Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
Keith, this 4m unemployed you constantly bang on about, is that the number who've become unemployed in the last 2 years?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
the current situation is untenable, the chancellor is being told by all sides to promote growth.
he is borrowing money with no plan on how to pay it back, borrowing is not in itself a bad thing - boosting the economy in order to get higher tax revenues is the only way that i can see of reducing the debt.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
David,
if the conservatives get there way and the cut backs become a reality
you cant do all that cutting in the public sector without big big job losses
never denied on here even by those supporting such a move
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 182...Agree,borrowing for growth is the main way out of this mess.....Ossie`s borrowing of £ 600 million was to cover the
gap between spending and revenue in July........not for growth.........
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Courtesy Times....
Disgruntled Tory Donors turn off the tap.........some of the Conservatives biggest funders have ``cut``
back on their donations since the election amid disenchantment with Cameron`s leadership.
Lord A shcroft...2007,,£ 1.7 million ...2012.....£ zero.
Lord Harris...2007...£ 500,000 ....2012 ....£ 87 k.
Micheal Spencer...2006...£ 1.1 million ....2012...£ 87 k.
Boris is attracting attention from the big funders..............
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
It is untenable,so much damage /suffering has been done and now there is more to come .....on the general
public...
Tax slump threatens to set off new wave of `spending cuts`,only one in six voters`trusts`the Chancellor.
# 177 & 182...set out the magnitude of this continuing mess we and this Coalition govenment are in.
Every sector of Society have told the two arrogant posh boys enough is enough............
But still the Treasury insists they have had borrow to cover this additional tax slump debt......but
will not borrow to fund growth................is this the way to run a Dance Hall.?
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
A snippet from an article in the Guardian on the `Reshuffle`
``The question that Cameron and Clegg cannot afford not to ask themselves is whether to move George Osborne. "It will be personally terrible and I shrink from it," Macmillan wrote in his diary before sacking his chancellor in 1962. Half a century on, Cameron will be thinking the same thing, as other prime ministers have also done since. Most, like Blair, persuade themselves that things will all come right somehow. Sometimes they are right.
Yet if Cameron thinks Labour can yet be stopped in 2015 then the case for Osborne to go is daring but strong. Change the policy. Change the chancellor. Put Ken Clarke or Vince Cable (or both) into the Treasury. Make Osborne party chairman. It might make all the difference in reviving confidence in the coalition. It is increasingly hard to see what else might do so.``
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
the reshuffle has to come soon
i wonder which way cameron will go
he has some clear choices now.
1; go the hard line upset clegg and throw his toys out of the pram thus bringing on
board the right of his party(otherwise know as the nasty section of the party)
2; with 1, get rid of many of the lib dems as asked by leading right wing tories
3; doing 1 and 2 of course pleases many in the tory paty but risks the co olition
not sure cameron wants that
4; keep to same line but this will just be death by a thousand cuts and the
co olition unlikey to survive if it continues
5; bring in boris to govt, cameron could then maybe try to bring him into line
but dont think cameron ready for that, and not sure boris wants to be
associated with cameron.
6; go to the country alone 9this wont happen, and of course this would send the
tories into the wilderness for years to come, not something cameron likely
to risk.
the most likely is that osbourne will move to a new position in a fan fare that it is promotion, when in fact it would desperation to get him out of the predsent post.
well its coming soon,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
Cameron can shuffle all day, he doesn't have a clue how to run the country.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
at last david we agree
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
Do we? I dont think you read my posts Keith, of course thats your prerogative.
Where we differ is your view that under Milliband and Balls we'll return to the land of milk and honey, the only good thing about Labour getting back in is that we'll hit rock bottom sooner, then we can start again with the population being more realistic.
Keith, we're £trillion+ in debt and rising, you and others want us to borrow even more, its lunacy
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
the chancellor is the most important job at the moment, even more than prime minister, i cannot see any politician now as up to the job.
he/she has to show slight signs of improvement in the economy to convince the public that the cuts are working.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
david
shows you dont read my posts!!!!
i will never be a tory fan
but im not much more in favour of a labour one
i would prefer a labour govt to a tory one
but realy not much between the two
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
Howard these cuts, where/what are they? We are spending more than ever, its madness.
Keith, you prefer a Labour govt purely because you see politics as tribal, like following a football team.
Why do you think a labour govt would improve things?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
where to start david?
cuts in numbers of police officers, armed services. personnel and border agency staff.
cuts in funding to local councils meaning, in extreme cases, closures of libraries, swimming pools and sports/leisure centres - more usually rural bus services, support to voluntary groups and sure start schemes.
cuts to the winter fuel allowance whilst the prices are rocketing, raising the age when people qualify for a bus pass, some people having their child benefit taken away etc.
putting disabled people on jobseekers allowance.
those are just off the top of my head, others will remember ones that have affected them personally.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
do i need say more david
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Osborne under tremendous pressure from `all` quarters now must swallow his `ego`
problem and go for ``Plan B`,has now been told by the IMF to delay his `austerity` plan
until we have economic growth returned.
GDP is still in contracting..........
Osborne is between a rock and a hardplace of his own making........
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Cameron is to revive a tradition championed by Thatcher by revamping the Government
Whips Office to have more powers over their Parliamentary Party.
It will mean our local Tory Party ....who deny they have a Whip System need to wake up
.........or own up......
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
reg;
that doesn't sound good
getting them all into line
so they cant rebel
any more details reg?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS