Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Ed Miliband will destroy Britain; David Cameron warns the electorate of Labour danger
Topic Started: Oct 18 2014, 11:37 PM (2,545 Views)
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
Writing in The Sunday Telegraph, David Cameron, flushed with his success at scaring the Scottish about Alex Salmond, declares that Britain’s prosperity is at stake in the most important election “for a generation”. He warns today that "Mortgages will rise, businesses will be crushed and the international markets will take fright if Ed Miliband wins power in the general election in 200 days’ time."
The Sunday Telegraph
Readers of The Sunday Telegraph might be frightened away from supporting New Labour after reading this.
Edited by Heinrich, Oct 18 2014, 11:38 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]

Not the most flattering photo of the PM - what's going on?
It's not like the Telegraph not to have library pictures that show every Tory minister in the best possible light.

As it is they are 'crying wolf' again. "We would lose our AAA rating if Labour got in" - well we lost it anyway.
"Labour will not cut deep enough, will take too long to balance the books" - well we are still on course to take longer.
"Labour will borrow more, will increase the debt mountain - our grandchildren will be left to pay it off". This government has borrowed more (than did Labour), has saddled our grandchildren with a bigger debt mountain, and has not made any headway on deficit reduction to boast of. The poorest record on deficit reduction of all our major competitors.

The fear is that these incompetents get another go at making things worse (as they have).








Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
johnofgwent
Member Avatar
It .. It is GREEN !!
[ *  *  *  * ]
Heinrich
Oct 18 2014, 11:37 PM
Readers of The Sunday Telegraph might be frightened away from supporting New Labour after reading this.
An old joke, retold in the script of "A Conflict of Interest" the twelfth episode of the BBC comedy series Yes, Prime Minister first broadcast 31 December 1987.

Hacker: .... I know exactly who reads the papers:

The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country;
The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country;
The Times is read by people who actually do run the country;
The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country;
The Financial Times is read by people who own the country;
The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country;
and The Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.

Sir Humphrey: Prime Minister, what about the people who read The Sun?

Bernard: Sun readers don't care who runs the country, as long as she's got big tits.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
johnofgwent
Member Avatar
It .. It is GREEN !!
[ *  *  *  * ]
"Mortgages will rise, businesses will be crushed and the international markets will take fright"

It may have escaped your notice Heinrich but interest rates in Britain are doomed to rise soon regardless of who gets in, businesses have already been crushed and international markets will do their own thing regardless ...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stan Still
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Yes they will
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
Seems we did make a big mistake in not slashing the deficit within 5 years, now we have growth based on low incomes of those taken out of taxation. So either borrowing continues to rise and/or taxes increase or Slasher is allowed to get on with the job. Why did anyone believe that growth would be based on higher value added? Not as if our surpluses of Labour all have technology degrees is it, more like difficulties with plain English. Note industry has been struggling since before 2008 to fill jobs technologists.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Oct 19 2014, 06:28 AM
Seems we did make a big mistake in not slashing the deficit within 5 years,
RJD you keep on making that comment. The consequences of the current pace of cutting the deficit has had dire and all to often deadly consequences for the poorest and most vulnerable people in the country. Can you please explain what you would have cut that would not have had far worse consequences.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Oct 19 2014, 06:28 AM
Seems we did make a big mistake in not slashing the deficit within 5 years,
RJD you keep on making that comment. The consequences of the current pace of cutting the deficit has had dire and all to often deadly consequences for the poorest and most vulnerable people in the country. Can you please explain what you would have cut that would not have had far worse consequences.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stan Still
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
And you keep ignoring the fact that the sooner the nation pays off its debts the better and cheaper it is.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lewis
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Oct 18 2014, 11:55 PM
Not the most flattering photo of the PM - what's going on?
It's not like the Telegraph not to have library pictures that show every Tory minister in the best possible light.

As it is they are 'crying wolf' again. "We would lose our AAA rating if Labour got in" - well we lost it anyway.
"Labour will not cut deep enough, will take too long to balance the books" - well we are still on course to take longer.
"Labour will borrow more, will increase the debt mountain - our grandchildren will be left to pay it off". This government has borrowed more (than did Labour), has saddled our grandchildren with a bigger debt mountain, and has not made any headway on deficit reduction to boast of. The poorest record on deficit reduction of all our major competitors.

The fear is that these incompetents get another go at making things worse (as they have).








Agree entirely. Labour couldn't possibly destroy a country that has already been wrecked by these incompetent Tory buffoons.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lewis
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Stan Still
Oct 19 2014, 07:44 AM
And you keep ignoring the fact that the sooner the nation pays off its debts the better and cheaper it is.
The nations debt has increased since the incompetents gained power and this is despite imposing cuts that affect the poorest in society the most. What about collecting the billions of pounds owed in unpaid taxes that the incompetents backers owe. The so-called deficit could be cleared pronto if that money was made available.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stan Still
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Lewis
Oct 19 2014, 07:55 AM
Stan Still
Oct 19 2014, 07:44 AM
And you keep ignoring the fact that the sooner the nation pays off its debts the better and cheaper it is.
The nations debt has increased since the incompetents gained power and this is despite imposing cuts that affect the poorest in society the most. What about collecting the billions of pounds owed in unpaid taxes that the incompetents backers owe. The so-called deficit could be cleared pronto if that money was made available.
Yes and the sooner we pay them off the better and cheaper it will be, unfortunately the kitty was empty when Labour left office they spent too much and nothing was left by the left :'( for a rainy day.

They bailed out the banks as well not the present Government.

As for getting taxes owed don't have a problem with that at all but as said in here many time you have to find it first then get it legally.

Enter PS to tell us where it all is and how the French do it again and again, Labour did not do it.

At least the Coalition is trying to legislate to make it more difficult for evaders and tightening up on avoidance, but even when and if that is accomplished there is a limit to the amount of taxes any Government can impose without damaging the economy
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Stan Still
Oct 19 2014, 08:09 AM
.

Enter PS to tell us where it all is and how the French do it again and again, Labour did not do it.

New Labour were not handed the offshore bank account numbers and home addresses in Britain of the account holders of accounts of the evaded tax.

George Osborne was handed them on a platter (well two DVDs) and has done precisely nothing with the information. America, Germany and France given similar information about their own nationals has taken action and recovered billions and jailed tax evaders.
Your comments about the difficulties of collection are frankly spurious.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stan Still
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Oct 19 2014, 08:18 AM
Stan Still
Oct 19 2014, 08:09 AM
.

Enter PS to tell us where it all is and how the French do it again and again, Labour did not do it.

New Labour were not handed the offshore bank account numbers and home addresses in Britain of the account holders of accounts of the evaded tax.

George Osborne was handed them on a platter (well two DVDs) and has done precisely nothing with the information. America, Germany and France given similar information about their own nationals has taken action and recovered billions and jailed tax evaders.
Your comments about the difficulties of collection are frankly spurious.
Heard it all before tax evasion has been going on for years and never been addressed properly by any Government, and with the screw ups and mistakes HMRC continually make how accurate are their records.

Perhaps that is why we are taking longer having to make sure the information given is accurate and the evidence to prove each case before they act on it is legally justified and can stand up to scrutiny, innocent until proven guilty and all that even for suspected tax evaders, and until convicted that is all they are suspects.

In an ideal world it would be done overnight and all tax evasions stopped and money owed reclaimed if not spent or moved where we cannot get at it, but we don't live in an idea world, get used to it.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Stan Still
Oct 19 2014, 08:40 AM
Heard it all before tax evasion has been going on for years and never been addressed properly by any Government,
Governments previous to this one did not have the information they needed handed to them on a platter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
johnofgwent
Oct 19 2014, 03:24 AM
"Mortgages will rise, businesses will be crushed and the international markets will take fright"

It may have escaped your notice Heinrich but interest rates in Britain are doomed to rise soon regardless of who gets in, businesses have already been crushed and international markets will do their own thing regardless ...
^ This.


All of things that Cameron claims will happen under Miliband have already happened under Cameron.

All The Best
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Oct 19 2014, 08:18 AM
Stan Still
Oct 19 2014, 08:09 AM
.

Enter PS to tell us where it all is and how the French do it again and again, Labour did not do it.

New Labour were not handed the offshore bank account numbers and home addresses in Britain of the account holders of accounts of the evaded tax.

George Osborne was handed them on a platter (well two DVDs) and has done precisely nothing with the information. America, Germany and France given similar information about their own nationals has taken action and recovered billions and jailed tax evaders.
Your comments about the difficulties of collection are frankly spurious.
Oh dear  ::)

We did that myth at the old site. It wasn't true then and it isn't any more true for repeating it here.

Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Lewis
Oct 19 2014, 07:51 AM
Affa
Oct 18 2014, 11:55 PM
Not the most flattering photo of the PM - what's going on?
It's not like the Telegraph not to have library pictures that show every Tory minister in the best possible light.

As it is they are 'crying wolf' again. "We would lose our AAA rating if Labour got in" - well we lost it anyway.
"Labour will not cut deep enough, will take too long to balance the books" - well we are still on course to take longer.
"Labour will borrow more, will increase the debt mountain - our grandchildren will be left to pay it off". This government has borrowed more (than did Labour), has saddled our grandchildren with a bigger debt mountain, and has not made any headway on deficit reduction to boast of. The poorest record on deficit reduction of all our major competitors.

The fear is that these incompetents get another go at making things worse (as they have).








Agree entirely. Labour couldn't possibly destroy a country that has already been wrecked by these incompetent Tory buffoons.
Would you care to take a bet on it.?

In France they have followed the more left wing views of the Labour party, and they are in a total social and financial mess, that is rapidly getting worse.

The bottom line is always
'Can we afford it or should we live within our means, and would different policies make it worse or better in the long run.
I think the answers are self evident.

To make changes Labour would have to tax more and spend more and that has been tried before and failed.
There is no panacea for our current problems, and we need to continue to make the hard choices and tighten our belts.

As for the NHS, we need another 30 Billion pounds to be spent by 2020 to maintain it at its current leveland by current means.and I read that those who make the biggest demands, the retired elderly, are set to double in numbers by 2030. How do we finance and resolve that problem alone?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 19 2014, 10:21 AM


We did that myth at the old site.

It is not a myth, the whistleblowers information has had results in every country that was given it, except Britain.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Stan Still
Oct 19 2014, 07:44 AM
And you keep ignoring the fact that the sooner the nation pays off its debts the better and cheaper it is.
Do they understand just how much a year it takes from taxpayers money just to service the current debt?
Its like a mortguage around ones neck, pay it off and no more interest and more in ones pocket to spemd on other things
Borrow more and pay more interest ,and prolong the period of repayment, with more paid in interest, and possibley go bankrupt when there is a drop in ones finances.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
johnofgwent
Oct 19 2014, 03:20 AM
Heinrich
Oct 18 2014, 11:37 PM
Readers of The Sunday Telegraph might be frightened away from supporting New Labour after reading this.
An old joke, retold in the script of "A Conflict of Interest" the twelfth episode of the BBC comedy series Yes, Prime Minister first broadcast 31 December 1987. ...
Well, I think it's a good joke still.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Oct 19 2014, 10:31 AM
Steve K
Oct 19 2014, 10:21 AM


We did that myth at the old site.

It is not a myth, the whistleblowers information has had results in every country that was given it, except Britain.
And now you are moving the goal posts

from "George Osborne was handed them on a platter (well two DVDs) and has done precisely nothing with the information"

to an assertion of no results. Please provide a reference to back that up
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 19 2014, 11:16 AM
Please provide a reference to back that up
HMRC themselves. ONLY £1.5 billion recovered in the last two years. Pathetic.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/345370/140819_Tackling_offshore_tax_evasion_-_A_new_criminal_offence.pdf

Publication date: 19 August 2014

£1.5 billion has been recovered from offshore tax evaders over the past two years
Edited by papasmurf, Oct 19 2014, 11:21 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Oct 19 2014, 11:17 AM
Steve K
Oct 19 2014, 11:16 AM
Please provide a reference to back that up
HMRC themselves. ONLY £1.5 billion recovered in the last two years. Pathetic.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/345370/140819_Tackling_offshore_tax_evasion_-_A_new_criminal_offence.pdf

Publication date: 19 August 2014

£1.5 billion has been recovered from offshore tax evaders over the past two years
Can you not see why we get frustrated PS

Original assertion by you: "has done nothing"

Challenged

No PS apology but a moved goalpost to "no results"

Challenged

No PS apology but "only £1.5Billion"


You could have avoided a lot of grief by just reading your own posts in This Thread where your own reply #8 shows there has been at least one prosecution.

