ConDem cuts 'will be permanent'

[Howj Begg]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/aug/03/david-cameron-public-sector-cuts-permanent

David Cameron warns public sector cuts will be permanent

Prime minister tells an audience in Birmingham that cuts need to be 'sustainable' and that funding will not be restored once budget deficit is under control


Cameron squared up to these decisions after being confronted by a public sector worker during the question and answer session in Birmingham today – one of three public sessions he intends to conduct this month.

The woman – who did not give her name – urged the prime minister to give a pledge that he would review cuts being imposed to tackle the deficit once the austere times are over "and you have the money back in the bank".

The local fire brigade worker cited the "sweeping cuts" the service had already endured since 2003 and warned that the new round of cuts due to be imposed would mean more fire engines taken off the road.

Citing the dramatic increase in the deaths of firefighters, and an increase in deaths as a result of fire, she asked him: "Will you give me a pledge today that when these austere times are over, and you have the money back in the bank or you're balancing your books, that you will look at anything that is cut during this period and go back and get in those fire engines back in the places they are needed to support the public?"

Cameron refused to make the pledge.

"The direct answer to your question, should we cut things now and go back later and try and restore them later, I think we should be trying to avoid that approach," he said.

Because I'm not saying we won't have to make cuts to all sorts of difficult services, because we will, but let's try and do it in a way that actually is sustainable. And try to make sure that the fire services that we have is capable of doing the very important work we want it to do but let's all open our minds and think how can we work in a different way."

Still at least the policies aren't ideologically motivated.

EDIT: Shit, actually meant to post this in the 'Budget' thread, oh well, never mind.

[Funcrusher]

Seems fair enough for Cameron to be deciding to savagely re-engineer the entire fabric of our society permanently, given that massive thumping majority he got.

Oh...

[Howj Begg]

'Let's open our minds and think how we can work in a different way'

I mean fuck off with that disingenouous managementspeak which is only clearly pointing to a fait-accompli devised by libertarian economists.

[biggytitbo]

'Let's open our minds and think how we can work in a different way'

I mean fuck off with that disingenouous managementspeak which is only clearly pointing to a fait-accompli devised by libertarian economists.

But you've not explained where the money is going to come from to spend £4 for every £3 we earn. You never explain that.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

The only way fewer fire engines can work in a different way is 'worse'.

[Howj Begg]

But you've not explained where the money is going to come from to spend £4 for every £3 we earn. You never explain that.

Higher taxes for people earning above a certain threshold and ensuring that all tax owed is paid by individuals and corporations. There job done.

[thepuffpastryhangman]

In response to Ben's "secret jewish cult" tag. I believe the basis for many of the free market principles, which include measures such as those described in this thread, are founded in the works of Jewish economists. Nothing secret about it though.

[biggytitbo]

Higher taxes for people earning above a certain threshold and ensuring that all tax owed is paid by individuals and corporations. There job done.

Wow you've cracked it! Why has nobody ever thought of this before?

Ohh yeah that's right, they have, and it doesn't work. If you tax rich people too much they leave, and in a globalized economy its incredibly hard to stop multinational companies avoiding paying some of their tax burden. If you do find  a way of doing it, they leave, taking their jobs with them. When the world is now stuffed with competitors who have cheaper harder working labour, lower taxes and less political scrutiny it's time we fucking grew up and realized we're living lifestyles as a country and individually that are way beyond our means.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

If you tax rich people too much they leave, and in a globalized economy its incredibly hard to stop multinational companies avoiding paying some of their tax burden

It's not true though is it? The top rate of income tax went up to 50% and they didn't leave. So they either don't mind or aren't paying.

If it's all about competing, why don't we reintroduce child labour so our Primarks can run more efficiently?

[thepuffpastryhangman]

Rather than edit this in to my above post...

If we examine of the Jewish Ludwig von Mises for example, you'll see it was his work that was later expanded upon by Friedrich Hayek, who was, along with the Jewish Milton Friedman, the largest influence on the economic policies of the Thatcher regime. So while your tag is inaccurate to some degree Ben, there is a link to the cuts highlighted by this thread.

[biggytitbo]

In response to Ben's "secret jewish cult" tag. I believe the basis for many of the free market principles, which include measures such as those described in this thread, are founded in the works of Jewish economists. Nothing secret about it though.

The catholic church frowned upon usury for many centuries so there are historic reason why the jews were disproportionately represented in financial areas. Not any more though, the world of banking fraud is equal opportunity for cunts of all colours and creeds nowadays.

