8 January 2011
11:4688149One of the problems with "state" initiatives is that they are often poorly thought through: an example is this, where an increase in a cost might be bearable if the method of payment was tweaked. There are many more local and national examples. A little thought and planning would be helpful.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
8 January 2011
15:4488181Sorry Claire, I did not mean to offend you and yes I was generalising so there was no need to take my comments personally.
It does annoy me though when people complain about £2 a week when it costs my low earner and single mother daughter £26 every week for his train fare while my grandson is at school, which is money she can ill afford.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
8 January 2011
16:3688189Sue, the increase in bus fares for children, together with all the other cost increases that are going to hit people, means less money in the purse, no matter how one tries to spin it off!
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
8 January 2011
16:5288192Yes Alexander it does mean less money in your purse however if money had been used wisely in the past we would not be in this mess .I did not see much sign of poverty in the town today the usual gang of beer drinkers outside of Marks and Spencer I have just travel;led via Lewisham Road cars everywhere .Not much car sharing going on
.
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
8 January 2011
16:5388193I dont spin either .I tell it how it is .
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
8 January 2011
17:2988202very early on i told u sue i told i agreed with your view on reduced faras comparing you to ken livingstones view on cheper travel on london underground and better usage
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
8 January 2011
17:2988203i think alex is right on the subject of less money in the pocket.
most people spend their money responsibly, they will just have less to spend on extras in the immediate future.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
8 January 2011
17:3688208Nobody has ever successfully explained to me why people should expect to receive goods and services free of charge from the government or from anyone else for that matter.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
8 January 2011
18:2688221There is no reason why people should expect to get things free Peter.
Gradually over the last so many years (13/14), the Government has made the general population more and more state-dependant until we now get to the point where that state dependancy is no longer affordable - and people do not like it.
I still think that KCC could come up with a plan to make the freedom pass easier to pay for; 1/4ly direct debits for instance.
Roger
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
8 January 2011
18:3088224Peter, the subsidised services such as children travel-fares are paid for (to the extent in which they are subsidiesed) by the State, hence by the tax-paying sector of the People and the economy, so they are not free of charge.
The economic crisis meant enormous spending cuts, including job-loss, but people might have wondered if the Government (national and local) would spare the subsidiesed services that are meant for children and students. This has not been the case.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
8 January 2011
18:3188225there is no such thing as a freebie from the government, it is all tax payers money recycled and coming back the taxpayer in one form or another.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
8 January 2011
18:3688230sorry roger cant let you get away with that last post.
the benefits system has been in place for some time a lot longer than your attempt to blame one goverment(nice try though)
frank fields i believe had some radical plans for the benefits probably didnt go far enough, but at least had a go
IDS more recently(with f fields as an advisor) tried aain
but all politicians of all political parties will never take this issue on as it cAN BE Seen as a vote loser.
So please roger whilst im all in favour of a radical shake up of the benefits system
please dont try the political blame one party here
it don't wash.
i still hope the issue will be taken on, but already cameron is backing down
co olitions are ok when the parties have similar views
but the lib dems are poles apart from the tories and it just will never work.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
8 January 2011
18:4588236Keith, all benefits and subsidies are paid for with tax. If the Government could account for how much money comes in to cover these benefits and subsidies, and explain why this tax is no longer enough to cover the expenses of benefits and subsidies, notwithstanding the recent tax (VAT) increase and increases of costs in many services, then it would be appropriate, as we could then ask ourselves if this tax-paid money hasn't been given over to some other use instead.
It seems to me that the Government has in fact destined enormous sums of money (tax-payers' money) to other uses, in paprticular outside of our national economy. In this aspect, the present and the former Government have followed identicle lines.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
8 January 2011
18:5388237Get away with what Keith ?
It is true that different benefits have been avaialble for a number of years, but the last 13 have seen the government make people more and more dependant and less self-reliant.
Roger
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
8 January 2011
19:2588245I can't work out what we get free? As I pointed out in post #18 the only people getting anything for nothing are Stagecoach.
I thought we lived in a democracy?
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
8 January 2011
21:3088288Welcome back to reality DT1. We need Swiss-style Democracy.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
8 January 2011
21:3188289you can be so forgetful sometimes darren, you left out the train operating companies.
you know the ones, they stripe up the passengers to appease the shareholders, using tax payers money to help things along.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
8 January 2011
21:3588290KCC should be easily able to stage a bill over 4 quarters without much financial admin.....
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
8 January 2011
21:4588291Sorry duplicate post
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
8 January 2011
21:4788292When I said 'free of charge' perhaps I should have said 'free to the user'. Obviously everything has to be paid for in the end by somebody but when the user makes no contribution or a very small one there is no motive to be economical in the use of such services. The NHS is a case in point; people are being treated to cosmetic surgery and gender re-assignments while cancer and hip replacement waiting lists increase. As a result more and more public money is being spent while clinical outcomes in the key areas continue to decline. People who can afford to pay should pay; yet there should be a means whereby the less well-off can still be accommodated. It's not rocket science but it does need a root-and-branch rethink of how the welfare state operates.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson