Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
LJAR

A Thought For Those Who Oppose The Cuts

Recommended Posts

For all those who oppose the cuts,

Why don't you voluntarily pay more tax or set up your own fund to help fill in where the state is cutting back (eg housing benefit, tuition fees etc)

Out of genuine interest would you consider doing this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We pay our taxes for public services but Gordon Brown diverted taxpayers money to bail out the reckless banks. Now David Cameron is punishing taxpayers and public sector workers for Gordon Brown's recklessness. Many clever young people won't be able to go to university now, as a direct result of David Cameron and Nick Clegg deciding that students should pay the price of Gordon Brown and the banks' stupidity.

That is why we should be so angry.

Edited by Hyperduck Quack Quack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is true hyperduck - the government has squandered our money on many pointless things.

but if you feel very strongly about tuition fees for example, why not set up a fund to help disadvantaged students through uni, I am sure there are may who feel as you do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is true hyperduck - the government has squandered our money on many pointless things.

but if you feel very strongly about tuition fees for example, why not set up a fund to help disadvantaged students through uni, I am sure there are may who feel as you do.

He could do this by NOT PAYING HIS TAXES and diverting this money to (what would become) massive charities for the needy. This makes perfect sense because neither he (nor the needy) will recieve any services from the government if he continues to pay tax as all the taxed value is being presently sucked by bankers and middle class real estate owners. I call that a win win, let the middle class and the government pay for their own welfare system.

Edited by Stars

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that you might be amazed how much money some charities raise goes on admin and wages .... what's the difference ?

Somewhere along the line a very few number of people make a lot of money from the masses ...In every system , ....its in the nature of man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that you might be amazed how much money some charities raise goes on admin and wages .... what's the difference ?

Somewhere along the line a very few number of people make a lot of money from the masses ...In every system , ....its in the nature of man

Well, i should imagine the diference would be that some of the money would end up in services

Why shoulkd anyone who isn't in either group contribute into what is in effect a welfare system for bankers and the upper middle class?

Edited by Stars

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that you might be amazed how much money some charities raise goes on admin and wages .... what's the difference ?

the difference is I can choose to give my money to the charities that I like.

In all reality if charities had to compete to provide the best value for money instead of having a monopolistic public sector crowding them out, we might actually have better and cheaper services than we do now.

I know this wouldn't work for everything (national defense for example) but I wonder if it would work for many more things than we currently try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We pay our taxes for public services but Gordon Brown diverted taxpayers money to bail out the reckless banks. Now David Cameron is punishing taxpayers and public sector workers for Gordon Brown's recklessness. Many clever young people won't be able to go to university now, as a direct result of David Cameron and Nick Clegg deciding that students should pay the price of Gordon Brown and the banks' stupidity.

That is why we should be so angry.

If you are clever you will still go to university and do something that has an economic value to yourself which outweighs any student debt you will incur. If you are feckless, you won't bother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone her oppose the cuts?

I want more cuts...lower taxes..higher interest rates...lower house prices...lower cost of living...more chance of growth and a better life....

It's so obvious I can see why the stupid people in charGe haven' realised this is the way ahead.

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We pay our taxes for public services but Gordon Brown diverted taxpayers money to bail out the reckless banks. Now David Cameron is punishing taxpayers and public sector workers for Gordon Brown's recklessness.

...Gordo Broon also diverted our taxes to waste on nonsensical jobs in the public sector and inflated HB much of which I did not know existed...he also encouraged the housing bubble which is leading to our doom .....someone has to pay for the catch up...and tax payers are the first in line ...those who do not pay tax can hardly help .....?... :rolleyes:

Many clever young people won't be able to go to university now, as a direct result of David Cameron and Nick Clegg deciding that students should pay the price of Gordon Brown and the banks' stupidity.

....the student only pays fees once he/she starts to earn over £21,000pa....don't see any logic in your statement... :rolleyes:

That is why we should be so angry.

.....'angry' is a negative emotional state ...you need to rise up of your rear and start contributing positively to society otherwise opt out and emigrate to North Korea...... :rolleyes:

Edited by South Lorne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For all those who oppose the cuts,

Why don't you voluntarily pay more tax or set up your own fund to help fill in where the state is cutting back (eg housing benefit, tuition fees etc)

Out of genuine interest would you consider doing this?

The first thing that you are missing is that we have already paid our taxes but instead of getting services in return we have a bailed out banking system.

The second thing you have missed is that we are still going to pay the same and most probably higher taxes but instead of getting services in return we are going to pay back the deficit caused by the bail out and probably have to pay for another bail out as well.

