Saturday, September 11, 2010

A real threat to social cohesion

Coalition cuts will hit poor 10 times harder than rich, says TUC

The coalition's spending cuts will hit the poorest in society 10 times harder than the richest as the health, social and education services they rely on are slashed, an extensive new study for the Trades Union Congress has found. The TUC general secretary, Brendan Barber, says the research proves that the Conservatives are breaching their election promise to introduce cuts fairly.

Posted by devo @ 10:11 AM (1932 views)
Please complete the required fields.



23 thoughts on “A real threat to social cohesion

  • Amazing how the left has so much to say now it’s out of power.
    Where were the socialists under New Labour and what were they doing?

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • the number cruncher says:

    I’m a socialist and I was winging about Blair and Brown, as was the Guardian – nothing amazing at all except your desire to fabricate a straw man augment to discredit and ignore the reality of what is happening and the central message of the article, which is true.

    Under Fake labour Blair made the super rich much richer and now under the condem austerity the poor and hard working classes will support the assets of the rent seekers, monopolists and super rich.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Would that be the poor non and modest property owners by any chance.

    2. the number cruncher ..Welcome to the NWO that so many have denied. All will be oneness, but for the chosen few who will not be

    marked by the beast for they are the children of the beast and bear his signature now for those that are able to see.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • They ought to be grateful they’ve had it good for so long. Not moaning now that they might lose some of their handouts.

    In any case this article begs the question as to why there is still so much ‘poverty’ after 13 years of socialism. Come on Brown and Blair. Tell us why…

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Sneaker, us socialists were very much engaged in trying to stop people with views like yours within the Labour Party from ripping up clause four and creating the creature which became the Blatcherite New Labour party at all. And we were completely right to do so. The “left” has consistently opposed the Blair project, Nu Labour privatisation and the accelerating inequality in British society.
    Of course, more pertinent to our concerns here in September 2010 is how fair the party of the rich was going to be in their spending cuts. It will no doubt be a particularly unedifying, if grimly entertaining spectacle watching those ardent advocates of social justice Cable and Clegg explain the presevation of wealth and increase in inequality at the expense of the oldest and most vulnerable which we are about to experience. I take it from the tone of your posting you have no problem with that, however.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Yeah Peter, you’ve done real well to survive the last thirteen years of SOCIALISM haven’t you. I bet you thought the nanny state was going to crush your freedom at any moment, didn’t you. All that political correctness and that.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • @3 Peter:

    “In any case this article begs the question as to why there is still so much ‘poverty’ after 13 years of socialism.”

    Come on, use your brain. It’s not rocket science. The country is full of people who think they are well off — especially if they own a home. There are so many people in this country that think that the more money they can keep for themselves the better off they will be. They just can’t see the bigger picture that the more we redistribute the wealth the more money there will be back in the economy to generate more business, more economic activity and so more jobs.

    But if you let it all go to a few, they stash it away, keep it out of circulation and make the rest of us suffer. The role of the Government — any government — must be to ensure this money gets put back into the economy. The easiest way is to tax the rich more and reduce the tax on the poor — that way the poor get more in their pocket, and it is well known that they will spend proportionally more.

    This doesn’t happen because so many people think they pay too much tax (now what does that mean? No one likes paying tax but how can you say you pay too much? It’s just a stupid comment and should be ignored).

    But as long as there are so many people in this country that can’t see the benefit of everyone over their own greedy short-sightedness we will never improve our society. Politicians pander to the views of the sheeple, and Labour were very good at it.

    Whoever said Labour was a Socialist party? If you think that you really are deluded. Open your eyes, look at the realpolitik, and then ask yourself how can you persuade everyone you know to think of the country before themselves? What, can’t do that? Well then, don’t moan when the country sinks further into the sh1t.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Labour rely on the impoverished for much of their support .

    If you want more of something you subsidise it which is exactly what they did with poverty .

    Even that was not enough for Labour , they had to import 3 million immigrants , the majority from outside the EU .

    It’s not as if the roads are uncongested or we have an abundence of natural energy resources , vacant houses everywhere or low unemployment .