And I really was not ever likely to forget my reply 89 in This Thread where I had to spell out in Janet and John terms the fallacies in your base assumptions


Edited by Steve K, Oct 19 2014, 11:57 AM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Alberich
Member Avatar
Alberich
[ *  *  * ]
Macro-economics is fiendishly difficult to understand; even by those who profess some expertise. And as a tyro in this field, I cannot help but worry that the western nations without exception have been living way beyond their means for decades now. The level of debt owed by them all is in reality unpayable, and they keep on borrowing, year on year, thus increasing the annual interest bill. Not only that, but when the banks were on the verge of collapse, they resorted to the simple expedient of simply printing more money...and yet more...and on and on, a la Weimar.

I just wonder how long we can juggle the ball and keep it in the air, without it crashing to the ground in an almighty thud. But what do I know?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 19 2014, 11:56 AM
Can you not see why we get frustrated PS

Original assertion by you: "has done nothing"

Challenged

No PS apology but a moved goalpost to "no results"

Challenged

No PS apology but "only £1.5Billion"


You could have avoided a lot of grief by just reading your own posts in This Thread where your own reply #8 shows there has been at least one prosecution.

And I really was not ever likely to forget my reply 89 in This Thread where I had to spell out in Janet and John terms the fallacies in your base assumptions


I have nothing to apologise for. ONLY £1.5 billion recovered in two years, in relation to the size of the problem that is nothing.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HIGHWAY
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Oct 19 2014, 12:27 PM
Steve K
Oct 19 2014, 11:56 AM
Can you not see why we get frustrated PS

Original assertion by you: "has done nothing"

Challenged

No PS apology but a moved goalpost to "no results"

Challenged

No PS apology but "only £1.5Billion"


You could have avoided a lot of grief by just reading your own posts in This Thread where your own reply #8 shows there has been at least one prosecution.

And I really was not ever likely to forget my reply 89 in This Thread where I had to spell out in Janet and John terms the fallacies in your base assumptions


I have nothing to apologise for. ONLY £1.5 billion recovered in two years, in relation to the size of the problem that is nothing.
You should apologise for the huge move in goalposts,but seems everyone on here is used to it
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Oct 19 2014, 12:27 PM
I have nothing to apologise for. ONLY £1.5 billion recovered in two years, in relation to the size of the problem that is nothing.
You posted false assertions, assertions your previous posts show you knew to be false and you think you have nothing to apologise for. If you cannot or will not see that that discredits everything you post and every cause you align with then what's left to be said?




Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tytoalba
Oct 19 2014, 10:27 AM


In France they have followed the more left wing views of the Labour party, and they are in a total social and financial mess, that is rapidly getting worse.

The bottom line is always
'Can we afford it or should we live within our means, and would different policies make it worse or better in the long run.
I think the answers are self evident.

To make changes Labour would have to tax more and spend more and that has been tried before and failed.
There is no panacea for our current problems, and we need to continue to make the hard choices and tighten our belts.

As for the NHS, we need another 30 Billion pounds to be spent by 2020 to maintain it at its current leveland by current means.and I read that those who make the biggest demands, the retired elderly, are set to double in numbers by 2030. How do we finance and resolve that problem alone?

France is up against the Corporate Empire. These can and will do what they require to ensure Hollande's government fails. It will not be because Hollande is wrong, it will be because Corporate Business is greedy and has more sway over the French economy than does the Parlement français.

'Live within our means' ...... "self evident" ..... as one of the wealthiest/richest countries I'd argue that our 'means' are pretty substantial. That to me is "self evident".

"Tax & Spend" has, as you say, been tried before. None more so than the Thatcher Government, but ran a close second by the John Major government (who ran a deficit of over 7% GDP for much of his term as PM).
Mrs T does however hold the record for having the heaviest tax burden - odd that when her whole privatisation drive was made on the premis that taxes would fall - they increased.


You are worried about the NHS and how much it is costing, how much it will cost in the future - The Federal bill (American tax payers) for Health care expenditure is more than double what you and I pay (for a Universal service - not so in the US). I'd be very wary of someone who wants to introduce an American style Health Service here ..... the Conservative Party.

Your comments exhibit the same Tory dogma I've been hearing for forty years .... Privatisation didn't deliver the gains it was told it would - does that not convince you at all that such dogma is mistaken?




Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
johnofgwent
Member Avatar
It .. It is GREEN !!
[ *  *  *  * ]
Stan Still
Oct 19 2014, 07:44 AM
And you keep ignoring the fact that the sooner the nation pays off its debts the better and cheaper it is.
yes, but some of us believe it would be good if at least some of the nation remained at the end to enjoy the promised land
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 19 2014, 12:39 PM
You posted false assertions, assertions your previous posts show you knew to be false and you think you have nothing to apologise for.

I have done no such thing. I am not responsible for people on this forum who do not keep up with news and current affairs.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
somersetli
Member Avatar
somersetli
[ *  *  * ]
You have to wonder why a nation in so much crippling debt can give so much in foreign aid, fight an air war against ISIS in Iraq, and now send a huge ship and personnel to West Africa to combat Ebola.
I am not saying these things should not be done, but I just wonder how they can be done by a debt ridden country that is struggling to finance it's own welfare.
One thing for sure...........you couldn't run your own household budget on those lines!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
somersetli
Oct 19 2014, 01:18 PM
You have to wonder why a nation in so much crippling debt can give so much in foreign aid, fight an air war against ISIS in Iraq, and now send a huge ship and personnel to West Africa to combat Ebola.
I am not saying these things should not be done, but I just wonder how they can be done by a debt ridden country that is struggling to finance it's own welfare.
One thing for sure...........you couldn't run your own household budget on those lines!

The simple explanation is that "reports of the debts have been greatly exaggerated"

Instead of being told repeatedly of how much the country is in debt, owes, why not hear how much money it is owed to it, is collecting in from those debts the others have?

Our Own government is paying out £50bn+ pa in interest charges - who to?

Make no mistake - there's plenty of money lying around, £395bn of it in QE ....... the interest/earnings from which THIS Chancellor now claims as Treasury income (from the BoE).

Smoke & Mirrors ....... nothing is as it appears, and certainly nothing is as we are told it is.







Edited by Affa, Oct 19 2014, 01:49 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Oct 19 2014, 01:17 PM
Steve K
Oct 19 2014, 12:39 PM
You posted false assertions, assertions your previous posts show you knew to be false and you think you have nothing to apologise for.

I have done no such thing. I am not responsible for people on this forum who do not keep up with news and current affairs.


Oh dear how quickly you hope we'll forget

papasmurf
Oct 19 2014, 08:18 AM
New Labour were not handed the offshore bank account numbers and home addresses in Britain of the account holders of accounts of the evaded tax.

George Osborne was handed them on a platter (well two DVDs) and has done precisely nothing with the information. . ..
aBig Fat Lie as you own link proved


Edited by Steve K, Oct 19 2014, 02:29 PM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Oct 19 2014, 07:41 AM
RJD
Oct 19 2014, 06:28 AM
Seems we did make a big mistake in not slashing the deficit within 5 years,
RJD you keep on making that comment. The consequences of the current pace of cutting the deficit has had dire and all to often deadly consequences for the poorest and most vulnerable people in the country. Can you please explain what you would have cut that would not have had far worse consequences.
Well you too can answer such a question as it comes down to priorities. Are you claiming that every Penny spent by the State is only to the benefit of the poorest in the land? Are you claiming that it is morally right to design welfare systems that discourage the fit and healthy from working? As for these huge departments of State do you not wonder why, as a full member of the EU, why we spend so much with Vince Cable and his DTI or whatever they call it this week. Same goes for the legions of QUANGOs. I know a woman, with a PhD in medicine who gave up research and now receives around £200,000 per annum from sitting on three QUANGOs and she takes zero responsibility for anything. She was previously,in the early eighties, earning less than £30,000 as an academic at a University. Why is it we can expand State expenditure but seemingly are incapable of reducing it?
I recall the days of absolute poverty and we did not die from starvation or hypothermia, in fact Adolphus only managed, in 5 years,to kill off less than 450,000 of us,military plus civilian plus commonwealth. So instead of waving your shroud why not look where you think the knifepoint best fall as fall it inevitably will.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Oct 20 2014, 07:26 AM
Are you claiming that it is morally right to design welfare systems that discourage the fit and healthy from working?
No I would not claim that RJD, but neither is it moral to declare seriously ill, and very disabled people "fit for work" as a quite deliberate policy.
Neither is it moral to state disabled and long term people will be helped into work, when the statement is a blatant lie, and all that has been done is to park 95% of them on JobSeekers Allowance with a lot less money to try and exist on.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
scorpio
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
somersetli
Oct 19 2014, 01:18 PM
You have to wonder why a nation in so much crippling debt can give so much in foreign aid, fight an air war against ISIS in Iraq, and now send a huge ship and personnel to West Africa to combat Ebola.
I am not saying these things should not be done, but I just wonder how they can be done by a debt ridden country that is struggling to finance it's own welfare.
One thing for sure...........you couldn't run your own household budget on those lines!
Not sure about foreign aid, but I think in most situations the aid would be given for something in return. Favourable access for trade, for example.

