Politics

[Christmas Tree 4827]

 

The global economy was nowt to do with labours economic failings. But the ONLY factor in the Tories failure to recover.

 

Party political alligience over evidence disgusts me.

 

The Tories are not in power.

[Rayvin 5296]

They're in mostly in power. More in power than anyone else. Unless you count corporate lobbyists.

 

Look, at the end of the day none of the main parties have a real vision for this country, they're only worried about the next election (and lining their pockets). Where are we heading exactly? I thought it would be into Europe where we could return to global prosperity and global relevance (highly controversial statement, don't worry, I'm as disillusioned as everyone else - seemed like a good idea at the time though, and I'd still back it if it could sort itself out). Now, we're just in terminal decline as we are outdone in global markets by emerging and emerged economies alike. We need someone with vision for the country, and there's just nothing.

 

What disappoints me more than anything is that the people of this country haven't come up with a credible alternative to this dross we get from the main parties. I include myself in this also of course, but aside from radical and insane right wing parties, we've no alternative. I sometimes find myself thinking that benevolent dictatorship would be a superior option to the sham that is democracy. If your vote is meaningless because manifesto promises are discarded when in power, what difference is there anyway?

[Dr Gloom 22149]

 

Tax rises of up to £9bn – equal to a 2p increase in the basic rate of income tax – could be imposed after the next general election to limit further cuts in public spending, experts warned on Thursday.

 

The scale of the spending cuts scheduled for 2015 in George Osborne's budget will be so difficult to implement an incoming government would have little alternative but to raise taxes or borrow more, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said.

 

The IFS, which produces a keenly watched analysis of the chancellor's budget, gave its warning after the Treasury's independent forecaster, the Office for Budget Responsibility, warned that growth would halve this year to 0.6% and the recovery would be weaker than predicted only in December.

 

There was speculation in the City following the poor figures that the UK could face its second credit downgrade as soon as the weekend. Ratings agencies Standard & Poor's and Fitch have the UK on negative watch and both have warned that a weakening of the recovery could lead to their stripping Britain of its AAA status. Osborne would face a second humiliation after Moody's issued a downgrade notice last month.

 

In a budget that kept the coalition tied to its austerity theme, Osborne was forced to admit that the UK would take two years longer to push the annual deficit below 3%. A rise in the personal income tax threshold to £10,000 next year, together with a 1p cut in beer duty and the abolition of a planned fuel duty rise in the autumn, were offset by a further tightening of Whitehall budgets to leave what the IFS described as a fiscally neutral budget that masked a further deterioration in the government's finances.

 

Osborne plans to keep spending at its current level until 2015 before a second wave of steep cuts takes effect up to 2018. The IFS said the government was delaying some austerity measures until after 2015, leaving the next government to bridge a large gap in Whitehall's finances.

 

Rowena Crawford of the IFS said politicians were likely to prefer tax rises to avoid making further spending cuts. "That is after an election and it is much more possible that a future government will prefer to increase taxes instead," she said.

 

Tony Travers, a director of research at the London School of Economics and an expert on local government finance, told Public Finance magazine: "You wouldn't know it from the headline figures, but local government, along with some other unprotected and unloved public services, looks likely to face at least 50% spending cuts between 2011-12 and 2017-2018."

 

Spending figures until 2018 show the debt bill has risen by £70bn since forecasts in the autumn statement and by almost £250bn since the coalition took office.

 

The IFS criticised Osborne for devoting senior civil servants' time to manipulating public spending figures to meet a pledge that the deficit would fall in successive years. The chancellor grabbed £10.9bn in underspends by Whitehall departments to squeak this year's debt bill under last year's £120bn deficit by £100m. More than £2bn came from an underspend in the NHS while a further £3bn came from defence.

 

He also delayed payments to bodies such as the World Bank and the European Union and brought forward a planned cut in a long-standing national insurance benefit to final salary pension schemes to reduce the annual bill. Some budget spending commitments were also delayed until after the election – including a £3bn infrastructure programme championed by the business secretary, Vince Cable, and £1bn for social care – which will not take effect until after April 2015.

 

The IFS said a ringfence around the NHS, schools, international development and defence equipment to protect them from cuts left further reductions in departmental spending limits to fall disproportionately on the remaining services.

