Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
7 October 2009
07:4529949#21
Harry - you clearly did not actually listen to George Osborne yesterday, the public sector pay freeze applies to those earning over £18000 a year, protecting the lowest paid. Child Tax Credits and Child Trust Funds are being removed from those who need them least, leaving them intact for the lower earners, public sector pensions limited to £50,000 a year so affecting only those earning £100,000 or more, etc etc. The same theme throughout.
Huge public sector savings have to be made, there is no choice and any Government will do this thanks to Labour's profligate spending over the last 10 years (not in the first 3 years when they followed Ken Clarke's spending plans).
This is only a start and no-one can claim that there is anything here targetted at the low paid.
Victor - I deal with these issues every day and see people who did or did not save enough towards retirement. I know a hell of a lot more than you will ever do about peoples savings and spending habits from the sharp end.
The number of people I see who claim they did not save enough into a pension because they could not afford it, who thought nothing about paying £200 a month on cigarrettes, £50 a month on Sky and with two holidays a year in Greece or Spain. These people made their spending choices and that is their right, but they cannot complain when this lifestyle comes to an emergency stop when they retire and cant afford it. A littel more moderation in their spending habits would have enabled them to save more and have a better life in their retirement. Imagine if they just halved their cigarette intake, really looked at the relative costs of the Sky Movies package, or just trimmed back a little on one of their holidays. That money saved and invested over 20-30 years would transform their retirement.
A lot of people I see do ask themselves such questions when prompted and amend their spending priorities once they appreciate the facts of life. Others do not.
I might also add that some of the heaviest smokers I see and those most addicted to Sky Tv, are among the very less well off and I am simply amazed at the priorites they have for what little money they have. I really cannot see how some of these can spend what they do on this, but of course, its other things that suffer, no savings, no pensions, poor health and so on. Thats their choice.
I see it all the time Vic and it comes down to choices.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
7 October 2009
07:5629952#22
You posted almost at the same time Barry.
Roger
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
7 October 2009
08:4329954#23
Just to add this little bit about retirement age following along from Vic and Harry there.
On the Conference coverage yesterday there were two journalists chatting with Andrew Neil and they made a very good point. The jobs they are doing they love completely and totally. So the extra year wont make any difference to them,..they love what they are doing. You cant kick those guys out when they are 70 never mind 65 or 66..and thats the point they made. Others, in fact the vast majority of ordinary working class people, are killing themselves in a daily grind without much love for what they are doing. These are the ones who will be hardest hit. The ordinary guy in the ordinary job who has gone through the miserable grind year in year out. This was the point the journalists made. To some its a breeze to others its hell to do that extra year.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
7 October 2009
09:1729956#24
Then they know who to blame PaulB.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
7 October 2009
12:4529957#25
Barry ,I do not drink or smoke And my job in the last 12years was O.K. but before then.I can only talk of myself ,I worked right up to 67years in all my years of working I was very lucky I did not have one day on the doll,but it has not been the same for all,years ago if you worked on the Railways , in the mines ,on the boats e,tc, YOU HAD A JOB for life,but it was the blues who stoped that,just for one ,THE Ashford Railways works over 3000 men worked there it had a full order book at the time you lot closed it down overnight.I was working there at the time,but again I was lucky I went the same week to Germany to work, but alot of the rest it was the doll. And the list goes on and on,in your post you put "Vic I see alot of it" and that is about right all you do is "See" your words not mine,just because you are again one of the lucky ones to map out your life E,T.C. most can not, and when they have done it,afew years down the road they found that they are going backwards.I do not think BARRY YOU LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD.tURN YOUR P.C,OFF FOR A FEW DAYS and get out and see it for yourself, I feel so sorry for alot of young and older ones men and woman who are looking for work and it is just not there ,the last thing they need is to turn on their p.c. if they have one and read posts like you do,and please do not go down the road saying it is the reds to blame.
I would just like to thank some of you who agree with me.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
7 October 2009
17:3429961#26
The world changes Vic, it always evolves and our economy must evolve with it. The efforts of Labour in the 70's to hold back the tide of change through huge subsidies had to end, however much you want prefer otherwise.
You can think what you like, Vic, I really dont care, but the way people live their lives and how they spend and save their money is crucial in my occupation. You are living in the past.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
7 October 2009
18:5029963#27
That is not the case Barry you are living in a make believe world,and know nothing about the working class which I am one of.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
7 October 2009
22:5029970#28
Working class outdated piffle. Your comment says it all. The world moves on Vic and its time you realised that. You dont even see how people make fun of you, talk about not living in the real world!
Guest 670- Registered: 23 Apr 2008
- Posts: 573
8 October 2009
00:1429971#29
Getting back to the thread, I think people in the light of the expenses fiasco are generally anti-politics with a distrust of all the main politics.