    It’s hard to see how they could have damaged the UK more if they had tried so I assume they were trying to damage the UK .

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • “The role of the Government — any government — must be to ensure this money gets put back into the economy. The easiest way is to tax the rich more and reduce the tax on the poor — that way the poor get more in their pocket, and it is well known that they will spend proportionally more”

    —————————————————

    Dude, you have been brainwashed by your government. I’ll let Peter Schiff do the explaining for me.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • the number cruncher said…

    ‘I’m a socialist and I was winging about Blair and Brown, as was the Guardian’.
    ________________________________________________________________

    You jest surely, the Guardian from 1994 onwards ceased to be a newspaper and became the propaganda sheet for the New Labour Project, whose apologists it still employs.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • peeping tom

    By your reasoning I presume you consider the Sun an organ of deep political analysis.

    estrader
    Brainwashed? That’s a curious retort to a post in response to #3. I listened to a little of the video; old arguments – the rich need the incentive to go on working and producing wealth. That has never been demonstrated. In fact the example of the banks is a strong argument to the contrary. And what about incentives for the low paid? Who is brainwashed?

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • “the rich need the incentive to go on working and producing wealth. That has never been demonstrated.”

    You must be poor then.
    Peter Schiff IS a businessman and investor, so what you’re saying is spurious nonsense. Besides, tell me where it has been demonstrated that the poor go out and spend proportionally more? Has it ever occurred to you that maybe that is why they ARE poor? Oh, I see, your idea of rich must mean anybody who doesn’t need government assistance and poor is someone who can’t afford to buy the latest iPhone, Flat Screen TV, iPod etc every month.

    I know many people who turn down overtime (me included) and extra jobs because of the diminished returns due to taxation. I have lived and worked in two different countries, neither of which includes America and I can assure you that Peter Schiff is right on the money with what he says. I have run a business and I personally know successful businessmen and they basically say the very things Peter Schiff has said in the video.

    ‘Poor’ to me does not mean someone who can’t afford to buy the latest fashion accessories as they are released.
    ‘Rich’ to me does not mean someone who buys bars of gold every month and bury it in their backyard.
    Instead of ‘Rich’ have you ever thought of hard working?
    Instead of ‘Rich’ have you ever thought of businessman and employer?
    Instead of ‘Rich’ have you ever thought of entrepreneur?
    Instead of ‘Rich’ have you ever thought someone who has sacrificed consumption today for a higher standard of living in the future?

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • PT @ 8, you just don’t want to hear it, do you? The New Labour Project was not a socialist project. However, you are right when you say that The Guardian has indeed often been full of apologists for the Nu Lab project, particularly the less palatable rightward Blatcherite tendencies which they wordily tried to explain and justify…. (whilst also generally being against much needed aurthoritarian socialist policy like ASBO legislation which, from what I see, did most to protect the vulnerable poor from scum). I agree also that it was indeed frequently nauseating to read. Nonetheless, neither Blair nor Brown were socialists no matter how often you say they were.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Estrader, hard working certainly doesn’t read to me as a synonym for “rich”, nor does “employer” or someone willing to make sacrifices for the future. The people I know who work the hardest and sacrifice the most for others or for the future are generally the poorer of my acquaintances.
    The richest individuals I know are comprised of the inheritors of land (farmers or landed families), children of the owners of big business (members of immediate family of supermarket owner who have some directorships which are sinecures and other hobby businesses on the side which wouldn’t work if you had to live only on that income), kids from very comfortable families (GPs X 2) and only three clever, enterprising and very well organised lads one of whom is a high court judge, one a leading virologist and the other a property developer, who have really made it themselves. My poor acquaintances comprise the selfless, those who made unfortunate career or marriage choices, those who have suffered ill health, those that are most able but lack confidence and those that are too busy doing their actual work to run their businesses better. I think my poor acquaintances contribute a graet deal more in tax and sacrifices than they can really afford and contribute to society in other ways a great deal more than the richest of my mates. I certainly believe Professor Mate, HHJ Mate and OtherMate Property Ltd can well afford to contribute a good bit more than they do. Happily they would all agree with me there, not least because, being from poorer families, they know what it is to do without the basics.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • letthemfall said…