 

Under pressure from backbench Tory MPs to sweeten the pill of welfare cuts already scheduled to hit this year, Osborne chose to let borrowing rise higher over the next two years than the government planned.

 

Paul Johnson, the IFS director, said: "Year-on-year real cuts in departmental spending have effectively come to an end for the period of this parliament." Tax cuts in the budget entailed a "modest loosening" in the next two years.

 

He pointed to a Treasury note in the budget documents saying bridging the gap between lower than expected tax receipts and spending commitments would need to be addressed by tax changes.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/mar/21/budget-2013-ifs-9bn-tax-rises-election

 

[Renton 22001]

They're in mostly in power. More in power than anyone else. Unless you count corporate lobbyists.

 

Look, at the end of the day none of the main parties have a real vision for this country, they're only worried about the next election (and lining their pockets). Where are we heading exactly? I thought it would be into Europe where we could return to global prosperity and global relevance (highly controversial statement, don't worry, I'm as disillusioned as everyone else - seemed like a good idea at the time though, and I'd still back it if it could sort itself out). Now, we're just in terminal decline as we are outdone in global markets by emerging and emerged economies alike. We need someone with vision for the country, and there's just nothing.

 

What disappoints me more than anything is that the people of this country haven't come up with a credible alternative to this dross we get from the main parties. I include myself in this also of course, but aside from radical and insane right wing parties, we've no alternative. I sometimes find myself thinking that benevolent dictatorship would be a superior option to the sham that is democracy. If your vote is meaningless because manifesto promises are discarded when in power, what difference is there anyway?

 

Good post, I essentially agree. The European dream seems like it is over, much to the glee of the right. Got no idea where to go from here now, I've always supported Labour , but Blair disgusted me on Iraq, and Milliband leaves me cold.

[Happy Face 29]

Less than 60% of people that can vote actually voted for ANY of the 3 main parties....and that is up on the previous 2 elections because it was much closer in 2010.

 

If that disaffected 40+% actually had a principled party to vote for things could be mighty different.

[sweetleftpeg 0]

I'm no Carol Vorderman, but wouldn't a cut in fuel tax give a massive boost to the economy? All goods and services have to be shipped about in transit and the high cost of doing this must be being past on to consumers through hikes in food price etc. Surely the key to boosting a economy is making sure people have disposable income to part with? From a personal point of view, I feel like my car is the one thing bleeding my dry at the minute to the point of looking at the logistics of getting rid.

[Tooj 17]

Are you against the idea of 'forced' work experience for jobseekers in any form or simply when it's something like stacking shelves for a company like Poundland?

 

I'm against it.

[ewerk 31203]

I'm against it.

 

10 hours a week to perform some form of community service that would benefit us all?

[Tooj 17]

Is it only 10 hours a week? Also don't see how it benefits us all. I just don't think it's fair personally that people should have to do it.

[ewerk 31203]

Is it only 10 hours a week? Also don't see how it benefits us all. I just don't think it's fair personally that people should have to do it.

 

I agree with the idea in principle but certainly not in the current format, I was suggesting 10 hours community service as an alternative to a situation where you have graduates forced to stack shelves for the benefit of national chain stores. You seemed to be opposed to the principle of having those on JSA being expected to do anything in return for it whereas I think that it should be part of the deal so that they can return something to society.

[Howmanheyman 33845]

I agree with the idea in principle but certainly not in the current format, I was suggesting 10 hours community service as an alternative to a situation where you have graduates forced to stack shelves for the benefit of national chain stores. You seemed to be opposed to the principle of having those on JSA being expected to do anything in return for it whereas I think that it should be part of the deal so that they can return something to society.

Sorry but a lot of these people have already done something for their benefits, they paid tax when they have worked. I'm against these schemes too and think they should be voluntary only or should have an enhanced payment rather than dole money plus expenses or the 'extra-Tenner' scheme.

[Tooj 17]

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-2294124/William-Hague-dragged-Tullow-Oil-court-row.html

[Happy Face 29]

It's slave labour for private companies. An absolute national disgrace.

[Rayvin 5296]

I think it should be done differently to be honest, and probably only for young people who would otherwise be ejected from the school system into nothingness. I wonder for instance why big companies with seemingly endless resources seemed to be poised to make the most out of it - that shouldn't be allowed. Why not lots of smaller companies struggling to avoid going under. It could be looked at as internships - small businesses tend to require a bigger range of skills due to the variation in work, and you learn more as a result. For younger people, this might encourage them to go out and start their own businesses or have meaningful experience to show people instead of 'stacking shelves as Tesco'.

 

Small companies are always hesitant to bring people in as another wage is a big deal; they're also really poorly informed about cheaper labour options like apprenticeships. But if you can bring in someone for nothing, give them skills, integrate them into a meaningful team - maybe you can employ them properly when the business becomes more competitive as a result of more resource at no additional cost. Even if you don't hire them, good experience for them to build on.

 

With that said, I suppose this is what they're doing with apprenticeships to some extent. We hired 1 young lad and two girls on the apprenticeship scheme and they've been brilliant - really switched on and capable. Really eager to work and learn things, even for the crappy apprenticeship wage. I think this is what we should be encouraging in our young people. We hired them all full time when they completed their NVQ - not every business can afford to do that, but even if we hadn't they'd have been more employable at 19 than most graduates at 21 due to the skills they picked up. I reckon the same would be true for internships as well.

 

When you're young, it's less about money and more about skills and experience. I think the opportunity to get that in such a competitive job market would be a reward in itself.

[NJS 4411]

Schemes like this can work if ran "honestly" as opposed to Tesco taking someone for nowt and at the end of their time just getting another one.

 

I've mentioned on here before I went to university but fucked up and didn't get a degree. This resulted in me being on the dole for about 15 months before I accepted a place on what was then called the JTS - this was dole + a tenner a week to cover travel and expenses. I ended up geting a place with a small software company in Gosforth where the owner saw the scheme as a chance to "test" potential without any risk and I'd been there six weeks when he offered me a job - the salary wasn't great but it was a start. He continued to use the scheme as the business expanded and a few duffers aside, he always gave jobs to those who proved themselves. I was with the company for nine years before moving south and I'm still in touch with a few of the people I worked there who've had successful careers based on it - a couple more so than me.

 

The problem I see is that for the numbers now desperate for work and more cynical employers (including cunts like Tesco) about cases like mine will be the exception which unfortunately does take it back to being a Tory favour to business and a figure fiddler. I understand that people who've been on the dole even for a few months might get into a rut and need a kick up the arse but that kick should be one of encouragement and not one of threat.

[Kid Dynamite 7170]

I think it should be done differently to be honest, and probably only for young people who would otherwise be ejected from the school system into nothingness. I wonder for instance why big companies with seemingly endless resources seemed to be poised to make the most out of it - that shouldn't be allowed. Why not lots of smaller companies struggling to avoid going under. It could be looked at as internships - small businesses tend to require a bigger range of skills due to the variation in work, and you learn more as a result. For younger people, this might encourage them to go out and start their own businesses or have meaningful experience to show people instead of 'stacking shelves as Tesco'.

 

Small companies are always hesitant to bring people in as another wage is a big deal; they're also really poorly informed about cheaper labour options like apprenticeships. But if you can bring in someone for nothing, give them skills, integrate them into a meaningful team - maybe you can employ them properly when the business becomes more competitive as a result of more resource at no additional cost. Even if you don't hire them, good experience for them to build on.

 

With that said, I suppose this is what they're doing with apprenticeships to some extent. We hired 1 young lad and two girls on the apprenticeship scheme and they've been brilliant - really switched on and capable. Really eager to work and learn things, even for the crappy apprenticeship wage. I think this is what we should be encouraging in our young people. We hired them all full time when they completed their NVQ - not every business can afford to do that, but even if we hadn't they'd have been more employable at 19 than most graduates at 21 due to the skills they picked up. I reckon the same would be true for internships as well.

 

When you're young, it's less about money and more about skills and experience. I think the opportunity to get that in such a competitive job market would be a reward in itself.

 

If this bloke isn't Alex he's a breath of fresh air around here. He's like the anti-CT. he has reasons to back up what he says and everything

[Renton 22001]

 

 

If this bloke isn't Alex he's a breath of fresh air around here. He's like the anti-CT. he has reasons to back up what he says and everything

 

And if it is Alex?

