Jump to content

What do you want to cut?


Lexander
 Share

Recommended Posts

... engineers are traditionally working class jobs,

Eh? I think not.

 

Have to agree with EM - engineers are usually classed as skilled labour as far as I know.

 

Yes, okay, you're right, though it's not like there's a table you can consult telling you what job belongs in what class. What I'm saying is that these days class and income are not necessarily clearly correlated. It's much hazier than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

There seem to be two unspoken assumptions both in this thread and out there in the big, bad world. One, that there should be cuts and two, that these should be in the way of reducing the support available for the weakest members of society. I disagree with both, although I certainly see many things which need cutting.

 

Plenty of respectable economists (as distinct from the PR puffers of the banking fraternity, who have been sucking a very fat living out of the common people for a very long time) wuold prefer to see a Keynesian bout of public spending, which could simultaneously result in giving employment to those who want it and increase the country's stock of (for example) Council housing - two "goods" for the price of one.

 

I also agree with Lexander that most, if not all, of our former publicly owned assets - water, power, communications etc. - should be renationalised, as they generally dealt with things which are important to the life of the country and ought not to be left to the whims of the gamblers in the City of London and beyond. It really doesn't matter if (say) the financial structure of one of the big holding companies goes titsup - as long as there is a way of maintaining the employment of the workers on the shop floors who do real work for a living, and who are the ones who really ought to be receiving the profits of their work anyway. It does matter that, for instance, we're told that the UK can expect "brown-outs" on the electricity supply in five years or so because none of the private moneymaking houses feels like gambling on building this or that sort of generating station for PR reasons. The Gov. may hum and hah, but unless they have real power over the decisions, all talk of them having a "policy" on energy are just hot air, aspirations, daydreams.

 

As for what should be cut, start at the top. £10 a week is a great deal to someone on benefit, almost nothing to the director of a company. It shouldn't be beyond the wits of the political class (who, let's not forget, believe that we have to pay more for them and their pals in the City "so as to attract the best and most talented people", unlike the system at the other end of the income scale) to put both taxation and benefits on a sliding scale.

 

Those who are "Comfortably Off" can afford a reasonable level of taxation, and shouldn't need benefits. Those of "Moderate Means" should pay less tax, but should still be above benefit level, while the "Hard Pressed" clearly do need help (and, okay, yes, given that some will always try to cheat the system, there should be some control over the benefits to stop that). Those enjoying "Urban Prosperity" can easily afford more in tax than the comfortably off, while the "Wealthy Achievers" might like to show their gratitude to the society which supported their achievements by giving back a larger percentage of their income to it. I repeat, £10 a week is a great deal to someone on benefit, almost nothing to the director of a company.

 

Bear in mind that a handful of City bankers between them could pay off the entire UK "overdraft" tomorrow, and still have more than most of us will ever see. Bear in mind also that it is us, the ordinary people, who are expected to pay OTT in taxation for the next God-knows-how-long to keep them in their obscene greed.

 

A pal who worked in Amsterdam for several years said that the first thing he noticed as a Brit was that about half his salary (which was respectable, but not excessive) went in tax. The second thing was that everything in the public sector worked, the streets were clean and well lit and safe, the population generally happy. If we want a society worth living in, it has to be paid for, and the people in the best position to pay are the rich, not the poor. Cutting the safety net is not the way it should go, though sadly it looks like the most likely outcome in a country ruled by the rich for the rich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to see a cut in awarding big contracts overseas. Any investment it would take to make it possible for the work to stay in the U.K. would surely pay back in the long term with higher rates of employment and more of our money staying in the country will boost the economy not to mention the possible exports that could come from investing in our trade and industry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

to keep such contracts in this country I think would mean we have to provide the training and then match the pay.

The UK may not have the infrastructure to complete large tasks, if they did we would be building the supertankers ( em that reminds me of that guy who was going to harness wave power by using huge boats, converting to heat and transferring it to land based power plants).

 

Well for many folks taxes will be cut, not many taxing opportunities taxing the unemployed. Sadly they will pay a larger % of tax against income.

