• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Labour Investment versus Tory Cuts

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Labour Investment versus Tory Cuts

    Listening to Cameron's apocalyptic vision of our economic future, it seems that the previous government were right.

    All the Tories want to do is cut services, whereas they, the Labour party, would have continued investing in them.

    Obviously the words 'services' and 'investing' need re-defining.

    #2
    Note really. They would have continued to invest... just with money they didn't have.
    Originally posted by MaryPoppins
    I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
    Originally posted by vetran
    Urine is quite nourishing

    Comment


      #3
      For the most part invest = waste where socialists are concerned. Some of it sounds good, a huge program of rebuilding schools say but does it really improve education? Look at the sort of buildings people learned in 50+ years back, outside toilets, crumbling drafty halls, prefabs. Can't see that all the expenditure has improved standards.

      PS Not me obviously as I am only 32.
      Last edited by xoggoth; 7 June 2010, 16:41.
      bloggoth

      If everything isn't black and white, I say, 'Why the hell not?'
      John Wayne (My guru, not to be confused with my beloved prophet Jeremy Clarkson)

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by xoggoth View Post
        Look at the sort of buildings people learned in 50+ years back, outside toilets, crumbling drafty halls, prefabs.
        Sounds like an early 80s prep school I know very well.
        And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

        Comment


          #5
          Socialism
          Investment = put Fine art in reception paid for by credit card (Someone else's) in the vain hope those forced to attend the school appreciate it and work harder so they can make donations to pay for the fine art and the interest repayments. If they don't then get the taxpayer to pay for it.

          Conservatism
          Investment = Teaching people so they get decent jobs which means they can pay more tax so we can afford to repaint reception.

          Capitalism
          Investment = Putting fine art in reception so that rich parents believe the school is high achieving so they pay the fees to afford the fine art.

          which is the most effective?
          Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by vetran View Post

            which is the most effective?
            Owning an art dealership?
            And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

            Comment


              #7
              The cuts still aren't big enough:

              Cameron Must Deepen Cuts in

              Scary really. The Germans have a smaller deficit and their cuts are bigger, and their cuts are also too small. To me it looks like they'd need to cut more like 18 billion rather than 5 billion, just to save the credit rating. To actually get the finances in order they need to cut well over 100 billion. The current deficit is about 156 billion, and in a healthy economy shouldn't be more than 3% of GDP i.e. about 25 billion.
              Last edited by BlasterBates; 8 June 2010, 10:24.
              I'm alright Jack

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by BlasterBates View Post
                To actually get the finances in order they need to cut well over 100 billion. The current deficit is about 156 billion, and in a healthy economy shouldn't be more than 3% of GDP i.e. about 25 billion.
                Aye. That'll do for a start. Then they will have to get the accumulated debt down.
                How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror.

                Follow me on Twitter - LinkedIn Profile - The HAB blog - New Blog: Mad Cameron
                Xeno points: +5 - Asperger rating: 36 - Paranoid Schizophrenic rating: 44%

                "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to high office" - Aesop

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by HairyArsedBloke View Post
                  Aye. That'll do for a start. Then they will have to get the accumulated debt down.
                  They’re not going far enough on public sector pay. LibCons are talking about 5% cuts, which is a start, but the Irish government have implemented 15% cuts; that shows they mean business. I’m not saying cut pay for the real front line lot, like soldiers at the front, nurses who get covered in blood and puke all day or even teachers in sink schools, but the bureaucrats will need to pay. Many, many people in the private sector have seen their pay fall by a lot more than 5% or 15% as bonuses and profit shares have evaporated, and business owners have taken real hits; time for the public sector to bear some of the burden too.

                  Think for a moment about small business owners; not the government, but SME owners have kept the economy afloat by extending credit to their large customers on very favourable terms (e.g. 90 day, 120 day payment terms without interest and with discounts), even when they can’t get credit themselves and have cut their own pay.

                  We can't go on acting as if the public sector is somehow immune to economic developments.
                  And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Meanwhile, Shadow Chancellor Alastair Darling said it was thanks to Labour's actions that the government had inherited a growing economy, and the proposal for immediate cuts risked the prospect of recovery.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X