[Rayvin 5296]

If this bloke isn't Alex he's a breath of fresh air around here. He's like the anti-CT. he has reasons to back up what he says and everything

 

I'm not Alex. And thanks. I am however curious as to what difference being Alex would have made?

 

 

I've mentioned on here before I went to university but fucked up and didn't get a degree. This resulted in me being on the dole for about 15 months before I accepted a place on what was then called the JTS - this was dole + a tenner a week to cover travel and expenses. I ended up geting a place with a small software company in Gosforth where the owner saw the scheme as a chance to "test" potential without any risk and I'd been there six weeks when he offered me a job - the salary wasn't great but it was a start. He continued to use the scheme as the business expanded and a few duffers aside, he always gave jobs to those who proved themselves. I was with the company for nine years before moving south and I'm still in touch with a few of the people I worked there who've had successful careers based on it - a couple more so than me.

 

That's a really good example, glad to hear it worked out; I do think that more small employers should be persuaded to think this way, it's win-win. The fact that he had a long standing and capable employee for 9 years as a result of a six week trial speaks volumes. It also starts you off on the right foot, as you work hard to make an impression. There's nothing wrong with hard work as long as you feel you're a) appreciated and b ) getting something meaningful out of it, be it pay or skills. Something that you just wouldn't get from Tesco.

 

I also agree with your later point though, perhaps there simply are too many people looking for work for this to be workable. I feel the government should find some way to efficiently manage this however, we're a nation predominantly made of small businesses, and something like this would perhaps mean they could out-compete bigger companies in some cases, if it could be made to work.

 

Also, it's definitely true that constant rejection makes it much harder to motivate yourself for work, and I'm not sure why the Tories expect that this would not be the case. A lot of the language they've been using is threatening and aggressive, and it's just counter effective. They fundamentally misunderstand what it's like. It always gets me that Osborne was employed for something like 6 weeks in Selfridges before he made his career as a politician. So he's only had a real job for about 6 weeks in his entire life. He also has no academic or professional background in economics, he has a history degree.

Edited March 23, 2013 by Rayvin

[NJS 4411]

Also, it's definitely true that constant rejection makes it much harder to motivate yourself for work, and I'm not sure why the Tories expect that this would not be the case. A lot of the language they've been using is threatening and aggressive, and it's just counter effective. They fundamentally misunderstand what it's like. It always gets me that Osborne was employed for something like 6 weeks in Selfridges before he made his career as a politician. So he's only had a real job for about 6 weeks in his entire life. He also has no academic or professional background in economics, he has a history degree.

 

I don't know if you remember since I don't know how old you are but two NE Tory MPs (Fabricant and Merchant) did a thing a few years ago where they spent a couple of weeks on the dole. Even knowing it was a fixed period with a return to luxury guaranteed it completely shocked them and unless they were the best actors ever affected them deeply. I think all MPs of all parties should try it - the fuckers get enough holidays so time isn't an issue.

 

I'd love to see CT try it as well but that's by the by.

[Tooj 17]

If this bloke isn't Alex he's a breath of fresh air around here. He's like the anti-CT. he has reasons to back up what he says and everything

 

Get over it man.

[Howmanheyman 33845]

Did about three YTS schemes in my time. Wrapped one in more or less straight away as even if I'd got the job at the end of it with my placement it wasn't what I wanted to do, another one was similar and an equal waste of time. The only one that might have been any good I left for a full time job as t was a guaranteed wage and most of my mates were working as they were older and I was sick of being skint on £36 a week. Once nipped in and chose a FLT course for a couple of weeks whilst out of work rather than be forced to work on a meaningless 'warehouse' course for 6-12 months for dole money plus a tenner. (The ET scheme). Luckily I've never been in as bad a state since and any stints out of work have been a few months at worst and that's bad enough.

[Kid Dynamite 7170]

 

 

Get over it man.

 

Get over what?

 

It can hardly be a breath of 'fresh' air if its the same bloke who has 50,000 posts

[Howmanheyman 33845]

Breath of 'familiar' air, maybe?

[Tooj 17]

Get over what?

 

It can hardly be a breath of 'fresh' air if its the same bloke who has 50,000 posts

Thinking every new poster is Alex.

[Kid Dynamite 7170]

The bloke ran up double the amount of posts than any other poster and has been back under 4-5 different accounts. It's not a question of if he comes back but when he comes back