Why are we in a right mess ?

[Rupert_Baehr]

Forget? Why forget? Lib Dems have been (more) honest about the scale of the problems we face. Perhaps that's why people would rather not vote for them - they'd rather bury their heads in the sand while voting for a party friendly to their vested interests.

 

None of the parties appears willing to talk frankly about the scale of the problem. Your previous post seemed to suggest that the Tories' cuts would be deeper than those of the other parties. You appear now to be suggesting that the Liberals are well aware of the scale of the problem (and I suspect that all 3 have a pretty good idea of how bad things really are) and that they (The Liberals) will act decisively to fix the problem.

 

Are you suggesting that the Lib Dems will cut more deeply than the Conservatives?

 

Short-termism is the name of the game. People can't see into next week let alone the next generation. Why should politicians worry about the long term then?

 

I agree. It's not a new problem either. The only people who seem to adopt long-term policies are the Chinese.

[Treatment]

Short-termism is the name of the game. People can't see into next week let alone the next generation. Why should politicians worry about the long term then?

 

That is true in many walks of life, I often advise companies not to sign some agreements as they may come back to haunt them in ten years time. I can see the looks on their faces which seem to say '' screw that, it won't be my problem in ten years time ''.

 

Poor behaviour.

[spinac]

Are you suggesting that the Lib Dems will cut more deeply than the Conservatives?

 

I was suggesting (hoping) that their response would be more balanced. Rather than continue on a tax and spend route, or cut taxes for the rich and screw the poor, that they would both tackle the tax loopholes for the rich AND address the issue of waste in public services.

 

This is not the time to think that anyone can continue on with the ways of the past.

[jobee]

Forget? Why forget? Lib Dems have been (more) honest about the scale of the problems we face. Perhaps that's why people would rather not vote for them - they'd rather bury their heads in the sand while voting for a party friendly to their vested interests.

 

 

 

Short-termism is the name of the game. People can't see into next week let alone the next generation. Why should politicians worry about the long term then

 

?

 

Vote LibDem, shift em, move on.

[spinac]

? ??? ... generally politicians aren't allowed to think long-term. The electorate are too impatient. I've got a glimmer of hope that the LibDems are a little bit different, not having to answer to the same powerful vested interests. You gotta have hope!

[mossdog]

Not true. They're trying to get rid of a load of us and let private companies run services and re-employ us at a cheaper wage. Many people have been TUPEd and given a raw deal.

Whilst I can sympathize with you,it maybe that lots of us will have to work in the future for a lesser wage to escape the debt we are in, a wage freeze is a mere drop in the ocean,and remember, that a major part of Greece's problem is overspending once again by their largest employer the public sector,so major surgery is needed there....................and here no doubt! Part of the problem is that the worlds most successful economy

China as we speak,employs people doing the same job in the global marketplace as we do here,for a fraction of the salary unions and people demand in this country.Wages and bonuses in the UK have become obscenely bloated in many cases.there are a spectacular amount of people in UK pocketing over a £100 grand a year................for what you may ask,most offer spectacular little value to the economy of Britain some doing less work than people on £10 grand a year.this fiasco needs to get back to reality and quickly.We can no longer afford some of the bloated wages paid to quite a number of professionals in the public sector,the list is endless.The front line services should be the beneficiaries of the savage cuts needed at the upper end!.........and NO-ONE repeat NO_ONE should be ever again rewarded for proven failure.

[Rupert_Baehr]

I was suggesting (hoping) that their response would be more balanced. Rather than continue on a tax and spend route, or cut taxes for the rich and screw the poor, that they would both tackle the tax loopholes for the rich AND address the issue of waste in public services.

 

Unfortunately, although blocking tax loopholes would be desirable, the total revenue gained from that along with efficiency savings is going to be nowhere near enough to eradicate the budget deficit - or even enough to make a significant reduction (unless the politicians know something they aren't telling us.)

 

'Efficiency savings' seem to be the first goal of every new government. No doubt there are some people who sit around doing nothing, but there are also others who are already working at full capacity. Savings made there will merely reduce the standards of service provided - and I suspect that is exactly what is going to happen, irrespective of whoever forms the next government.

 

Whichever party forms the next government, taxes will rise. You can either pay tax on money when you get it or pay tax when you spend it. Labour want to make people (and employers) to pay more taxes on income (and Labour's proposed NI increase will hit the largest number of people.)

 

If a government wants to raise large amounts of tax revenue, the way which optimises the amount raised is to introduce/increase a tax which will be paid by the largest number of people.

 

The Conservatives don't want an NI increase, because it's a 'tax on jobs' and nobody seems prepared to discuss an increase in the base rate of income tax so presumably they will want to increase the taxes people pay when they spend the money.

 

Nobody has ruled out a VAT increase and VAT in the UK is amongst the lowest in Europe.

 

Unfortunately VAT is a tax on private-sector jobs.

 

With no VAT, If I want somebody to dig my garden I will have to pay that person enough money to live on, plus enough money to cover his income tax.

 

If he is registered for VAT, I will have to pay him the money to live on, plus the money to pay his income taxes & NI, plus VAT on the whole lot.

 

If the government sets the VAT level high enough, I'll go out and buy a rototiller and dig the garden myself. I would have to pay VAT on the Rototiller, but I wouldn't be paying VAT on my gardener's income tax and I would only pay the VAT once.

 

The gardener would have to look elsewhere for work.

 

It's a pity that governments don't seem to be aware that VAT on labour is a tax on jobs - particularly when the person paying the VAT has to pay VAT on the income tax and NI the employee will pay.

 

This is not the time to think that anyone can continue on with the ways of the past.

 

I agree. Unfortunately, on one hand people should only buy what they can afford (and reduce the extremely high levels of personal debt) and on the other, they should spend more to stimulate the economy. Which should they do?

[spinac]

It's a balancing act. The country's on the high wire and there's a gale blowing.

 

Closing tax loopholes for large corporations is not the answer alone, but it's got to be done.

 

Efficiency savings and real cuts to services are not the answer alone, but they've got to be made.

 

We need to raise more in taxes and spend less on public services. For the right wing the immediate target is cutting the spending while giving the rich more tax breaks. The left prefer to continue on a tax and spend route. Neither route is the optimum route. Everyone's going to have to pay somehow. We shouldn't be fighting to protect any vested interests, but ask the whole country what they can do to minimise the burden we'll be placing on generations to come.

 

The aim is to spend within our means - that means as an individual, and as a nation.

[jobee]

Because before that we didn't pay any kind of tax at all for public services?

And we still survived.

The same as the idle ones.

[jobee]

I don't think that the Conservatives will keep to their promises.

 

They represent the wealthy and the wealthy are shielded from

the hardship that we are about to endure.

 

They talk the talk because they need votes from ordinary people.

 

If they get in power, they will screw you.

.

.

.

They wont cut the idlers money, there are no jobs to be had.