Tories NOT punishing the unemployed.

[tzijlstra]

What I don't understand is why people are being punished, when the cuts haven't made the slightest bit of difference. Borrowing is up and if the costs are down where is all the extra money going? To pay for MPs' 11%?

 

I presume you are saying this in jest? Or is your sense of scale so warped that you really don't understand this?

 

It seems I was wrong... you weren't jesting.

 

So if socialists spend other peoples' money how come the troies have borrowed more money from other people than the socialists did?

 

Have you heard of the debt-spiral? When you are borrowing more, and more, and more, and more you get to a point where you are borrowing to pay back the borrowing. This debt spiral is what was left by Labour. Due to the economic crisis the Tories (and LibDems) have not managed to break that spiral yet.

Also: We, the UK population, are getting older. As a result pensions and healthcare cost more. As a result government spending is now on a practically irreversible incline.

 

Labour did not foresee this when other governments across Western Europe were making massive changes to the pensions and healthcare systems.

 

Or did Labour foresee this and realise that if they fixed it they would never be elected in again?

[Obelix]

So if socialists spend other peoples' money how come the troies have borrowed more money from other people than the socialists did?

 

You are being inconsistent Mecky - you have repeatedly pointed out that you don't consider Brown and Blair to be socialists in previous posts.....

 

---------- Post added 01-08-2014 at 10:06 ----------

 

 

Or did Labour foresee this and realise that if they fixed it they would never be elected in again?

 

You may very well think that. Labour of course couldn't possibly comment.

[charmer]

Why will people not accept that there are simply not enough jobs to go round, and, what with automisation, computerisation, outsourcing to foreign countries etc, there never will be again.

 

What jobs there are tend to be in certain areas, and relocating involves all sorts of other problems. And we haven't even touched on the problems with 0 hours, part-time etc.

 

The government figures and propaganda are works of art in terms of manipulation and misinformation.

 

Instead of punishing the unemployed, we need to be turning our attention to how we share out what work there is, and making it financially viable for all.

 

 

I have a few things to say. Perhaps there are not enough jobs to go round. What is stopping people creating themselves work instead of wanting it to be handed to them?

 

I am in the process of starting 2 new businesses, one of which will employ people (3 or 4 I think), the other will be manned just by myself. I have a full time job on top of this. Why will you not accept that this is something that people can do?

 

The unemployed are not being punished. The welfare state in this country is exceptional. I am guessing from your juandiced view of it that you have not spent much time travelling? I have and the lot of the unemployed is far greater in this country than in any I have been to (most of europe, some of africa and some of Asia). What exactly do you expect for these people Anna?

 

 

What I don't understand is why people are being punished, when the cuts haven't made the slightest bit of difference. Borrowing is up and if the costs are down where is all the extra money going? To pay for MPs' 11%?

 

No, the cuts are not being used to pay for the MP's 11%. I would rather give an employed person a pay rise then a non-employed person a hand out rise.

 

Of course computerisation, automation and outsourcing has created jobs, it would be strange if it hadn't, but the point is, has it created as many jobs as it has displaced? And the answer to that is no, otherwise what is the point?

I would dispute your assessment regarding the working population. Firstly the population has increased, creating work, but the eighties also saw the rise of the underclass / long-term unemployed, which is with us still. Please don't insult me by saying all these are people 'who don't want to work.'

 

It's also wrong to say people who get hit are those who refuse to continue their professional development - chance would be a fine thing. Often professional development is a perk of being employed, or a very expensive lottery which isn't open to all.

 

 

Please don't insult me by saying that all those out of work want to work. I grew up in an area of very high unemployment, the vast majority of my peers were from non-working households. In my experience (which is fairly vast), most people are happy on the dole and are not looking for work. Not all, but most.

 

I wouldn't say foreigners work harder. What they tend to do, but not not always because there are gangs looking to exploit people so nothing is a given, is live in crap accomodation for a short period, put up with some discomfort and lack of privacy in dormitories, save as much money as possible and then return home and start a small business with the money they saved.

 

A British person has an house to keep which is much more of a struggle both physcially and financially. Incidentally, I read in the Metro today that UK salaries are the lowest, in relative terms, they've been for 134 years. Coupled with the fact that average houses prices will soon be 10 times the annual salary making a deposit £72K, something will have to give.

 

I would say that foreigners work harder, especially in the service and construction industries. I would also say that children of non-British nationals work harder at school. This is because we grew up in an environment of entitlement, knowing that we don't have to work to live. This isn't the case in a lot of places.

 

The use of Sanctions is appalling.

 

IF you are in a place so deperate you have to go the the Job Centre, the pittance they give you should be sacrosanct for at least say, 3 months.

 

In fact, IF you have worked for a long time prior to being dumped in the scrap bin, it should be something like 2/3rds of your previous 12 months average pay rate for 6 months till you find a suitable job.

