howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#1
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#2
very interesting reading howard
our barryw will probably be true to form and come back with
THEY DONT UNDERSTAND
lol
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#3
Ah, that old quiz time favourite...
"Here is the answer; What was the question?"
Is it not very big of society to condemn the elderly, infirm and the poor, but only temporarily?
Good to hear them advocate that spending should be wise and taxation fair. Especially as the recent line of both shades of government is to spend fairly and tax wisely.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 683- Registered: 11 Feb 2009
- Posts: 1,052
#4
Barry will let us have his thoughts but I imagine the will be along the lines of 'we need more and deeper cuts'. That's the good thing about Barry, you know where he stands and, therefore, where you stand when you want to oppose him. I regard Barry as the true voice of the Conservatives and look through the mealy mouthed words uttered by Osborne and Cameron. They are instinctively pursuing a cuts agenda and using the financial crisis to justify it but don't have the courage to state this because they are too concerned about their public image.
The article suggests that they are fast getting out of step with their own supporters as well as the rest of the country.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#5
an intressting artical,but will the condem goverment listen and see reason.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#6
i think what irks blue voters the most is that they were told that cuts would not affect front line services.
we all know now that it simply isn't true.
i don't doubt that some local authorities are playing a political game when making some cuts but the nett result is the same, bad news for the public.
people of all political colours are against a total cop out from the state, they believe that many services cannot be run by voluntary organisations.
the real truth is that funding for voluntary organisations is falling so it will be difficult to keep the same services being run now without even thinking of offloading more work onto them.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#7
Amusing and interesting that I can be brought into a discussion without even commenting, at least give me a chance to say something without assuming! Remember the old saying to ASS U ME is to make an ASS out of U and ME.
I suspect that what you are seeing is a touch of cynisism by the public rather than anything else and you cannot blame them. I have posted before about how our system works against good financial management by effectively encouraging government to keep spending to get votes. That is why they don't think that cuts are temporary, they think that the government will go back to spending to buy votes. I hope they are wrong.
Howard - that is not quite right, you are being too simplistic, in the sense that only essential services were described that way. There are a lot of services that are not essential and are being cut back and some stopped all together. The government was always open about saying that it does too much and needs trimming. The 'small government', 'big society' and localism (handing back responsibilities to people and away from government) are all evidence of that.
Yes Mark - they are not going far enough in getting out of our lives...but are making some significant progress.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#8
essential is open to interpretation, rural bus services for example, citizens advice centres another.
i think the real cyncism is coming from the government, trying to pretend that there are enough volunteers with time and skills to take up the slack left by central government.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#9
That is not an assumption being made at all Howard, its your interpretation.
Take rural bus services, sounds brutal, but people decide they want to live in the countryside and enjoy certain benefits from doing so. So why should I, as a townie and someone who chose to live in the town, subsidise that choice through my taxes.
As for the CAB - they do a great job, but localism means that the council has to decide if and by how much it subsidises them balancing other spending priorities. Local decisions, local choices. There are, incidentally, other organisations/people from whom such advice can be obtained.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#10
barry
the fact of the matter is that many people when they retire cannot afford to run a car or they decide that they are not up to driving anymore, they will have expected to drive to work or to a rail station in their working life.
on you other point who are the organisations that deliver an alternative service to the c.a.b?
this localism bit is farcical, the councils just have a choice of what to cut.
if the funding had stayed the same then it would be an example of localism, which services could be improved or cut.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#11
looks like howard even there own supporters(tories) are starting to turn against them
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#12
Howard: Funding cannot stay the same, the last government destroyed government finances so they have to be cut. Issues of transport is always a consideration and cost for anyone who chooses to live in the countryside, their choice. Time to let people make their own decisions and to cope with them in whatever way they decide.
Localism is not just about Councils Howard, it is about a lot more and includes taking the responsibility for your own actions and decisions.
Keith - you and your wishful thinking.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#13
not mine barryw
the independent
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#14
link Keith? - if you use a source then you need to credit that source. Without that it is your wishful thinking and we all see lots of that, your comment is clearly yours anyway.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#15
post 1 explains it
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#16
The public services need a root and branch reform to make them value for money. Right down to town councils and right up to ministries of state.
We also need to change the public mindset so that things are not blamed on 'government' but on specific individuals who make the decisions which infuriate voters so much. Unfortunately these bureaucrats are faceless and, as has been revealed recently, even use aliases when communicating with the public.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