Whilst Cameron and Brown are trying to restore confidence they are still being less than honest with us.
Osborne has said that we are in for a difficult time but then I think people already know this. He has announced £7 billion of savings but this is a drop in the ocean compared to the amount which is required. Where is the rest of the money coming from, he has as far as I am aware, avoided the issue of tax increases which surely must be inevitable and which he knows would be deeply unpopular.
8 October 2009
06:1029973#30
Politicians will always be economical with the truth, and somtimes that is justified. But there is no excuse for swindling and cheating the people who pay their wages. Please let us keep that anger and disappointment in our minds as they creep around our houses begging for votes to send them back onto the gravy train, wheedling and faux-promising things that sound good but mean zip.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
8 October 2009
08:5129977#31
Dave1 - you have to admit that you have had the most candid and honest speech by a politician for decades. He has not denied that this is only a start and he cannot possibly produce a full budget until in power and politically it would be stupid to do so. He has also refused to rule out tax rises which, yes, would be very unpopular. He needs to see just how much public expenditure can be cut before looking towards tax rises, so again he is right not to decide on these now.
Dont forget other cuts that have been announced, an end (not merely Labour's delay) to ID Cards, end to the NHS database, end to the regional governments structure and to cut a swathe through quangoes. There are a lot of cuts that can be made through changing the way Government does business in a lot of respects. There is a lot of fat to be pruned.
The fact is that in a practical sense he has probably gone as far as he can and is wise to go in the doom and gloom stakes and must be applauded for doing so. This was not a speech aimed at buttering up the electorate before an election, it was a honest speech by a serious man with a serious job to do.
Contrast that to the Labour Conference when neither Brown or Darling even mentioned the defecit and produced uncosted pie in the sky spending plans that cannot be afforded. That is the dishonesty with which GO can be compared with.
We are see a Government acting like an Opposition and an Opposition behaving like a Government. I note Nick Robinson on the BBC yesterday referring to David Cameron as the Prime Minister, he can be forgiven for doing so.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
8 October 2009
19:3629989#32
i think that nick robinson can be excused his faux pas, can the same be said of the shadow minister who got the parties confused?
accused the PM of a political gimmick in appointing a former army supremo, when he discovered that it was, in fact, the shadow PM who did so, thought it a great idea.
cannt beat that hypocricy.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
8 October 2009
20:2629990#33
He was on stage for two hours and was caught flat footed having misunderstood the question. I dont call that hypocritical because Labour have a record of gimmicks and if what he thought he heard had been right then he would be right to wonder. As it happens Dannent is advising the Conservatives not the Government. We shall see in time if its a gimmick or not.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
8 October 2009
20:3829992#34
mmmmm,yes lets all wait and see.
reminder to self,keep breathing.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
8 October 2009
20:4529995#35
Firstly which army general worth his 'salt' would not ask for and want more troops!!! So there is nothing radical or eye opening about his comments.
Secondly one now has to question his motives for speaking out publicly obviously they were self promoting and political in the hope of catapulting him into a second well paid career in politics.
William Hague,who I have a lot of time for , when questioned today on TV refused to say whether the Tories,if elected, would send more troops or even helicopters to Afghanistan.
" We will obviously assess the situation and blah blah blah"
Is that a yes or no then?
Repeat above answer.
If they really are the govt-in-waiting why have they not already assessed the situation and said " Yes 8 more helicopters and 1000 extra troops as soon as we are in power" No a missed opportunity I feel and again highlights the promises an opposition party makes but when pressed start to backtrack.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
8 October 2009
22:1829999#36
Marek - he will have to decide on the facts at the time they are in a position to act. The tactical situation will almost certainly be different then. No opposition spokesman would say different to be credable.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
9 October 2009
09:2930021#37
It would appear that the Tories intend to cut the MoD budget by 25% without affecting the troop numbers.Should be interesting to see how they work around that.
Brown having assessed the 'current' situation is to send a further 500 more troops to Afghanistan.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
9 October 2009
09:5430022#38
Marek - there are nearly as many people working in the MOD as in the British Army. That is somehow wrong and that is why such a cut is possible.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
9 October 2009
14:0630040#39
Sadly I find myself posting on one of BARRYW posting.
I for 1 don't agree with much VIC may say, or the way he decides to do things, but i will defend his right to post on it.
I feel ashamed that Barryw decided to attack VIC on a personal basis. very sad.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
9 October 2009
14:0630041#40
Sadly I find myself posting on one of BARRYW posting.
I for 1 don't agree with much VIC may say, or the way he decides to do things, but i will defend his right to post on it.
I feel ashamed that Barryw decided to attack VIC on a personal basis. very sad.