Jump to content

Is George Osbourne trying to get sacked?


Recommended Posts

It dramatically increased in 2008-9 because of the global financial crisis.

 

Osborne is running a deficit at almost quadruple what we had in 2007 before the crisis hit.

 

Any deficit reduction Osborne has achieved is down to stealing from future generations:

 

1. Slashing capital expenditure causing a backlog of infrastructure work that will be pushed down the line into future years.

 

2. Taking gilt interest on QE money. Interest that will have to be paid back.

 

3. Stealing the assets of the Royal Mail pension scheme, meaning that all Royal Mail pensions now have to be funded forever by the tax payer.

 

4. Keeping spending off the balance sheet by signing off hundreds of new PFI deals.

 

He's not a safe pair of hands. He's a disaster for this country. At least on a par with Brown, maybe even worse.

 

 

Well at least you agree that Labour was running a huge deficit that built up our £1.3 trillion in debt and dropped us into the abyss.

 

Did you expect that Osbourne could reverse the overspend in an instant.

 

It takes longer to repair something than it takes to break it in the first place. This isn't helped by the country having to pay 10% of tax revenue to pay interest on the inherited debt before they can think about spending anything getting us out of Brown's black hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well at least you agree that Labour was running a huge deficit that built up our £1.3 trillion in debt and dropped us into the abyss.

 

Did you expect that Osbourne could reverse the overspend in an instant.

 

It takes longer to repair something than it takes to break it in the first place. This isn't helped by the country having to pay 10% of tax revenue to pay interest on the inherited debt before they can think about spending anything getting us out of Brown's black hole.

 

Nope. Osborne has taken it to 1.3 trillion. Osborne inherited 900bn.

 

Please get the basic facts correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oddly enough the system of what had been allowable on MPs expenses was set up under the tenure of Michael Martin a decade ago. I know that some folks like to get outraged about these things but a couple of years back every single MP had his/her expenses claims fully scrutinized. The only one found to be making fraudulent claims were prosecuted and sent to jail. Well. All but one as she claimed ill health and was spared a prison sentence.

 

Perhaps you will save me the trouble and list the names of the jailbirds.

 

In 2010 of course the system of expenses was fully overhauled, and what was allowable altered. It might be hard to swallow but it is difficult to single out any individual who was operating fully within the rules they were given when they took up the job. It is a different matter for those who broke the rules.

 

So when George Osbourne says the welfare system is in need of an overhaul (on the back of Phillpott) he is merely pointing out what was said about MPs expenses, which were subsequently overhauled.

 

You can say that again :rant:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. Osborne has taken it to 1.3 trillion. Osborne inherited 900bn.

 

Please get the basic facts correct.

That's pretty much what I said, and it doesn't alter the fact of who caused the mess in the first place, or do you blame the firebrigade for not putting the fire out quickly enough rather than Phillpott for lighting it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. Osborne has taken it to 1.3 trillion. Osborne inherited 900bn.

 

Please get the basic facts correct.

 

The reality is that if someone’s lifestyle is fuelled by excessive debt and spending, they have to take a significant reduction in lifestyle just to stop increasing the debt, and we haven’t seen that significant reduction in lifestyle, we couldn’t afford to live the way we were living before the crisis and we can’t afford to live the way we are living now. We are simply spending more than we can afford to spend, and that spending as to slow down, which this government is doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anti-social behaviour doesn't have to be narrowly defined in law.

 

You would think that a member of a Government that has just forced the best part of a million people off incapacity benefit, might leave a parking space for the ones that remain.

 

Of course, we could equally conclude that his behaviour is entirely to be expected because he's a tosser.

 

Cleary there will now be too many disabled parking bays for the rest, so it makes sense to use them. :D

 

MrSmith you are so predicable with your off the cuff remarks. Do you not know that people on incapacity benefit or the new employment and support allowance do not get a blue badge and therefore it doesn’t matter how many come off those benefits it will make no difference to the amount of blue badge holders and the amount of disabled parking spaces.

 

You can get a badge if:

you receive the higher rate of the mobility component of Disability Living Allowance

 

you are registered blind

 

you receive a War Pensioner's Mobility Supplement

 

you have a permanent and substantial disability which means you cannot walk, or have very considerable difficulty walking - in this case your doctor may be asked to answer a series of questions to confirm your eligibility for a badge

 

you drive a vehicle regularly, have a severe disability in both arms and are unable to operate, or have considerable difficulty operating, all or some types of parking meter

 

children under the age of two, if they have a disability due to a medical condition and need to travel with bulky equipment, or to be close to a vehicle for emergency medical treatment, may be eligible for a badge

 

Take you blinkers off and find yourself an outdoor activity well away from a computer (sky diving or base jumping would be good):loopy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MrSmith you are so predicable with your off the cuff remarks. Do you not know that people on incapacity benefit or the new employment and support allowance do not get a blue badge and therefore it doesn’t matter how many come off those benefits it will make no difference to the amount of blue badge holders and the amount of disabled parking spaces.

 

You can get a badge if:

you receive the higher rate of the mobility component of Disability Living Allowance

 

you are registered blind

 

you receive a War Pensioner's Mobility Supplement

 

you have a permanent and substantial disability which means you cannot walk, or have very considerable difficulty walking - in this case your doctor may be asked to answer a series of questions to confirm your eligibility for a badge

 

you drive a vehicle regularly, have a severe disability in both arms and are unable to operate, or have considerable difficulty operating, all or some types of parking meter

 

children under the age of two, if they have a disability due to a medical condition and need to travel with bulky equipment, or to be close to a vehicle for emergency medical treatment, may be eligible for a badge

 

Take you blinkers off and find yourself an outdoor activity well away from a computer (sky diving or base jumping would be good):loopy:

 

Calm down dear, he was just joking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reality is that if someone’s lifestyle is fuelled by excessive debt and spending, they have to take a significant reduction in lifestyle just to stop increasing the debt, and we haven’t seen that significant reduction in lifestyle, we couldn’t afford to live the way we were living before the crisis and we can’t afford to live the way we are living now. We are simply spending more than we can afford to spend, and that spending as to slow down, which this government is doing.

 

But spending isn't slowing down. At best the deficit has corrected downwards after a freak spike in 2008-9 and has reached a level of 120bn per year (when one-off thefts from future generations are not included in the creative accounting).

 

120bn a year is almost QUADRUPLE the deficit in 2007.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone not agree that people like Philpott should not have had their lifestyle paid for by the state for all these years? All Osbourne has suggested is debate. The welfare state is 65 years old. It cannot be the same today as it was then. Society has changed so much .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But spending isn't slowing down. At best the deficit has corrected downwards after a freak spike in 2008-9 and has reached a level of 120bn per year (when one-off thefts from future generations are not included in the creative accounting).

 

120bn a year is almost QUADRUPLE the deficit in 2007.

 

Train crashes take a lot of clearing up. What a pity the one eyed moron ran our train so far off the rails.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.