***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 2 *****
No doubt that there will be some discussions about what is likely to become a dominant topic on the News over the next couple of days. Easier to have it all in one place.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 21 Oct 10 at 20:42
|
|
To save money on fuel, don't drive so fast
Last edited by: FotheringtonTomas on Tue 19 Oct 10 at 13:29
|
PU's doing his impression of a sheepdog again:)
Pat
|
The major problem I have with this is there isn't enough jobs to go round. 500 people or more are applying for one position at Morrisons.
We will end up with pensioners living in loony hospitals because they are forced to get jobs when they are not capable. We will end up with massive homeless problems in our cities and the cuts will just cause the economy to shrink further.
I may be wrong but I can see it happening.
|
>> We will end up with pensioners living in loony hospitals
Which loony hospitals would those be, then? All the ones round here got shut down and converted to flats about 20 years ago...
What needs to happen - it won't, but allow a man his dream - is that the Gov't explains chapter and verse of how deep the hole is, how we got there (most of us have ideas on that count, but we need the full picture), how we get out and why we get out that way.
For example: lots of people ask why we keep ladling out money to (e.g.) the EU, foreign aid etc etc when we haven't enough to go around at home. We never get anything approaching an adequate answer - with the result that all the tinfoil helmet merchants start blethering on. Not good enough. Just give us the truth, and have done with it. And if the truth is that there is no good reason, be it economic or strategic, then away with it.
I personally would rather have this sort of thing than all the "we're all in this together" rubbish and the careful targeting of ire against this or that section of the population.
|
Think it was Clarkston I read last week who said let the Govt give us a monthly update like our own bank statement. Let us see how much we are in the red, and then any credits/debits through their new actions to see on a month to month basis what the improvements are.
I go back to my post on war when many people replied saying that although lots were getting spent, it was basically coming back to us in the form of wages and contracts. Is that not the theory that Labour were going to adopt, to get the Councils and Governements spending their way out of the recession rather than cutting back.
|
Anyone who thinks a policy of loading debt onto future generations and paying our civil servants and pensioners and unemployed and disabled more than the working population can afford is a viable long term strategy ..
is called Ed Balls.
"Think it was Clarkston I read last week who said let the Govt give us a monthly update like our own bank statement. Let us see how much we are in the red, and then any credits/debits through their new actions to see on a month to month basis what the improvements are."
Shows how ignorant he is.. Government borrowing IS pubblished monthly . £14.9 Billion last month iirc.
Just an excuse to cover monumental ignorance.
Last edited by: madf on Tue 19 Oct 10 at 13:52
|
>> Just give us the truth, and have
>> done with it.
>>
Truth from a politician? What planet are you on?
Last edited by: Old Navy on Tue 19 Oct 10 at 15:22
|
>> >> Just give us the truth, and have
>> >> done with it.
>> >>
>>
>> Truth from a politician? What planet are you on?
>>
I would refer my learned fellow forum member to my comment about allowing a man his dream, further up my post...
|
>> I would refer my learned fellow forum member to my comment about allowing a man
>> his dream, further up my post...
>>
My apology for interrupting your dream. Unfortunately only the loony lefties believe that the countries bankruptcy is a fantasy. I see in the press today that the shadow chancellor wants to increase taxation by £300 a head to allow even more spending. The only one I believe is the politician that said "There is no money left".
Last edited by: Old Navy on Tue 19 Oct 10 at 17:13
|
|
This is the shadow Chancellor who admits knowing nothing about economics and that reading up on it will bring him up to speed - well that's alright then..
|
>> This is the shadow Chancellor who admits knowing nothing about economics and that reading up
>> on it will bring him up to speed - well that's alright then..
>>
Hmm The last Chancellor like that - who learned in a hurry was : Healey...
History is repeating itself... but as the people concerned learn nothing from history, they are doomed to repeat its mistakes...
That sounds familiar ah yes..
Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it.
- Winston Churchill
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
|
|
At least this one isn't in power and the IMF seem happy with what Osborne is doing. I think there's a closer parallel to what was going on in the twenties than in the seventies.....but that was almost catastrophic as well, especially in the area of defence....
|
>> This is the shadow Chancellor who admits knowing nothing about economics and that reading up
>> on it will bring him up to speed - well that's alright then..
