Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
durhamborn

Cable On The Ball Again! - MERGED

Recommended Posts

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11...r-pensions.html

Vince seems to be putting forward where Lib-Dem policy will be for the general election.Reform of public sector pay and pensions and the end to tax credits for everyone but the very poorest.

Interesting that this is much closer to Conservative thinking than Labour.Maybe an indication who the LibDems would side with under a "hung" parliament if by some miracle it happened.

Ironic that Brown made Blair sack the only MP in The Labour party who would of stopped these disasters before they happened,Frank Field.If he wasnt MP for Birkenhead i think he would of crossed the floor to the LibDems by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shame they'd dump sterling at the earliest opportunity or I might vote for them. If we were in the Euro over the last 12 months we'd be toast like Ireland by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11...r-pensions.html

Vince seems to be putting forward where Lib-Dem policy will be for the general election.Reform of public sector pay and pensions and the end to tax credits for everyone but the very poorest.

Interesting that this is much closer to Conservative thinking than Labour.Maybe an indication who the LibDems would side with under a "hung" parliament if by some miracle it happened.

Ironic that Brown made Blair sack the only MP in The Labour party who would of stopped these disasters before they happened,Frank Field.If he wasnt MP for Birkenhead i think he would of crossed the floor to the LibDems by now.

Anyone making a shite storm survival plan should disregard tax credits and the possibilty that bloated rents will be paid for by housing benefit. We'll see some dramatic changes in the fairly near future....GE before year end I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11...r-pensions.html

Vince seems to be putting forward where Lib-Dem policy will be for the general election.Reform of public sector pay and pensions and the end to tax credits for everyone but the very poorest.

Interesting that this is much closer to Conservative thinking than Labour.Maybe an indication who the LibDems would side with under a "hung" parliament if by some miracle it happened.

Ironic that Brown made Blair sack the only MP in The Labour party who would of stopped these disasters before they happened,Frank Field.If he wasnt MP for Birkenhead i think he would of crossed the floor to the LibDems by now.

Finally someone with real guts tom talk about piblic sector pay & pensions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shame they'd dump sterling at the earliest opportunity or I might vote for them. If we were in the Euro over the last 12 months we'd be toast like Ireland by now.

Yeah shame we were not in it, would have taken us to where we are going to end up eventually far quicker and gotten it over and done with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11...r-pensions.html

Gordon Brown's continual squirming and denials can't conceal the truth: public finances are in a truly terrible mess. People know that nasty spending cuts and tax increases are on the way. They want political leaders to be frank and spell it out. What, when and how?

They will not be convinced by George Osborne's alternative: to win an Election and then get Ministers round a table behind closed doors to decide what the painful cuts will be. His message seems to be like the South Sea Bubble or some of today's property clubs: 'Invest in the project and we shall tell you the details in due course.'

The public want to be part of that debate. They should be.

We know what happens when fat cats are asked to clean up the cattery. There is some arbitrary figure for public spending cuts. The good is cut with the bad. Politically invisible groups such as the very old and the mentally ill, and unpopular groups like young offenders, take the biggest hit.

Investment is cut, not bureaucracy. An army of consultants is hired at vast cost to give advice while lowpaid workers are fired or their jobs contracted out. And if the numbers don't add up, taxes go up as well.

This crisis is too deep for cynical games. Britain has lost the windfalls that kept public spending at unrealistic levels: North Sea oil revenue and the tax take from the housing bubble and the banking casinos.

The British State will have to downsize. Here is a starting list of candidates for the axe: the Trident replacement; the NHS IT scheme; the ID card; other databases like Contact Point; 'baby bonds'; and tax credits, which extend way beyond the low paid.

But that still leaves the need to cut costs without undermining frontline services. The Government's efforts to improve efficiency are a triumph of hope over experience. Its claims to have saved billions have been exposed by its own auditors as largely phoney. This begs the question why, if efficiency could be so improved, wasn't it done earlier?

So we have to address public-sector numbers, pay and pensions. At the last count, three million people worked for the Government and its agencies (including 526,000 civil servants) and three million for local government. Over ten years, the number of public-sector jobs has risen by 800,000, including 90,000 civil servants.

The big test of political courage is public-sector pensions, which are in danger of running out of control. Highly paid staff are obtaining pensions often worth two- thirds of a final salary, index-linked for life.

It has been estimated that the total Government subsidy for unfunded schemes is about £28billion - roughly the amount we spend on policing - and it is rising rapidly.

The MPs' scheme involves a contribution from the taxpayer of 26.8 per cent of salary.

Had my colleagues not argued that this was unfair and unjustified, it would have been raised again last week to plug a £50million hole in the fund. The MPs' scheme is merely the tip of a publicsector iceberg.

There must be no question of cutting the entitlements of existing pensioners. Most have modest pensions earned after a career teaching, nursing or in poorly paid manual jobs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vince seems to be putting forward where Lib-Dem policy will be for the general election.Reform of public sector pay and pensions and the end to tax credits for everyone but the very poorest.