[Howj Begg]

please dont talk about the jews guyz :( :(

[thepuffpastryhangman]

Have you checked the Nobel Prize for Economics lately biggy? I'm talking about the economics of the Tories during and since Thatcher.

Shoulders - I thought Primark did use child labour, at least until around 2006, when the manufacturing process of some of their stock was highlighted, forcing them to switch suppliers? (If I recall correctly)

[thepuffpastryhangman]

please dont talk about the jews guyz :( :(

Sorry Howj, you did once award one of my posts "10/10". So I'll gladly hush now, having highlighted the association between the opening tag and the subject matter of the thread.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

Shoulders - I thought Primark did use child labour, at least until around 2006, when the manufacturing process of some of their stck was highlighted, forced them to switch suppliers? (If I recall correctly)

That was the point I was making. Increase our productivity by not funding child labour abroad and do it in this country instead. We have to think of 'different ways' to run things now.

[thepuffpastryhangman]

Sorry, I didn't make the direct association with Primark, imagining you'd chosen the store at random and the connection was coincidental.

[biggytitbo]

It's not true though is it? The top rate of income tax went up to 50% and they didn't leave. So they either don't mind or aren't paying.

Mostly the latter, there are so many ways around the higher tax rates, especially for well heeled rich people with tax accountants. The 50p rate, even at the most rosiest of projections if nobody avoided it would only bring in £2.5b a year, less than 2% of our deficit. Are you saying if we properly hammer the rich (the most mobile people in society) to a degree that would actually make a difference to the deficit they wouldn't just leave?

[biggytitbo]

That was the point I was making. Increase our productivity by not funding child labour abroad and do it in this country instead. We have to think of 'different ways' to run things now.

If we moved away from globalization to more localism and internal consumption things would be a helluva a lot more expensive than they are now. The 2 reasons for our relative prosperity over the last 20 years are our huge debt levels and the massive imported deflation from China and the BRIC. I think though, in the long run it would be a lot better for us if we did move to a more French model of internal consumption, even if it meant things were more expensive it would make for a healthier and more balanced economy, with higher employment and a better sense of community and the value of things than we have now.

[thepuffpastryhangman]

There's massive evidence to suggest they wouldn't just leave. Oddly enough, they like living in London. We're not talking about Lewis Hamilton, or, in the case of Ireland, cunts like U2, we're talking, say £200K + with an inverse taper.

It was claimed the rise to 50% would empty the Square Mile. Has it bollocks.

And, hahaha, if, as the ConDems claim, the VAT hike hits the rich hardest...won't that scare the fuckers to Switzerland anyway?

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

That wouldn't be my solution to cutting the deficit. But I do believe principally that people should pay tax and that 'oh they'll find ways to get out of it' is a pathetic reason not to try, and also sets the dangerous precedent of saying that richer people are legally above other people. I'm sure, hating oligarchs like you do, that you agree.

I'd concentrate on dropping cold war weapons we don't need, coming home from Afghanistan, and introducing a new banking levy along these lines: give businesses the credit they need for their day-to-day running or face a windfall tax on profits. I know you don't agree with 'credit' but when used for its original purpose- giving flexibility and assurance to businesses- it is actually extremely useful and makes countries more efficient and productive.

This ideological carnage the Tories are set to wreak on us is unnecessary and avoids confronting the real issues of why the deficit built up- indeed it makes it more likely that we'll be exposed to such a level of risk in the future. So it's not just about 'wah we're spending £4 for every £3'- and as the deficit is decreasing, that isn't even true anymore- the issue is that the Tories are using it as an excuse to set about realigning the country in a direction that makes all these problems more likely to resurface, and ruin institutions and public services that were reborn under Labour.

[GentlePalms]

If we examine of the Jewish Ludwig von Mises for example, you'll see it was his work that was later expanded upon by Friedrich Hayek, who was, along with the Jewish Milton Friedman, the largest influence on the economic policies of the Thatcher regime.

Mises work in turn expanded on that of the non-Jewish Carl Menger, considered the founder of the Austrian school of economics. This is another example of the confirmation bias that someone else mentioned.

Aren't Jewish economists heavily represented across the whole spectrum, to the very hard left? Do you have a judenfrei lineage for the ideas of economic justice that you support?

[thepuffpastryhangman]

You must be happy about the Lloyds results biggy. Stick with it or go for more gold?

[thepuffpastryhangman]

I was just linking in with the tag Gentle Palms. I didn't introduce the sideways topic to the thread.

EDIT - Is Carlisle named after Menger?

EDIT 2 - If, the thread was about nationalisation, under, let's pretend Labour, and the tag said 'labour is obviously a secret jewish cult', I'd have highlighted any link between nationalisation and Jewish authored economic theory. It's not a good/bad thing personal preference, I'm just noting the influence, the connection wth the tag.

I hope that explains it.

[biggytitbo]

Deficit != debt. Our total debt is increasing at an alarmingly fast rate, that's the problem and that's why we have to cut spending, to say us spending way more than we earn, even at the peak of the biggest boom in history is financial idiocy on a grand scale, the kind of nonsense that got us here in the first place.

I'm all for raping the banks but all this jizz about levys and transaction taxes is a total distraction. Why don't we just remove their powers to create money at interest? The economy needs credit to grow, so why don't we set up a national bank that creates interest free money for worthwhile businesses and capital scehemes that are going to be of value to the country? You know, cut the banking leaches that are sucking us dry out of the equation altogether? Rather then trying ever more elobaret schemes to get the coacroaches to behave themselves, just stamp on the fuckers.

[biggytitbo]

You must be happy about the Lloyds results biggy. Stick with it or go for more gold?

Bank gets money from taxpayer and savers at 0.5%, lends it out at 5%+ and makes money shocker. We're basically stealing money from our left pocket having a huge premium cut off the top, then putting whats left in our right pocket and calling it profit. Hurray for us!

[alcoholic messiah]

Rather than edit this in to my above post...

If we examine of the Jewish Ludwig von Mises for example, you'll see it was his work that was later expanded upon by Friedrich Hayek, who was, along with the Jewish Milton Friedman, the largest influence on the economic policies of the Thatcher regime. So while your tag is inaccurate to some degree Ben, there is a link to the cuts highlighted by this thread.

What's the more pertinent connection, that they're Jewish, or that they're economists? Is there some unique agenda to Jewish economists? Do any non-Jewish economists hold similar views? Why concentrate on their ethno-religious background? Why not their gender? Why not the continent that they were raised in? The football team they supported? Favourite cheese?

[thepuffpastryhangman]

For goodness sakes, I didn't write the tag, I simply highlighted a connection that was already there! I've already explained this. If the tag said 'tories are secret chelsea fans' I'd have mentioned David Mellor's not so secret lurv for the club.

EDIT - I concentrated on the claim in the tag. Gadzooks, if it had mentioned football, cheese, whatever, any similar response of mine would've mentioned football, cheese, whatever.

[mini goatbix]

For goodness sakes, I didn't write the tag, I simply highlighted a connection that was already there! I've already explained this. If the tag said 'tories are secret chelsea fans' I'd have mentioned David Mellor's not so secret lurv for the club.

EDIT - I concentrated on the claim in the tag. Gadzooks, if it had mentioned football, cheese, whatever, any similar response of mine would've mentioned football, cheese, whatever.

Mr Hangman, whoever wrote the tag is probably baiting you to see if you'll turn this thread into another Jewish rant, if you don't like people thinking of you as anti-semetic or a troll, then the wise course of action may be to ignore the bait.
Yours respectfully
mini goatbix

[alcoholic messiah]

Come on Puffy, you wrote the post I referred to. There's no need to to attack me, I'm just asking questions here.

[thepuffpastryhangman]

Come on Puffy, you wrote the post I referred to. There's no need to to attack me, I'm just asking questions here.

I wasn't attacking you, not in the slightest. Tuther day I paid homage to a piece your work with my 'Mr Townshend, getting Fooled Again, Behind Blue Eyes' comment.

You asked "what's the more perntinent connection?" well, the tag only mentioned "tories" and "jewish" so it's either, or both of those. I've said this several times already. I didn't make the connection, I just detailed a connection made by the tag to the content of the thread.

I'm not sure I can spell it out any more clearly, I simply took a claim made in a tag, and applied it to the content of the thread. I neither wrote the tag or started the thread.

You ask "why concentrate on their ethnoreligious background"? That's what the tag did! As mentioned many times already, if the tag said 'tories are secret chelsea fans' and 'chelsea fans had an influence on the subject matter of the thread, then I would've highlighted that association.

It's a straightforward sequence...thread - tag - linking of thread and tag.

EDIT - To remove accidental italicisation.