>>
Can we give him a fighter jet to test and a manual.
|
>> My apology for interrupting your dream. Unfortunately only the loony lefties believe that the countries
>> bankruptcy is a fantasy. I see in the press today that the shadow chancellor wants
>> to increase taxation by £300 a head to allow even more spending.
>>
I saw that too. It didn't surprise me in the slightest, but this is the sort of idea you get from folk who start from the principle that income ought to belong to the State, with pocket money being disbursed to those considered suitable, and confiscated from the rest.
I keep saying it, but it bears repeating: C Northcote Parkinson's The Law and the Profits should be required reading for all Chancellors, shadow or otherwise. Yes, it was written 50 years ago but the underlying message still applies.
|
>> PU's doing his impression of a sheepdog again:)
What happened to my crack about (P)laytex (U)nderwear? It was itself based on an old joke.
|
We're all too young to remember Playtex FT:)
Right then you lot........
Quickly, before the announcement tomorrow, tell us what you would do.
Pat
|
>> Right then you lot........
>>
>> Quickly, before the announcement tomorrow, tell us what you would do.
>>
>> Pat
>>
I'd do the same as anyone would.
I'd increase taxes for everyone who earned more than me, cut services that don't effect me and only give benefits to people in the same circumstances as myself.
Economics are easy if you keep a clear head.
|
Now that's not what I call entering into the spirit of the question, RR.
Pat
|
It's when things are bad that you find out what has been going on for a long time. Hands up who agree it is okay for someone to keep a council property once they earn say the national average wage? Also hands up who think it is fine to then pass on the council property to children regardless of their situation? It's not your own home that you own after all.
And then the French and Greek's protest when their retirement age is made nearly as high as ours!
|
I think part of the problem in this country is that we have been encouraged to have a sense of entitlement to everything from council houses to benefits and everything inbetween, but little encouragement to work for any of it.
Hence the prospect of having to have some of that support withdrawn or reduced is more than people so used to that culture can comprehend. They may actually have to stand on their own two feet. How terrifying.
|
>> PU's doing his impression of a sheepdog again:)
>>
>> Pat
>>
But I like him and he is sensible which of course he may not like. I like you too Pat even though you can't cook! David Cameroooooon and his burk of a mate, I had faith in and now I hope they get lost as soon as poss. As for the defence cuts I am totally convinced that ANY defence cuts are ludicrous. Getting it RIGHT is right and if that entails an increase of whatever amount I will happily subscribe to that and pay as I have always done.
UP our Defence. UP our Education. UP our Healthcare, but get rid of the wasters in our society. Just get rid of them, for I have had enough of supplementing their life styles (sic)
Martin.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 26 Oct 10 at 01:06
|
OI, I'll have you know that I've discovered tht Tikka sauce comes in jar with cooking instructions so we've got chicken Tikka and Uncle Ben's Pilau rice tonight with naan bread.
Only thing is I've made it with beef, does it matter?
Pat
|
Not at all. I'd recommend Lloyd Grossman's curry sauces.
John
|
>> OI, I'll have you know that I've discovered tht Tikka sauce comes in jar with
>> cooking instructions so we've got chicken Tikka and Uncle Ben's Pilau rice tonight with naan
>> bread.
>>
>> Only thing is I've made it with beef, does it matter?
>>
>> Pat
>>
BRILLIANT. I consider I am shot down. grrrrrrr ouch!!
M
|
...Only thing is I've made it with beef, does it matter?...
Beef tikka didn't immediately appeal to my refined taste buds.
But I see there are several recipes for it on the 'net, so perhaps Pat's not so far off the culinary mark as I first thought.
|
>> ...Only thing is I've made it with beef, does it matter?...
>>
>> Beef tikka didn't immediately appeal to my refined taste buds.
>>
>> But I see there are several recipes for it on the 'net, so perhaps Pat's
>> not so far off the culinary mark as I first thought.
>>
Get a grip Man!! 0:-)
|
I don't think you need to "UP" anything Martin, I think we just need to get value for money. There's a load of wasters in education and health plus grossly inefficient structures. Get rid. As for defence, in all the scenes from Afghanistan, when did you ever see a tank? Or heavy artillery? Never. It's all light (too light!) stuff. An aircraft carrier is no use against a nutter with a bomb in a rucksack.
Did you notice that special forces got an INCREASE? 40% I think it was.
But 25,000 are going from the MoD. That'll save money in more ways than one!