If Tax Credits are only for people who are "very poor" then they become another incentive for them to remain so -- there's already too many of those. What's needed is to phase out Tax Credits, most working-age benefits and tax allowances and replace them with a universal Citizen's Income. The savings on bureaucracy would be immense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There must be no question of cutting the entitlements of existing pensioners. Most have modest pensions earned after a career teaching, nursing or in poorly paid manual jobs.

So just screw the young then - who whether they work in the public or private sector are saddled with big debts and unaffordable house prices. Its actually the existing pensioners who have taken more than their fair share out which is why we are in this mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So just screw the young then -

On the contrary, it is those who are 40 and above who have paid far more than their share in supporting the benefits cheats, dole scroungers and public sector leeches of this country.

We have paid for our retirement many times over, and the government has blown it buying votes from the slackers of society, and yes, from the young.

Now that money has to be repaid to our generations, and there are only two ways to do it. Massively increase taxes, or allow us to benefit from HPI. Pick your poison, but you'll be paying either way.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shame they'd dump sterling at the earliest opportunity or I might vote for them. If we were in the Euro over the last 12 months we'd be toast like Ireland by now.

IF the Uk were in the Euro they'd have had an austerity budget by now and be years closer to recovery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone making a shite storm survival plan should disregard tax credits and the possibilty that bloated rents will be paid for by housing benefit. We'll see some dramatic changes in the fairly near future....GE before year end I guess.

So we are going to cure the economic ills of the country by squeezing the poor while the rich get off scot-free. Madness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If Tax Credits are only for people who are "very poor" then they become another incentive for them to remain so -- there's already too many of those. What's needed is to phase out Tax Credits, most working-age benefits and tax allowances and replace them with a universal Citizen's Income. The savings on bureaucracy would be immense.

absolutely.

I think Vince makes a key point about making savings from reducing beuracracy [which can and should be done] rather than savings through cuts to services.

There has been a massive expansion of the public sector, and jobs in public sector related works in the private sector. Both public and private sector are therefore in parts heavily bloated and weighed down by all this red tape. However, the way that this has been dealt with, is exactly how vince has described. And it's those at the chalk face who normally lose out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are clearly a bit deranged Hamish, "paid many times over", I doubt that. Keep pimping that Ponzi scheme.

i think his post is what gives the boomer generation a bad rep in a vast overgeneralization sort of way - but hey this is hpc and i'll have a boomer rant if i want to....although he might be a few years himself outside of technically being a boomer, he undoubtedly has that chip on his shoulder re 15% interest rates characteristic of many late boomers.

at first he's saying that supply and demand is at the route of hpi, and now he's saying it's an inevitable result of having to pay the boomers again!! As if they haven't been paid in kind already via earlier windfalls in the property market, final salary pension schemes, possibly the first generation to get access and wide participation in a not dumbed down FREE further and higher education. Ergo the first employment opportunities in the new service and finance dominated economy which was being formed. I suppose today student debt of 20k, and being forced to work to 70 is yet more payback.

To be so utterly selfish and unsympathetic takes some doing. But hey, they like to be sympathetic [i mean in control]

when writing those substantial gifts/loans cheques for their pricedout offsprings first home purchase, as that's the inevitable result of such wealth concentration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So he is suggesting once again that the middle classes once again are squeezed and the feckless get rewarded for being lazy? He perhaps should take up a place in the Cabinet if Brown offers him one. How have we got ourselves into the situation where those who pay most for services get the least out of them. Whats fair about a system where the lazy can work part time and take home a full time wage.

What is stopping people working is the high taxation and high level of 'benefits' this Government hands out. Reduce benefits to a subsidence level, reduce income tax and you will find it suddenly makes sense for people to work. For instance, my wife and I pay a combined income tax of around £2000 a month. Reduce this by 3/4 and we would have £750 a month extra to spend. My wife would get her hair done every couple of weeks instead of once a month. Business increases at the hairdressers so they need extra staff. They take on 'Sharon' as a trainee who was previously on the dole. Now it makes sense for 'Sharon' to work as with the lower tax level and lower benefits she now is far better-off working than not. So as a result of lower taxes the benefit bill is cut and more money is fed through the system.

High taxes are all about government control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would these be the same tax credits that banks helpfully counted towards your mortgage?

That's the dilemma pull the credit collapse the banks and make people homeless causing social unrest. Laws of unintended consequences. Keep paying and then your propping up zombie banks.

There are huge problems, just simply cutting tax credits will make people not considered poor, poor because of debts. You might even trigger demand destruction and you would certainly hit savings levels again causing the banks to become "insolvent".

If your going to take the view that the banks shouldn't have used these tax credits as income fair enough but that means part of the loan was illegally given by the banks meaning many people need the value cutting according. This is itself creates a problem of laws of unintended consequences.

As for tackling public sector pay / pensions all to the well and good but will many in the public sector vote Liberal with this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is stopping people working is the high taxation and high level of 'benefits' this Government hands out. Reduce benefits to a subsidence level, reduce income tax and you will find it suddenly makes sense for people to work.

Yes but lets get rid of the big benefit scroungers first. Lets start with Sir Richard Branson and his trains subsidies. As his bronze beardy face is beamed to us from Caribean tax exile land. After all he was bleating about BA being allowed to go bust as thats "private enterprise" init. Yes lets have some proper private enterprise for a change rather than this crony, state funded capitalism. An end to benefits for the wealthy I say! Huzzah! "Here's my office" Beardy says pointing to his hammock overlooking the sea. Yes, and here is your prison cell and orange fatigues mate and be careful with the soap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sillybear2

Whitehall would sooner dump us another £2t in debt, push taxes up to 99%, print money and sell the entire country to the Chinese than cut its own pension schemes. Just last week MP's decided it was a great idea to get the taxpayer to increase the contributions to their scheme, until somebody with an ounce of common sense and media awareness pushed it off the agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would these be the same tax credits that banks helpfully counted towards your mortgage?

That's the dilemma pull the credit collapse the banks and make people homeless causing social unrest. Laws of unintended consequences. Keep paying and then your propping up zombie banks.

There are huge problems, just simply cutting tax credits will make people not considered poor, poor because of debts. You might even trigger demand destruction and you would certainly hit savings levels again causing the banks to become "insolvent".

If your going to take the view that the banks shouldn't have used these tax credits as income fair enough but that means part of the loan was illegally given by the banks meaning many people need the value cutting according. This is itself creates a problem of laws of unintended consequences.

As for tackling public sector pay / pensions all to the well and good but will many in the public sector vote Liberal with this?

Well done! The first sensible post in the numerous (and increasingly idiotic) threads about cutting benefits. The problem with the "Cut tax and my wife will go to the hairdressers more often" argument is, as you allude to, that it is a bit simplistic.

The problem is well baked in the pie. It has taken us 10 years to get in this mess and it runs right through the system. Changing suddenly would be akin to a revolution and would have unintended consequences. Thatcher had north sea oil money in the 80s to keep the books balanced during the last major shake-up, and even then there was mass unrest. This time reform would be coming at a time of massive personal debt and government deficits with no obvious way of keeping everything ticking along during a rocky transition.

There is of cause something fundamentally wrong with a welfare system that pays out more in benefits than it collects in income tax. Add the fact that if you have kids you have to be earning over £65k - well over the average family income - before you considered wealthy enough not to require benefits. Benefits should not reach anywhere near that far up the income scale. And nobody's even mentioned the elephant in the room that is public sector pension liabilities.

Vince Cable is the only mainstream politician telling it like it is on this issue. Labour are obviously part of the problem and therefore not part of the solution, but the Tories are too scared to speak the truth, probably because they are playing for votes of mortgaged-up "middle class families" (in the Daily Mail sense of the phrase), but it does make you call into question the entire democratic system when populism can so easily trump economic reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On the contrary, it is those who are 40 and above who have paid far more than their share in supporting the benefits cheats, dole scroungers and public sector leeches of this country.

We have paid for our retirement many times over, and the government has blown it buying votes from the slackers of society, and yes, from the young.

Now that money has to be repaid to our generations, and there are only two ways to do it. Massively increase taxes, or allow us to benefit from HPI. Pick your poison, but you'll be paying either way.......

I never realised you were so old - you must really hate young people to want to keep housing prices high so they can never afford to buy a home. :lol:

Put bluntly the post war generation (45-70 year olds) have had it pretty good. Cheaper housing (i.e. an average salary buying an average house), no student tuition fees, final salary pensions etc plus all will get fuel allowances and free bus passes no matter how well off they are.

Today's young people are paying for these today - and wil not benefit from them themselves when they retire as they are unaffordable now let alone in the future. Today's 45-70 year olds on average have taken out far more than they have put in (including benefiting from speculative housing bubbles). Good luck to them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On the contrary, it is those who are 40 and above who have paid far more than their share in supporting the benefits cheats, dole scroungers and public sector leeches of this country.

We have paid for our retirement many times over, and the government has blown it buying votes from the slackers of society, and yes, from the young.

Now that money has to be repaid to our generations, and there are only two ways to do it. Massively increase taxes, or allow us to benefit from HPI. Pick your poison, but you'll be paying either way.......

There is another way. It is called Carousel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sillybear2
That is hill walking talk. Vince had better be careful or he will end up like JFK.

You mean in 40 years time a couple of fake Japanese nationals will be caught sneaking into Switzerland with 'Cable Bonds' stashed in their suitcase?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You mean in 40 years time a couple of fake Japanese nationals will be caught sneaking into Switzerland with 'Cable Bonds' stashed in their suitcase?

Yeah my mistake i meant michael Jackson. Easy to get those two white guys confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   296 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.