 

The "pittance" they give you is more generous than the handouts given to the unemployed is the vast majority of other countries in the world. Regarding your last point, it is ridiculous. When Wayne Rooney retires from football, shall we give him £200,000 a week for 12 months? Also this stupid proposal of yours will actually further entrench the income gap between the rich and the poor in this society, something you seem to be against.

[Anna B]

Perhaps you could enlighten us as to why you think that then...? and your reasoning behind it.

 

World wide recession caused by the bankers, not Labour, (and I am no lover of Labour.) Several countries on the point of bankruptcy. Quantative easing. etc etc it's all been discussed before.

 

The debt now into the trillions, and climbing, but we don't seem to even mention it anymore, I wonder why.

Even Carney cannot understand why bankers in Britain haven't been jailed, - nothing to do with them being best chums of the politicians I'm sure.

Instead, while the richest get richer to a ridiculous degree, Tories take from the poorest members of society and try to punish and demonize them.

[Obelix]

World wide recession caused by the bankers, not Labour, (and I am no lover of Labour.) Several countries on the point of bankruptcy. Quantative easing. etc etc it's all been discussed before.

 

The debt now into the trillions, and climbing, but we don't seem to even mention it anymore, I wonder why.

Even Carney cannot understand why bankers in Britain haven't been jailed, - nothing to do with them being best chums of the politicians I'm sure.

Instead, while the richest get richer to a ridiculous degree, Tories take from the poorest members of society and try to punish and demonize them.

 

OK that's all good and perhaps true. It doesnt answer the question though.

 

Q: Why is the current Govt spending more on debt than the last

A: Because the last Govt bled the coffers dry

 

Your response to that was utter rubbish. You still havent addressed that and gone for the populist sport of banker bashing.

[Anna B]

OK that's all good and perhaps true. It doesnt answer the question though.

 

Q: Why is the current Govt spending more on debt than the last

A: Because the last Govt bled the coffers dry

Your response to that was utter rubbish. You still havent addressed that and gone for the populist sport of banker bashing.

 

Apart from Tory propaganda, can you actually support that statement with fact?

[ronthenekred]

Apart from Tory propaganda, can you actually support that statement with fact?

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/may/17/liam-byrne-note-successor

 

 

Although a similar letter was left by the outgoing Tories previously.

 

 

The letter recalls a similar note left by Tory Reginald Maudling to his Labour successor James Callaghan in 1964: "Good luck, old **** ... Sorry to leave it in such a mess."

[Obelix]

Apart from Tory propaganda, can you actually support that statement with fact?

 

Would an apologetic note left by the outgoing Labour administration suffice?

[L00b]

Apart from Tory propaganda, can you actually support that statement with fact?

For your reading pleasure (pdf)

On the eve of the financial crisis, the UK had one of the largest structural budget deficits among either the G7 or the OECD countries and a higher level of public sector debt than most other OECD countries, though lower than most other G7 countries. Most OECD governments did more to reduce their structural deficit during the period from 1997 to 2007 than Labour did. This fiscal position formed the backdrop to the financial crisis.

[Lotusflower]

I have a few things to say. Perhaps there are not enough jobs to go round. What is stopping people creating themselves work instead of wanting it to be handed to them?

 

I am in the process of starting 2 new businesses, one of which will employ people (3 or 4 I think), the other will be manned just by myself. I have a full time job on top of this. Why will you not accept that this is something that people can do?

 

The unemployed are not being punished. The welfare state in this country is exceptional. I am guessing from your juandiced view of it that you have not spent much time travelling? I have and the lot of the unemployed is far greater in this country than in any I have been to (most of europe, some of africa and some of Asia). What exactly do you expect for these people Anna?

 

 

 

 

No, the cuts are not being used to pay for the MP's 11%. I would rather give an employed person a pay rise then a non-employed person a hand out rise.

 

 

 

 

Please don't insult me by saying that all those out of work want to work. I grew up in an area of very high unemployment, the vast majority of my peers were from non-working households. In my experience (which is fairly vast), most people are happy on the dole and are not looking for work. Not all, but most.

 

 

 

I would say that foreigners work harder, especially in the service and construction industries. I would also say that children of non-British nationals work harder at school. This is because we grew up in an environment of entitlement, knowing that we don't have to work to live. This isn't the case in a lot of places.

 

 

 

The "pittance" they give you is more generous than the handouts given to the unemployed is the vast majority of other countries in the world. Regarding your last point, it is ridiculous. When Wayne Rooney retires from football, shall we give him £200,000 a week for 12 months? Also this stupid proposal of yours will actually further entrench the income gap between the rich and the poor in this society, something you seem to be against.

 

There's nothing like a nice, well balanced, well thought out, reasonable opinion.

This is nothing like a nice, well balanced, well thought out. reasonable opinion!