The air personnel in Iraq, and the naval personnel in West Africa, are paid, wherever in the world, that they are located, and the aircraft if not flying in Iraq, are flying in the UK. That is part of the military budget. The extra cost is in the munitions.
Edited by scorpio, Oct 20 2014, 08:27 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Oct 19 2014, 12:47 PM
Tytoalba
Oct 19 2014, 10:27 AM


In France they have followed the more left wing views of the Labour party, and they are in a total social and financial mess, that is rapidly getting worse.

The bottom line is always
'Can we afford it or should we live within our means, and would different policies make it worse or better in the long run.
I think the answers are self evident.

To make changes Labour would have to tax more and spend more and that has been tried before and failed.
There is no panacea for our current problems, and we need to continue to make the hard choices and tighten our belts.

As for the NHS, we need another 30 Billion pounds to be spent by 2020 to maintain it at its current leveland by current means.and I read that those who make the biggest demands, the retired elderly, are set to double in numbers by 2030. How do we finance and resolve that problem alone?

France is up against the Corporate Empire. These can and will do what they require to ensure Hollande's government fails. It will not be because Hollande is wrong, it will be because Corporate Business is greedy and has more sway over the French economy than does the Parlement français.

'Live within our means' ...... "self evident" ..... as one of the wealthiest/richest countries I'd argue that our 'means' are pretty substantial. That to me is "self evident".

"Tax & Spend" has, as you say, been tried before. None more so than the Thatcher Government, but ran a close second by the John Major government (who ran a deficit of over 7% GDP for much of his term as PM).
Mrs T does however hold the record for having the heaviest tax burden - odd that when her whole privatisation drive was made on the premis that taxes would fall - they increased.


You are worried about the NHS and how much it is costing, how much it will cost in the future - The Federal bill (American tax payers) for Health care expenditure is more than double what you and I pay (for a Universal service - not so in the US). I'd be very wary of someone who wants to introduce an American style Health Service here ..... the Conservative Party.

Your comments exhibit the same Tory dogma I've been hearing for forty years .... Privatisation didn't deliver the gains it was told it would - does that not convince you at all that such dogma is mistaken?




Your the sort of person AFFA that would stand on the deck of the Titanic, whilst it was sinking and ciam it wouldnt sink if only things were done differently.
You have a blame mentality but only directed to one party. The fact is that the NHS is sinking, and no party is going to stop the leak,just by trying to plug it with more and more taxpayers money The old system needed change for that was failing as well.
Only with an honest discussion on the issues,and an honest approach to the needed solutions, by all paries acting in concert. The political adversity and blame game is solving nothing, anmd just undermis our confidence in a necessery service of need.
My view of the matter is based on facts as we know them to be, not on some dream scenario based on socialist idealism that cannot be sustained.
The bottom line is that it is costing more year on year to run , the demands for its services are growing just as the population is growing {73 million by 2030} the numbers of older people is growing as they live longer. and they do require the most from the NHS and GP practices and the country just cannot afford it.
At my age I need the NHS, and would want it to be perfect, just to keep me alive,but I cannot expect other younger working taxpayers to pay more and more for all my growing needs.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tytoalba
Oct 20 2014, 10:49 AM
Affa
Oct 19 2014, 12:47 PM
Tytoalba
Oct 19 2014, 10:27 AM


In France they have followed the more left wing views of the Labour party, and they are in a total social and financial mess, that is rapidly getting worse.

The bottom line is always
'Can we afford it or should we live within our means, and would different policies make it worse or better in the long run.
I think the answers are self evident.