Typically, as in most polls, you left out my answer which would be "I don't mind paying for things that are of true benefit" or "Yes, I will pay a bit more as long as it doesn't go to the banksters".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We pay our taxes for public services but Gordon Brown diverted taxpayers money to bail out the reckless banks. Now David Cameron is punishing taxpayers and public sector workers for Gordon Brown's recklessness. Many clever young people won't be able to go to university now, as a direct result of David Cameron and Nick Clegg deciding that students should pay the price of Gordon Brown and the banks' stupidity.

That is why we should be so angry.

Gordon Brown ran a massive deficit for the 7 years before the banking crisis, building up debts for future generations to pay back and growing the state to an unsustainable size and cost before the crisis hit. (He added over £200,000,000,000 to the reported debt in that period, to say nothing of that which went unreported).

Your clever young people will still be able to go to University. They will just have to decide if they are willing to rack up more personal debt to do it as they will be subsidised less by taxpayers due to excessive national debt.

Shouldn't we be angry that we the taxpayers have been subsidising the tertiary education of excess numbers of feckless youths studying useless degrees.

Edited by Hip to be bear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gordon Brown ran a massive deficit for the 7 years before the banking crisis, building up debts for future generations to pay back and growing the state to an unsustainable size and cost before the crisis hit. (He added over £200,000,000,000 to the reported debt in that period, to say nothing of that which went unreported).

Here is some of the justice problem

take two people -

Person one has a large 'savings' fund they garnered by selling property into the boom, they are about 50 +

Person two has no savings and is university age or in their twenties

A lot of the sentiment on this site comes from group 1, who wish the young (2) to pay for the crises, by working eighteen hours a day in an insecure job, with no unemployment benefit, for enough money to buy food and a pair of shoes. What actually needs to happen is the big stacks of what is essentially real estate based welfare in the accounts of group 1 needs to be counted into the 'austerity' equation and we need to make some pretty radical cost cutting reforms which may seriously atack these people's interests. This isn't happening and so the real cause of the costs isn't being addressed

Austerity is seen entirely in terms of attacking the security of the people who are actually engaged in production, or who are more or less powerless, while leaving the un productive but secure people who caused the problem and benefited from it, more or less free and clear.

Edited by Stars

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is some of the justice problem

take two people -

Person one has a large 'savings' fund they garnered by selling property into the boom, they are about 50 +

Person two has no savings and is university age or in their twenties

A lot of the sentiment on this site comes from group 1, who wish the young (2) to pay for the crises, by working eighteen hours a day in an insecure job, with no unemployment benefit, for enough money to buy food and a pair of shoes. What actually needs to happen is the big stacks of what is essentially real estate based welfare in the accounts of group 1 needs to be counted into the 'austerity' equation and we need to make some pretty radical cost cutting reforms which may seriously atack these people's interests. This isn't happening and so the real cause of the costs isn't being addressed

Austerity is seen entirely in terms of attacking the security of the people who are actually engaged in production, or who are more or less powerless, while leaving the un productive but secure people who caused the problem and benefited from it, more or less free and clear.

What I find amazing is that this entirely correct analysis is never presented as part of the debate. It's not even particularly radical, yet it isn't raised by politicians on the left or right, journalists, the times letters page, housing charities, wherever. That for me is 100% proof of an implicit media bias.

In an unbiased media this would be the central issue of our time.

Or, in other words, +1.

Edited by (Blizzard)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is some of the justice problem

take two people -

Person one has a large 'savings' fund they garnered by selling property into the boom, they are about 50 +

Person two has no savings and is university age or in their twenties

A lot of the sentiment on this site comes from group 1, who wish the young (2) to pay for the crises, by working eighteen hours a day in an insecure job, with no unemployment benefit, for enough money to buy food and a pair of shoes. What actually needs to happen is the big stacks of what is essentially real estate based welfare in the accounts of group 1 needs to be counted into the 'austerity' equation and we need to make some pretty radical cost cutting reforms which may seriously atack these people's interests. This isn't happening and so the real cause of the costs isn't being addressed

Austerity is seen entirely in terms of attacking the security of the people who are actually engaged in production, or who are more or less powerless, while leaving the un productive but secure people who caused the problem and benefited from it, more or less free and clear.

I always said that when one person 'makes' £100k on a property deal someone else has to pay for it. I thought that this payment by the rest of us would always remain a background issue but the size of the global crash has changed that.

I am hearing more and more people getting properly angry about this. I know that us Brits are a bit slow to take to the streets but I really think that it's now a case of when rather than if.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With thanks to Eric Pebble, there are no cuts, it's just highly effective government propaganda.

The government is planning to increase spending in nominal terms every year of this Parliament, from £697bn this year to £740bn in 2014/15.

See my sig.

Edited by Dorkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first thing that you are missing is that we have already paid our taxes but instead of getting services in return we have a bailed out banking system.

The second thing you have missed is that we are still going to pay the same and most probably higher taxes but instead of getting services in return we are going to pay back the deficit caused by the bail out and probably have to pay for another bail out as well.

Typically, as in most polls, you left out my answer which would be "I don't mind paying for things that are of true benefit" or "Yes, I will pay a bit more as long as it doesn't go to the banksters".

The OP does not seem to realise that he is going get cuts in services AND higher taxes

It is not a case of choice.

The money is going to be diverted to bail the financial system.

Osbournes decision to borrow 7 billion to lend to the Irish shows he is committed to that goal just as much as Brown.

The real dole may be cut but the corporate dole is going to be increased exponentially

This is not a reun of the 1980s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I find amazing is that this entirely correct analysis is never presented as part of the debate. It's not even particularly radical, yet it isn't raised by politicians on the left or right, journalists, the times letters page, housing charities, wherever. That for me is 100% proof of an implicit media bias.

In an unbiased media this would be the central issue of our time.

Or, in other words, +1.

Politicians and the media establishment are mostly in Group 1, who have already benefitted by it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We pay our taxes for public services but Gordon Brown diverted taxpayers money to bail out the reckless banks. Now David Cameron is punishing taxpayers and public sector workers for Gordon Brown's recklessness. Many clever young people won't be able to go to university now, as a direct result of David Cameron and Nick Clegg deciding that students should pay the price of Gordon Brown and the banks' stupidity.

That is why we should be so angry.

Good post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone her oppose the cuts?

I want more cuts...lower taxes..higher interest rates...lower house prices...lower cost of living...more chance of growth and a better life....

:lol:

I tend to agree with you mostly......I want to find out how the cuts will effect me and the people around me, then find ways of overcoming any pain if indeed there will be pain....if more are prepared and are allowed to get together to do things as a collective community our taxes and CT should be reduced to reflect this.

I can guess the powers that be will make it as difficult as possible for people to do there own thing...some people love to feel they have some sort of power and control over others. ;)

Edited by winkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many clever young people won't be able to go to university now, as a direct result of David Cameron and Nick Clegg deciding that students should pay the price of Gordon Brown and the banks' stupidity.

I don't believe that for one moment. The tories have waited for years to make education a privately funded enterprise, all the leading players enjoyed fee paying schooling. The national debt (and Clegg's complete lack of scruples) have given them the perfect excuse to bring in user-funded education in one fell swoop instead of piecemeal cuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We pay our taxes for public services but Gordon Brown diverted taxpayers money to bail out the reckless banks. Now David Cameron is punishing taxpayers and public sector workers for Gordon Brown's recklessness. Many clever young people won't be able to go to university now, as a direct result of David Cameron and Nick Clegg deciding that students should pay the price of Gordon Brown and the banks' stupidity.

That is why we should be so angry.

The public sector wouldnt have grown so much in the preceeding 10 years if it wasnt for the banks.

The banks and Brown may be to blame for the bust, but theyre also to blame for the 'boom'

That is to say, even without the banks, cuts need to be made. Heck, they couldnt even balance the budget in the 'good' years.

I hardly think anyone is being 'punished' for gordon browns recklessness, other than maybe savers and retirees without property. Though the bankers and politicians need to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With thanks to Eric Pebble, there are no cuts, it's just highly effective government propaganda.

The government is planning to increase spending in nominal terms every year of this Parliament, from £697bn this year to £740bn in 2014/15.

See my sig.

Shh, keep it quiet. You might threaten their delusions.

Some on this site of all places seem to think its sustainable to keep expanding the public sector by double digit percentages ad infinitum.

They dont explain why, other than 'its not fair' :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the Govt intending to do with the bailout money once banks are in a position to pay it back? Presumably we will all pay zero taxes for a decade? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We pay our taxes for public services but Gordon Brown diverted taxpayers money to bail out the reckless banks. Now David Cameron is punishing taxpayers and public sector workers for Gordon Brown's recklessness. Many clever young people won't be able to go to university now, as a direct result of David Cameron and Nick Clegg deciding that students should pay the price of Gordon Brown and the banks' stupidity.

That is why we should be so angry.

I am sorry but this is a load of rot.

I am no fan of Brown, but he did not "divert taxpayers' money to bail out banks". Tuition fees are nothing to do with the bank bailouts, because the bank bailouts did and do not affect operational spend ... the bank bailouts were, in reality, loans and loan guarantees provided by the BoE. They didn't come out of taxpayers' money.

As a result, everything else in your argument is just rubbish.

Oh, and by the way, if you had bothered to read the Browne Review and the government proposals, you would know it is only Band C and D degree courses that will receive no tuition fee subsidy from government.

It is not the same for Band A and B ... the STEM subjects will still be subsidisied, so clever young people who want to study medical, or dentistry, or maths, or science will be able to do so without paying full fees.

Edited by dissident junk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 146 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

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.