    ‘peeping tom

    By your reasoning I presume you consider the Sun an organ of deep political analysis’.
    ________________________________________________________________________

    And by what ‘reasoning’ do you suppose that? Both The Guardian and The Sun supported New Labour, they are as bad as each other.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Gentlemen, to quote Shakespeare: “all our yesterdays have lighted fools the way to dusty death” (Macbeth 5:5)

    Focus on the present – our coalition government is more open to constructive suggestion on this subject than any other in the post war era, and is currently drafting a housing bill.

    Seize the moment – the odds are that you will never have a better chance to influence government on this subject in your lifetime..

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • clockslinger, it has *nothing* to do with whether rich people can afford to pay more than the “poor”. It is the Governments reasoning as to *why* they should. Besides, why should the rich should pay for other peoples unfortunate marriage or career choices or lack of confidence?

    No offence, but I think you are either too young to understand or you’ve never earned enough to understand that Governments don’t distinguish between “rich” and hard working. Once your earnings hit the higher tax brackets then any extra work is taxed so heavily that there is little incentive to do it. I take TOIL instead of money because at least I get it 100% tax free ie/ 1 hr overtime = 1 hr TOIL. Now, that is LESS money for me to spend but I’d rather that than be giving a large proportion of my earnings to the taxman only for him to give it to a poor divorcee so that they can buy an iPod!

    Peter Schiff has given many good, solid, logical real and intelligent reasons as to why the idea of taxing the rich more will not produce the results the Governmets claim they will.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • estrader
    Your comments are riddled with assumptions, including that everyone should think like you. In essence you are repeating the mantras that the wealthy use to defend their positions. Don’t forget that low paid people work hard too, often much harder than the wealthy just to survive. If you are going to attempt to justify your position, offer some good reason in place of your tabloid baying.

    peeping tom
    You can’t tell the difference between the Guardian and Sun? I’m afraid I can say no more then.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Is anyone going to talk about house prices anymore? The ultimate unfairness is those who worked hard, saved their money and did the right thing by not getting into debt (in highly inflated house prices) are now having their savings inflated away to pay for everyone who did the wrong thing and greedily drank all the fruits of prosperity whilst the sun shined.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • letthemfall ,

    What is it that renders you incapable of understanding what I am saying? I have made NO assumptions anywhere. I am repeating the mantras to defend MY position and experience in life? Do you get it? I am not saying that poor people don’t work hard, what could possibly lead you to that conclusion!? Go back and listen to what is being said in the video and read what I have written, again, until you at least are in a better position to make your case. Right now you are creating a completely irrelevant straw man argument.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • letthemfall said…

    ‘peeping tom
    You can’t tell the difference between the Guardian and Sun? I’m afraid I can say no more then.’
    ______________________________________________________________________________

    I can tell the difference in presentation, but in terms of political allegiance they were exactly the same throughout the Blair years. If you can’t tell the difference between a New Labour propaganda rag and a newspaper (as the Guardian *was* until 1994) then I’m afraid I can say no more then.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • the number cruncher says:

    UT @ 14 – they have the appearance of being open, as did the Blair regime in their first year. Hope springs eternal….

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • it_is_going_with_a_bang says:

    12.
    “I certainly believe Professor Mate, HHJ Mate and OtherMate Property Ltd can well afford to contribute a good bit more than they do. Happily they would all agree with me there, not least because, being from poorer families, they know what it is to do without the basics.”

    Really – that happily? I doubt it. I feel fairly sure they will be employing the services of an accountant to make sure they pay as little tax as possible at any given opportunity. So they’re not “that happy” about paying tax are they???

    That comparison of peoples ability to contribute towards tax or society is quite frankly a load of b**locks.
    Now I am a fairly open minded person and would invite anyone to have an opinion but that is absolute generalized cr*p.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



Add a comment

  • Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
  • Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user´s views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
  • Please adhere to the Guidelines

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>