To make changes Labour would have to tax more and spend more and that has been tried before and failed.
There is no panacea for our current problems, and we need to continue to make the hard choices and tighten our belts.

As for the NHS, we need another 30 Billion pounds to be spent by 2020 to maintain it at its current leveland by current means.and I read that those who make the biggest demands, the retired elderly, are set to double in numbers by 2030. How do we finance and resolve that problem alone?

France is up against the Corporate Empire. These can and will do what they require to ensure Hollande's government fails. It will not be because Hollande is wrong, it will be because Corporate Business is greedy and has more sway over the French economy than does the Parlement français.

'Live within our means' ...... "self evident" ..... as one of the wealthiest/richest countries I'd argue that our 'means' are pretty substantial. That to me is "self evident".

"Tax & Spend" has, as you say, been tried before. None more so than the Thatcher Government, but ran a close second by the John Major government (who ran a deficit of over 7% GDP for much of his term as PM).
Mrs T does however hold the record for having the heaviest tax burden - odd that when her whole privatisation drive was made on the premis that taxes would fall - they increased.


You are worried about the NHS and how much it is costing, how much it will cost in the future - The Federal bill (American tax payers) for Health care expenditure is more than double what you and I pay (for a Universal service - not so in the US). I'd be very wary of someone who wants to introduce an American style Health Service here ..... the Conservative Party.

Your comments exhibit the same Tory dogma I've been hearing for forty years .... Privatisation didn't deliver the gains it was told it would - does that not convince you at all that such dogma is mistaken?




Your the sort of person AFFA that would stand on the deck of the Titanic, whilst it was sinking and ciam it wouldnt sink if only things were done differently.
You have a blame mentality but only directed to one party. The fact is that the NHS is sinking, and no party is going to stop the leak,just by trying to plug it with more and more taxpayers money The old system needed change for that was failing as well.
Only with an honest discussion on the issues,and an honest approach to the needed solutions, by all paries acting in concert. The political adversity and blame game is solving nothing, anmd just undermis our confidence in a necessery service of need.
My view of the matter is based on facts as we know them to be, not on some dream scenario based on socialist idealism that cannot be sustained.
The bottom line is that it is costing more year on year to run , the demands for its services are growing just as the population is growing {73 million by 2030} the numbers of older people is growing as they live longer. and they do require the most from the NHS and GP practices and the country just cannot afford it.
At my age I need the NHS, and would want it to be perfect, just to keep me alive,but I cannot expect other younger working taxpayers to pay more and more for all my growing needs.
Health costs by country.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_(PPP)_per_capita


ppp should have been PPP
Edited by C-too, Oct 20 2014, 11:59 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
somersetli
Member Avatar
somersetli
[ *  *  * ]
scorpio
Oct 20 2014, 08:26 AM
somersetli
Oct 19 2014, 01:18 PM
You have to wonder why a nation in so much crippling debt can give so much in foreign aid, fight an air war against ISIS in Iraq, and now send a huge ship and personnel to West Africa to combat Ebola.
I am not saying these things should not be done, but I just wonder how they can be done by a debt ridden country that is struggling to finance it's own welfare.
One thing for sure...........you couldn't run your own household budget on those lines!
Not sure about foreign aid, but I think in most situations the aid would be given for something in return. Favourable access for trade, for example.

The air personnel in Iraq, and the naval personnel in West Africa, are paid, wherever in the world, that they are located, and the aircraft if not flying in Iraq, are flying in the UK. That is part of the military budget. The extra cost is in the munitions.
If you read my post again you will see that I did not query the generosity of carrying out these acts, I merely queried how it can be afforded by a country that is trying to balance its finances, it being so much in debt.
You feel that this money would have been spent anyway, so the cost of all this would not amount to any great sum. To me any amount is too much if you are deeply in debt. (ask anyone who has fallen into the grasp of payday loan sharks).

According to the Daily Mirror report 8/10/14, before this ship and personnel were sent to West Africa the UK had already spent "hundreds of millions of pounds" in aid to the region.
Again a report in the Daily Mirror 26/9/14 states that the cost of joining the fight against ISIS could cosy £3 billion, £1 billion of which involved flying sorties and firing 1000 missiles.
These flights, by the way, are flying out of RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus.

Let me repeat, there is nothing wrong with giving aid, but how is it afforded by a country riddled with debt and struggling with internal finance.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply