people want nation states to be in perpetual debt? The mechanism by which the Federal Reserve puts money into the economy means that the US can never repay its debt. Debt keeps everyone in line.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Anybody who doesn't think we need deep spending cuts is living in cloud cuckoo. Our present spending levels are unsustainable.

 

Not one of our major parties is being honest and the public are not prepared to accept any cuts in living standards despite the obvious hole we're in. We are just passing the debt down to future generations.

 

Government spending is 50% higher in real terms than it was 10 years ago, the cut in expenditure in 2011-12 is just 1.5% of GDP.

 

I read an article that chilled me to the bone. Our debt is at about 75 per cent of GDP. But if public sector pension liabilities are included, the private finance initiative is included and the guarantees given to the banking sector were ever called upon, it would rise to more than 240 per cent.

 

It's Skate economics. Our political leaders are the Peter Storrie's, never telling us the truth and and carrying on spending someone elses money (ours).And the public are the Blue Few, putting our head in the sand and trying to convince ourselves that it really is sustainable.

 

Its the trouble with democracy; who is going to get elected saying we are going introduce savage cuts. We will just end up like Spain and the others in a decade. As for the PIGS in a decade you really do worry.

[Saintandy666]

Have you ever considered that some people want nation states to be in perpetual debt? The mechanism by which the Federal Reserve puts money into the economy means that the US can never repay its debt. Debt keeps everyone in line.

 

I have to say, the whole web that money and debt creates is extremely complex in the modern world. Someone has borrowed money from an institution which has borrowed money or has 'money' locked up in assets, and then that bank or institution has borrowed money from another place and so on and so on. Makes you wonder how much money actually exists and how much is just debt.

[Verbal]

The thread title is a word too long.

[View From The Top]

He was in the SBS

 

No, he was in SAS TA for a short time.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

No, he was in SAS TA for a short time.

 

I have already apologised for getting the wrong special forces. I got muddled up with Pantsdown.

 

Is the selection criteria different for the SAS if you are in the TA.

[View From The Top]

I have already apologised for getting the wrong special forces. I got muddled up with Pantsdown.

 

Is the selection criteria different for the SAS if you are in the TA.

 

Trust me on this, it was short term TA for ££ reasons. He's said it himself.

 

Tim Spicer & a few others on both sides of the House are ex-army.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Trust me on this, it was short term TA for ££ reasons. He's said it himself.

 

Tim Spicer & a few others on both sides of the House are ex-army.

 

That fella in the House of Commons Bar who has a similar affection to Tories as yourself; I think he was as well.

[Lord Duckhunter]

I couldn't give a monkeys whether DD was in the TA, SAS, SBS or Boy Scouts. He talks more sense than those upper class private educated *** ts Cameron, Osborne, Balls and Milliband. Him and AJ should be leading the 2 parties imo, and the sandal wearers should have Tim Farron.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

I couldn't give a monkeys whether DD was in the TA, SAS, SBS or Boy Scouts. He talks more sense than those upper class private educated *** ts Cameron, Osborne, Balls and Milliband. Him and AJ should be leading the 2 parties imo, and the sandal wearers should have Tim Farron.

 

I too have always enjoyed DellDays posts.

[pap]

I have to say, the whole web that money and debt creates is extremely complex in the modern world. Someone has borrowed money from an institution which has borrowed money or has 'money' locked up in assets, and then that bank or institution has borrowed money from another place and so on and so on. Makes you wonder how much money actually exists and how much is just debt.

 

You'd never really know these days. A lot of people don't pay for things with cash anymore. I use my card nine times out of ten. It has become a very abstract concept, but there has been an element of unreality involved ever since the banks started lending money at a rate of interest. Assuming a finite amount of money, there's no way that the interest can be paid without someone else losing out. So you either print more money, pretend to print more money or watch companies and individuals go unpaid. We do all three.

[View From The Top]

That fella in the House of Commons Bar who has a similar affection to Tories as yourself; I think he was as well.

 

Yep, think you are correct on that one.

[View From The Top]

I couldn't give a monkeys whether DD was in the TA, SAS, SBS or Boy Scouts. He talks more sense than those upper class private educated *** ts Cameron, Osborne, Balls and Milliband. Him and AJ should be leading the 2 parties imo, and the sandal wearers should have Tim Farron.

 

I too despise career politicians.

[dune]

I agree about Alan Johnson. Labour would obliterate the Tories with him in charge, just like the Tories would obliterate Labour if they had a credible leader. Sadly the Islington set have the monopoly when it comes to politics.

[bridge too far]

I couldn't give a monkeys whether DD was in the TA, SAS, SBS or Boy Scouts. He talks more sense than those upper class private educated *** ts Cameron, Osborne, Balls and Milliband. Him and AJ should be leading the 2 parties imo, and the sandal wearers should have Tim Farron.

 

Miliband went to a state comprehensive school

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Miliband

 

Miliband was educated at Primrose Hill Primary School, Camden, Featherbank Primary School, Leeds,^[7] and then Haverstock Comprehensive School in Chalk Farm, North London.

 

[dune]

Miliband went to a state comprehensive school

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Miliband

 

Miliband was educated at Primrose Hill Primary School, Camden, Featherbank Primary School, Leeds,^[7] and then Haverstock Comprehensive School in Chalk Farm, North London.

 

 

He's still a career politician and a geek. Surely even you must realise what a poor leader he is.

[JPTCount]

Miliband went to a state comprehensive school

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Miliband

 

Miliband was educated at Primrose Hill Primary School, Camden, Featherbank Primary School, Leeds,^[7] and then Haverstock Comprehensive School in Chalk Farm, North London.

 

 

they only went to state school coz his dad was a leading socialist thinker, wud have been a bit hypocritical otherwise.

 

and he's a **** leader because he's a spineless sap. bring a geek isn't the be all and end all, beast is a massive geek.

 

wordplay :-)

[Gambol2K9]

well if Vodafone pay thier £6bn they owe we only need to find another two multi nationals who have been dodging tax and it's sorted.

 

this chancellor malachi is simple.

 

They don't owe £6bn, similar to Jimmy Carr what they did was legal if immoral

[Fuengirola Saint]

Anybody who doesn't think we need deep spending cuts is living in cloud cuckoo. Our present spending levels are unsustainable.

 

Not one of our major parties is being honest and the public are not prepared to accept any cuts in living standards despite the obvious hole we're in. We are just passing the debt down to future generations.

 

Government spending is 50% higher in real terms than it was 10 years ago, the cut in expenditure in 2011-12 is just 1.5% of GDP.

 

I read an article that chilled me to the bone. Our debt is at about 75 per cent of GDP. But if public sector pension liabilities are included, the private finance initiative is included and the guarantees given to the banking sector were ever called upon, it would rise to more than 240 per cent.

 

It's Skate economics. Our political leaders are the Peter Storrie's, never telling us the truth and and carrying on spending someone elses money (ours).And the public are the Blue Few, putting our head in the sand and trying to convince ourselves that it really is sustainable.

 

All we have to do is make sure everybody and i mean everybody ( footballers, corporations, tv stars, business men, royalty, The aristocracy and anyone else you can think of ) Pays the correct amount of tax on what they earn! Nada mas.

[Ex Lion Tamer]

Miliband is actually doing a decent job now, he is making the right policy choices and putting the tories under pressure on most big issues when they arise. He battered Cameron in PMQs this week.

 

The problem remains in communicating to the electorate and the fact he is seen as a geek, and he may never entirely overcome that, but he is starting to look more confident. I could certainly see him winning the election.

[Saintandy666]

Miliband is actually doing a decent job now, he is making the right policy choices and putting the tories under pressure on most big issues when they arise. He battered Cameron in PMQs this week.

 

The problem remains in communicating to the electorate and the fact he is seen as a geek, and he may never entirely overcome that, but he is starting to look more confident. I could certainly see him winning the election.

 

Hollande was seen as a bit of a geek supposedly and he is President of France now, so anything can happen.

[dune]

A perfect illustration of where savings can be made if pressure is applied to the bloated public sector:

 

Holidaymakers heading abroad after the summer, or those who won't need their passport for a few months, should consider waiting till September if they need to renew it as the fee will drop.

 

The price drop comes after a restructuring programme within the Identity and Passport Service made savings of £40 million in the last financial year.

 

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/travel/2012/07/passport-fees-dropping-this-autumn

[dune]

Miliband is actually doing a decent job now, he is making the right policy choices and putting the tories under pressure on most big issues when they arise. He battered Cameron in PMQs this week.

 

The problem remains in communicating to the electorate and the fact he is seen as a geek, and he may never entirely overcome that, but he is starting to look more confident. I could certainly see him winning the election.

 

What policies? What cuts?

[scotty]

Have you ever considered that some people want nation states to be in perpetual debt? The mechanism by which the Federal Reserve puts money into the economy means that the US can never repay its debt. Debt keeps everyone in line.

 

 

What do you suppose is happening in the eurozone right now? We are at war, and nobody seems to realise it.

[Ex Lion Tamer]

What policies? What cuts?

 

It's the right strategy not to come out with a whole range of policies at this stage, as they'll seem old by the time of the election and the best ones will get taken by the government. But for example, calling for a judicial inquiry into the banks was the right one even though it would probably have been embarrassing for labour, as it showed how the tories are in the pocket of the banks.

 

Labour had said all along that cuts are necessary, but these ones go too far and too fast. Unfortunately the paradox of Keynesian economics is proving difficult to explain to the electorate.

[Lord Duckhunter]

 

Labour had said all along that cuts are necessary, but these ones go too far and too fast. Unfortunately the paradox of Keynesian economics is proving difficult to explain to the electorate.

 

"TOO FAR and too fast" is a meaningless Labour slogan. Andrew Neil monstered Rachel Reeves over this on The Daily Politics.

 

His question "if 1.5% of GDP is too far, what is the right %." All she did was waffle and bluster. He also pointed out that if they acceptted cuts were necessary, why have they oppossed every cut so far in this parliament including cuts to family benefit for millionaires.

[Ex Lion Tamer]

"TOO FAR and too fast" is a meaningless Labour slogan. Andrew Neil monstered Rachel Reeves over this on The Daily Politics.

 

His question "if 1.5% of GDP is too far, what is the right %." All she did was waffle and bluster. He also pointed out that if they acceptted cuts were necessary, why have they oppossed every cut so far in this parliament including cuts to family benefit for millionaires.

 

Just because they can't/won't put a figure on it, doesn't mean the slogan is meaningless. It signals their intentions. Anyway, I was responding to the insinuation that labour don't intend to make cuts, when they have said they will repeatedly.

 

The exact extent of cuts isn't really the issue, there's no magic number. It's about what you do with the money you decide to spend -things like a VAT cut (a concrete labour suggestion) would give people money to spend, creating demand in the economy and creating jobs and growth. That's how to reduce benefit spend, raise tax returns and pay down the deficit.

 

I don't know why they have opposed all the cuts and don't have time now to do detailed research. Perhaps because if you believe the government is cutting too much, stopping them in whatever areas you can is worthwhile. Perhaps simply to make trouble for the government - I never said they were perfect. Child benefit is a tricky issue for labour because they believe benefits should be universal - means testing is an expensive business after all.

 

PS Rachel Reeves is something which Osborne and most of the coalition's treasury people are not - a trained economist

[Gambol2K9]

 

It's about what you do with the money you decide to spend -things like a VAT cut (a concrete labour suggestion) would give people money to spend, creating demand in the economy and creating jobs and growth. That's how to reduce benefit spend, raise tax returns and pay down the deficit.

 

It's an economic oddity that cutting VAT very rarely causes an increase in spending and most of the time does little to boost the economy. It seems logical that if people are getting a tax cut then they will have more money to pump back in to the shops, restaurants etc, weirdly though it just doesn't seem to happen.

[Verbal]

It's an economic oddity that cutting VAT very rarely causes an increase in spending and most of the time does little to boost the economy. It seems logical that if people are getting a tax cut then they will have more money to pump back in to the shops, restaurants etc, weirdly though it just doesn't seem to happen.

 

Au contraire! Cuts to VAT are believed by economists to have wide-ranging benefits for the economy.

 

http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/4418

[Ex Lion Tamer]

Fortunately George had started to see the error of his ways:

 

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/whisper-it-osborne-has-embraced-keynesianism

[Ex Lion Tamer]

*has!

[Jonnyboy]

They are starting to backtrack on all their economic policies without admitting it.

[alpine_saint]

According to one of the nationals today, the government now think austerity measures, previously planned until 2015, will need to be continued until 2020.

 

Dark times we live in

[Lord Duckhunter]

Fortunately George had started to see the error of his ways:

 

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/whisper-it-osborne-has-embraced-keynesianism

 

It's the plan B, that Labour said he didn't have.

[pap]

According to one of the nationals today, the government now think austerity measures, previously planned until 2015, will need to be continued until 2020.

 

Dark times we live in

 

Load of crap if you ask me. The only reason we're living in dark times is because our priorities are wrong.

[badgerx16]

It's the plan B, that Labour said he didn't have.

 

It's the Plan B that Georgie said he didn't need.

Edited 19 July, 2012 by badgerx16

[Lord Duckhunter]

It's the Plan B the Georgie said he didn't need.

 

He would have had one, just wasn't sensible to announce you have one.

 

As Alistar Darling said in an interview with the Economist, "If you announce a plan but also say you have a stand-by plan, you might as well throw your first plan away."

[buctootim]

"If you announce a plan but also say you have a stand-by plan, you might as well throw your first plan away."

 

tbf he would have been better off throwing the first plan away.

[Lord Duckhunter]

tbf he would have been better off throwing the first plan away.

 

I disagree.

 

He needed to gain the confidence of the markets. By paying of 25% of the deficit and sticking to a plan, he’s kept interest rates low. He’s now using those low rates to inject some stimulus into the economy.

[buctootim]

I disagree.

 

He needed to gain the confidence of the markets. By paying of 25% of the deficit and sticking to a plan, he’s kept interest rates low. He’s now using those low rates to inject some stimulus into the economy.

 

I agree he needed to cut intitally to regain confidence of the markets. The worst problem for the UK economy now though is loss of confidence by consumers and company's thinking about making investments. People deferring spending they can afford but aren't making because they are scared for the future is holding the economy back more than budget cuts. Its time to be telling people that now is a good time to invest and spend, not that we are so screwed that austerity will need to last till 2020.

Edited 19 July, 2012 by buctootim

[Fuengirola Saint]

It's the plan B, that Labour said he didn't have.

 

 

 

It's the plan B the he said he didn't need ;-)