Though it still may be true that there could be no VAT on a 1,000,000 pound gin palace in bought the right way.

Suffolk are still thinking of scrapping ALL services and farming them out.

Trouble that spells, it still has to be paid for, and ontop you need contracts managers and the associated staff.

It means the architects and planners will have free reign to build more chite buildings, though I must admit the younger ones do have some vision. That we can be happy about. Them that built the estates now being pulled down and radically modernised around the 70's 80's need retiring

Link to comment
Share on other sites

to keep such contracts in this country I think would mean we have to provide the training and then match the pay.

The UK may not have the infrastructure to complete large tasks, if they did we would be building the supertankers

 

Obviously it would cost to get started but without investment in the future the country will surely go to the dogs. Cuts mean less money to go round and if we farm out all our big contracts abroad there goes what money is left. Then we'll see more cuts and so on it'll go.

 

As I see it the only sure way out of economic melt down is investment. Cuts will help only if they are going to cut waste and inefficiency. Get people out working, create jobs and produce exports....job done :D Bet a supertanker is worth a bob or two :D :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is just a quick response (my brain is still fried from the post I wrote yesterday!).

 

DamnSaxon - I agree with much of what you've said and I find it interesting that you've pulled out those 2 assumptions actually.

 

Personally, I'm pro-Kenyesian but I know that the current mob won't go down that route for love nor money as it would break their ideology. As for the second, I agree that we shouldn't be cutting at the vulnerable.....but again, I know that's exactly what this government will do because they can plaster the red tops with photos of chavvy kids living the life of riley on the dole and claim that all benefit claimants (regardless of individual circumstance) are like them and that their plans will off the lot of them. It's what they've been doing since they lost the last time & it's what they're still doing because they know that if they stir up the mob enough, the majority will support anything they want without question. Let's face it, none of us like our money to be spent on those who deliberately choose not to contribute to society. The Tories know this and they also know all the stereotyping that goes with the benefits system these days. All it takes is a photo of one chavvy looking family in a council house with a big TV fronting a story about benefits and the mob start baying for blood and for the whole system to be killed off. I imagine that if they put a picture of someone with a disability or serious illness ast in a council house on the front page, the reaction might be a little different. Unfortunately, the majority don't think of the flipside of who does/doesn't claim benefits. They only see the people that they want to get rid off and hate.

 

Amy - I think you make a good point about outsourcing actually. I think if more big contracts could be kept in the UK then it would help with rising unemployment. However, it would also require people to be willing to (potentially) pay higher prices for things and for CEOs to be willing to put a decent amount of investment into the UK rather than taking the easy road and outsourcing to somewhere cheaper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I see it the only sure way out of economic melt down is investment. Cuts will help only if they are going to cut waste and inefficiency. Get people out working, create jobs and produce exports....job done :D

 

^^^ That is easily the most sensible thing I've heard in relation to the current economic situation in months!

 

So how exactly do we go about getting you into David Cameron's job again? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well to begin with , all wars that this country have invited themselves too that they cant afford , other countries manage to mind their own buisness why the hell cant this one ?, All Ministers expense accounts , they've already proven they are not to be trusted and are the most devious crooked band of *osspots you're every likely to meet. Abolish forever these multi million pound golden handshake pensions for all these already overpaid bankers.

 

Cuts to be made in all Councils starting at the top , not the bottom , as it is the bottom who supports the top not the other way round.

 

If we managed all that then we would all be better off , the country would be respected , the voters would be happier , the only people who would be miffed would be the numpties who do very little for far to much money.

 

If we achieved all that then lexander could maybe afford a spelling course. :lol: :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

This is terrible and what I can't understand is how the general office workers can be under threat.

 

Surely they were in place long before the Labour over-spend balloon mushroomed out of control.

 

By all means cut the bloated public services and crazy health and safety culture, but to cut the Police services is madness....

 

However, the one post that could go though is the traffic warden. It's not exactly a life or death post is it.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...