And if we weren't paying about £66 billion a year in interest on the debt that Labour ran up, and that's before we pay a penny off the credit card bill, none of that would have had to be cut, though it should because why should you and I pay for waste?
Stuart got it right. Fools are being bribed and they're too dumb to see it's with their own money.
John
|
>> An aircraft carrier is no use against a nutter with a bomb in a rucksack.
Very useful in Afghanistan though... not. Apparently a lot of the Harrier's were in use in Afghanistan at one point so they weren't on the aircraft carriers anyway. And didn't they have problems in hot climates because of the thin air etc.
I just hope they do redesign the carriers with a catapult to buy normal planes instead of something costing more than a Raptor.
|
|
Just got around to reading about some of the cuts... cancellation of the Nimrod MRA4... good. Too much was spent on an ancient airframe. Basically rebuilding a de Havilland Comet! de Havilland gives a clue to the age of the airframes. Not value for money. Sense at last.
|
Its very simple.
We have no need, and a damn site less right to "project power", so defence away from our shores is not required. So all that expense can go.
The nuclear powers that have the ability to target us wont attack us, so....
Anyone who carries out an act against the uk, the source of which should be nuked.
Any more fanatical muslim attacks bases in from Pakistan? Nuke the whole north of the country
Argentina invades the Falklands? 20 megatons on Buenos Aries.
Tehran sends over some fanatical cells? Boom
Who needs an army and airforce?
|
|
.....especially if Apple come up with an iNuke app.
|
I tried to start a thread similar to this a couple of weeks back along the lines of what would you do, taking into account the practicality of the issues these days.
In the alcohol thread, it is mentioned that an easy way would be to up the price but that won't tackle the culture. Similarly here, it would be easy to impose all sorts of taxes, changes to benefits etc but the culture needs to change with it.
If we try to cut benefits to benefit cheats, there will be more lawyers, dodgy doctors, advice agencies , human rights groups all working against it to make money for their "clients"
If we do something with tax, there will be accountants able to interpret schemes to benefit their well off clients. If we impose VAT, the poor will be worse off, the rich will get their accountants to put it through company expenses.
We need a culture that being a benefit cheat, working on the side etc is deemed as anti social as drunk driving. We need the country to wake up and realise the state we are in.
But to do this, the country needs to start the ball rolling. We know the sort of issues that annoy many of us, Health & Safety, ambulance chasing lawyers, corruption, MP expenses etc etc.
Before Cameron comes out and tells us what we must do, he needs to show what they will do. Let us see instant proof that H&S is going to change, that the compensation culture will be dealt with. Let us see how he and his millions are going to feel the heat and pinch? Let us see how he is going to tell the Euro Union to take a hike, that we are going to stop putting money anywhere than our own country.
And while he is still spending billions fighting Americas wars, he will lose all credibility about the state of our finances.
|
have you not got it yet?
Its picture of the globe and you shake to aim.
|
>> Just got around to reading about some of the cuts... cancellation of the Nimrod MRA4...
>> good. Too much was spent on an ancient airframe. Basically rebuilding a de Havilland Comet!
>> de Havilland gives a clue to the age of the airframes. Not value for money.
>> Sense at last.
>>
SENSE! Aircraft that are bought and paid for, have the best technical fit in the world and the first have actually been delivered. Cancelling it shows what idiots Politicians are. The world beating expertise in maritime patrol and reconnaissance lost. No long range SAR cover (next time an oil rig explodes or your ship sinks more than a few hundred miles out-forget it). No screening cover when our own subs leave for patrol.
Still, we are at least getting three rivet joint aircraft to provide electronic surveilance. Oh, I'm sure they'll forget to mention that the airframes are 45 year old refurbished KC-135s from the USAF boneyard.
|
I work in IT and my employer has a lot of government contracts. So... what do I expect?
A lot of job losses... For various reasons we are mortgage free so not so at risk but if we as a company lost a lot of contracts I could be vulnerable..... and I'd gladly take the money. I might quit in 5 years anyway so why not go early for a good pay off? But I hope I don't go down that route!
Having said that on the occasions I frequent the likes of PC World I enjoy helping people. For some reason I get mistaken for staff (no badge) but happy to offer independent advice. Sometimes I do offer help when someone looks in need though ;-) Saved someone over £500 last week! They seemed to accept my opinion advice and turned to their boyfriend to check - the boyfriend worked in IT.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Wed 20 Oct 10 at 00:11
|
My job as at risk as more and more people are using mobile devices to access their emails. I think long term there will always be a demand for my job but it will decrease. Ideally I will start doing it part time and get another job, maybe not IT related the rest of the time.
I can't carry on earning the amount I am doing in the medium term it just isn't enough as I do want my own place some day.
The spending cuts will effect me badly. A year ago I did a lot of work for employees of the local universities, now I do a lot less work for these type of people but interestingly I do more work for GPs and other types of doctors now, it seems GPs are still happy to flash the cash but then they earn enough to do so.
I know so many people who work for the universities are so worried about their jobs, and I worry for my area as the entire economy is built around the three universities in a lot of ways -not students but the graduates and the lecturers.
I really don't know what is going to happen long term. My dads business is already very much none existent now. Being nearly 60 he really has no hope of getting a job.
I have two female friends who have spent the last three years on the dole on and off but they do a lot of charity work in between. They just cannot get any sort of job at all, even the supermarkets don't want them.
It is a long way from even 2006 when I applied for a Christmas job at Currys.Digital and just pretty much walked into it without even a proper interview.
If those days return then maybe the outlook isn't so bleak, but at the moment unless you have a skill there is just no work.
|
|
You're all doom and gloom Rattle! Fewer people will be after a new PC.... so opportunity for you to tune/update the old one.
|
That would be the obvious thing but it doesn't seem to be happening. It is the viruses and rootkits which has kept me going but that has gone a little quiet but it gets like that. Tomorrow I could be mad busy I just don't know.
What seems to be happening a lot at the moment with none business people is their PC breaks so they just use their mobile phone for internet access instead. My sister tells me a lot of her friends hardly use their PCs any more because of modern smart phones.
Maybe Android virus removal will be a national progression :p
On the plus side at least I know I will always have a job, and that is why I don't want to ever give this up completely as it is always a bit of security.
|
|
Maybe the overdue coffee is really now due ;-) I'm back living in the Heatons but if it was Chorlton I could invite Ted and buy all of us a coffee.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Wed 20 Oct 10 at 02:02
|
.........and now we go to war with the French cheese eating surrender monkeys as allies.
God help us and all who sail in us!
|
Saved someone over £500 last week!
Wonder they haven't banned you.
|
We're all ok:
Carbon capture and wind farms to be protected. Extra billions on MMGW nonsense. I'm sure all those losing their jobs will feel proud that they've been sacrificed for a hugely expensive, useless white elephant.
Foreign aid to be 0.7% of GDP. I'm sure those industrial giants India, China and Russia are happy they are still going to be receiving aid from us.
Makes you proud!
|
Hmm
Oil prices are rising . Oil drilling success rates are falling. Deep sea drilling is where the action is and we know what BP did for that..
Anyone basing a future on an oil based economy at under $100 per barrel is well to put it kindly .. retarded.
|
There is no conceivable reason why Britain should send billions of pounds (WHICH WE HAVE TO BORROW) in overseas aid.
Most of it goes to fund the extravagant lifestyle and palaces of a myriad of Third World dictators: that which goes to Pakistan at least partly, by offset, funds that country's nuclear weapons program.
Charity begins at home - in Great Britain.
|
>> Foreign aid to be 0.7% of GDP. I'm sure those industrial giants India, China and
>> Russia are happy they are still going to be receiving aid from us.
>>
I thought I heard Osborne say that aid to China and Russia was to be stopped. Also, it has been hinted that aid to India will be reduced. In my view, no aid to be given to countries that have space and nuclear programs, and to countries which export more to us than we import from them. I do accept that there may be some strategic reasons given for giving aid to India and Pakistan, but I do not agree with those reasons.
As for "cuts", Osborne has announced that "Total public expenditure will be £702 billion next year, then £713 billion, £724 billion and £740 billion in 2014/15". Labour spent £690 billion last year. So that is £billions MORE each year, year on year for the next 4 years, than Labour did last year.
:Devil's advocate mode on:
I think we can all play our part by choosing to spending on goods and services that are UK based. So choose a bank or insurer who uses UK call centres, buy cars, shoes, computers, etc. that are wholly or partly made in the UK. If you buy foreign made stuff, minimise your expenditure as much as you can. eg.
Jaguar, Land Rover, Nissan, Honda, Toyota, MINI rather than Audi, BMW, Fiat, Hyundai, etc.
Novatech PC rather than a Mac or iPad or Imac or whatever.
make do with a basic Nokia worth £20 rather than spending hundreds more on an iPhone or Samsung android whatsit.
If you carry on buying foreign made stuff and services, then don't complain that we are debt ridden and our economy is in ruins and your job is at risk because of it.
:Devil's advocate mode off:
I thought the spending review has broadly got it right. I am more a glass half full person than a pessimist, even though I find this statistic frightening "UK's net debt hits £842.9 billion - a record 57.2 per cent of GDP".
Last edited by: Suppose on Wed 20 Oct 10 at 14:29
|
Suppose are you aware who makes the procesors (the brain) of the Iphones and other smart phones? Well they can be made by many companies in the far east but the important thing is all the design and logic in the processors have been done in Cambridge by a company called ARM.
ARM is major importance to the UK and is a word leader in mobile processors. Buy a £500 Iphone and a chunk of that will go straight to ARM. By a £20 Nokia and there will be no British input at all.
It is all very well saying buy a British car there is no British built car on the market which suits my needs apart from perhaps the Nissan Micra.
And anyway even my Panda has some British input, FIAT seats are designed by Loughbrough University!. The glass is made by Pilkington (although probably not in the UK).
The UK's big industry is designing things. Yes a phone may be made in China but you can bet a good chunk of the technology is owned by a British company.
|
They might be thinking about cutting aid to China and Russia, but they're putting it up to £11.5 BILLION pounds/year.
An absolute scandal, but it makes the Politicians feel warm and cosy.
|
>> ARM is major importance to the UK and is a word leader in mobile processors.
>> Buy a £500 Iphone and a chunk of that will go straight to ARM. By
>> a £20 Nokia and there will be no British input at all.
>>
>> The UK's big industry is designing things. Yes a phone may be made in China
>> but you can bet a good chunk of the technology is owned by a British
>> company.
>>
>>
Rattle, you say "major importance to the UK " and "good chunk". Just look at some basic figures for Apple and ARM for the last reported quarter:
Apple $4.31bn of profits on $20.3bn of sales
ARM £43.5m profit on £100m of revenue.
So assume that ARM makes a total £200m profit in four quarters. Even if all the profit was paid to the Treasury as 100% tax, that £200m won't cover the interest we are paying on our debt in a DAY!
>> It is all very well saying buy a British car there is no British built
>> car on the market which suits my needs apart from perhaps the Nissan Micra.
>> >> And anyway even my Panda has some British input, FIAT seats are designed by Loughbrough >> University!. The glass is made by Pilkington (although probably not in the UK). >>
Well, Rattle, you carry on buying foreign made goods, and keep supporting the foreigners at the expense of Brits.
>> They might be thinking about cutting aid to China and Russia, but they're putting it
>> up to £11.5 BILLION pounds/year. >> >> An absolute scandal, but it makes the Politicians feel warm and cosy.
>>
MLC - I agree with landsker that it is bonkers to borrow to give aid to foreigners. I do not know how the politicians justify it or why we voters put up with it. If we felt strongly about it surely we should be complaining about it to our politicians in strong terms.
Last edited by: Suppose on Wed 20 Oct 10 at 16:01
|
There was no British car which fitted my needs. If we all did that no foreigners would buy hour UK made cars. People used to do that logic, they ended up with crap rust buckets like the Morris Marina because they could get away with it.
I don't have a problem with having a Polish built car, I am still supporting the UK because the finance company is British, the government will make 17.5% on around £8000 and the UK based dealer will make some profit, its just a pitty that money went to Birmingham and not Manchester :p.
People used to buy British made TVs, they broke down on a monthly basis, my uncle was always round fixing the damn things, yet the Japanese Sony's lasted.
|
>> People used to buy British made TVs, they broke down on a monthly basis, my
>> uncle was always round fixing the damn things, yet the Japanese Sony's lasted.
>>
Did they?
My Grandparents had a Pye TV in a wooden cabinet buttons on the front for BBC 1, BBC2, IBA and then genric labeled 4,5,6 , British made and that TV went on, and on, and on
We had a early Toshiba (Japenese company granted) again wood cabinet and RED LCD clock and channel display with a fully functional remote control (rare at the time used a 9v sqaure battery) made in Britain, > 23 years old still going on it only left the family via the boot of a car becasue my dad wanted a widescreen tv and somewhere to plug the Freeview Box in
I have a 14" Toshiba (now in the loft) 15 years old still works perfectly (made in Britain)
My Cousin has a Sony 42" LCD, 1 year old, it was a FOC replacement from Sony becasue the 1st one fizzed and went up in a puff off smoke. granted i love sony products but you cant say generally that British made TV's where rubbish becasue they were not*
*Im not having a go at you Rats, just merley pointing out that I dont think you can generalise like that.
Last edited by: Redviper on Wed 20 Oct 10 at 16:26
|
Good point but but I was meaning the brands. We had a rented Tatung and Toshiba portable which were both very reliable, both made in Britian.
I was refering to all the old Fergusons and Baird stuff. Having that my grandparents had a very old early 80's Ferguson TV until recently when the tube went.
|
>>MLC - I agree with landsker that it is bonkers to borrow to give aid to foreigners. I do not know how the politicians justify it or why we voters put up with it. If we felt strongly about it surely we should be complaining about it to our politicians in strong terms.
French style I hope????
What do we get in retun for this foreign aid? Do we charge interest on it at a higher rate than we are charged interest on our debt?
|
>> What do we get in retun for this foreign aid? Do we charge interest on
>> it at a higher rate than we are charged interest on our debt?
>>
Bobby, aid is aid - not a loan. It is charity. It is given probably for the same reasons people donate time/goods/money to your charity shop.
In return, I guess that the politicians expect to get some goodwill; maybe in the form of some trade at advantageous terms to Britain. But I don't really know if that is the case or whether the gift aid is just a wasted "bribe" that only helps make the British people feel that they have done some good for the "poor and needy" of the world. It may be the same warm glow of self-satisfaction felt as when giving to overseas causes supported by Christian Aid, Oxfam, or to a needy fellow forum member who wants to declare bankruptcy.
|
|
37% rise totalling £11 billion. I'm absolutely seething with rage!
|
We're also wasting how many billions on those stupid games in 2012? I'd scrap those and the foreign aid then use the money for innovation funds.
|
"37% rise totalling £11 billion. I'm absolutely seething with rage!"
It a good job the American public did not feel the same when the UK received $3 billion in aid from the US as part of the Marshall plan after the second world war.
The UK is still a wealthy country compared with most of the world. We should do what we can to improve the lives of those who live in conditions that we can barely imagine. "No man is an island"
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Wed 20 Oct 10 at 19:02
|
>>" It a good job the American public did not feel the same when the UK
>> received $3 billion in aid from the US as part of the Marshall plan after
>> the second world war."
Provided for strategic purposes.
>>
>> The UK is still a wealthy country compared with most of the world. We should
>> do what we can to improve the lives of those who live in conditions that
>> we can barely imagine. "No man is an island"
Earth to mars..Earth to mars...WE ARE BANKRUPT! WE ARE NOT WEALTHY! THERE IS NO MONEY LEFT!
(How many trillions have been poured into Africa..and the effect????)
|
Of course US aid was provided for strategic purposes - They did not want Europe to fall into the hands of the communists. Many Americans including President Truman were also appalled at the level of suffering and near starvation that they saw in Europe after the war.
Much of our aid is motivated by the same reasoning. We do not want Pakistan and Afghanistan to fall into the hands of Moslem extremists an a lot of our aid is directed to this area. I would also like to think that aid is sometimes provided because it morally right to do so.
The UK is not bankrupt. Countries cannot become bankrupt. It currently has a severe budget deficit that needs to be rectified but by all measurable standards it is an advanced and wealthy country whose s citizens still, on average, enjoy a high standard of living compared with most of the world's population. Just look around you. Your fellow countrymen are not dying of starvation. Malaria is not rife in your town. For many millions of people in the world this is not the case. If 0.7% of my taxation is directed at helping some of the worlds poorest people then I don't have a problem with it.
|
However painful it is, we are an "old world" country that became rich by exploiting other races and nations, sometimes in a manner that none of us would be proud of.
Aid could be seen as our debt to them.
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 20 Oct 10 at 19:22
|
>> However painful it is, we are an "old world" country that became rich by exploiting
>> other races and nations, sometimes in a manner that none of us would be proud
>> of.
>>
>> Aid could be seen as our debt to them.
>>
Dear God..give me strength!
|
>> Dear God..give me strength!
Lets see, you'll need Guinness or Irn Bru then
|
|
Much as you don't like it, you do have a debt to the rest of the world we screwed over.
|
>> Much as you don't like it, you do have a debt to the rest of
>> the world we screwed over.
>>
It's not "you" and "we" but people who lived a hundred years ago in a different world. We don't go on being morally responsible for all the actions of our ancestors.
|
>> >> Much as you don't like it, you do have a debt to the rest
>> of
>> >> the world we screwed over.
>> >>
>>
>> It's not "you" and "we" but people who lived a hundred years ago in a
>> different world. We don't go on being morally responsible for all the actions of our
>> ancestors.
It is *you* and me and we. *You* currently reap the benefits of your ancestors actions, actions without which *you* would not be living in a wealthy and prosperous society or enjoying its benefits.
|
>> It a good job the American public did not feel the same when the received $3 billion in
>> aid from the US as part of the Marshall plan after the second world war.
And what did the Labour Government at the time do with the Marshall Plan money which was far more than what France and Germany got. Here is a multiple choice, did they:
a) Use it to invest in infrastructure and industry to rebuild a war shattered country, like France and Germany did.
Or
b) Use it to prop up the pound on the currency markets by buying gold and dollars as well as buying imports of tobacco and wood.
Tomorrow, a similar multiple choice concerning the revenues from North Sea Oil.
Selling the country up the river is nothing new for British Governments.
|
|
Hmmm - seems my retirement has slipped away from me by a year - I am 65 in 2020 and that's the year it becomes 66. That's a bit annoying, to say the least.
|
|
Oh Dear, I am 65 in 2019.
|
|
The most annoying bit is my bro-in-law is in the OBR! That's one Christmas card that will be going in my spending cuts!! :-)
|
It wont happen often Zero, but you have a very valid point.
I hear Germany have only just stopped paying their war reparations. I doubt anyone cared about any recessions they had.
|
|
As we speak I think the Brtish Forces in Germany still get a monthly ration of car fuel at a laughably cheap price; they certainly used to when I was there. Also the married quarters were equipped with fine Bohemian crystal, on the same basis = reparations
|
Spending cuts announced today....in the post this morning, a letter from our local councellor saying they now have the finance and go-ahead to re-furb our pavements and those of the two roads off ours. Plus some junction re-alignment work.........I should live to see it !
Ted
|
It might be do with the Metrolink work. I don't want to get off topic but are you a bit worried about the extra parking problems the stop will create?
Also Manchester city council seemed to still be quiet rich. So far Manchester city council hasn't announced many job cuts but both Trafford and Stockport have.
|
|
That'll be an underspend in this year's budget, it's use it or loose it hence the traffic lights sprouting up everywhere in February like tulips - another bonkers Government idea where spending from previous years can't be rolled over.
|
When I worked for a local authority back in the eighties we used to regularly get overtime doing virtually nothing (often sitting at home) as the end of the financial year approached, while the department desperately tried to spend all of it's budget.
A criminal waste of money.
|
|
Manchester council relies on a lot of government grants for income - so they will be affected. The majority of Stockport MBC's income is from council tax and not central government. But they still need to make cuts like all the other councils..... even though the cuts will help out central government very little. Go figure.
|
Talk of benefits and overseas aid always brings out the narrow minds: "I don't get any, so why should I pay for it?". The rationale for both is the same: the greatest threat to society, both within nations and between them, is inequality. Trouble brews where those with least perceive that those with most are interested only in protecting their own wealth and doing nothing to close the gap.
Stay in a comfortable house in an African city and you'll be shocked by the razor wire on the 4m-high walls, the steel bars on the windows and the armed guard at the gate. This isn't a consequence of being African, or even of being poor; it happens because the perceived gap is so wide. Not all the have-nots resort to crime, of course, but some always have and always will, however much you equip the police to try to stop them. And don't imagine it couldn't happen here, if the current tabloid-pleasing obsession with 'benefit cheats' ends up depriving whole chunks of society of the ability to make any kind of living.
By any standards, this is an affluent country; if you're reading this in your own home, over your own broadband, and paying enough tax to be concerned about where it goes, you're at least a relatively affluent individual. Bellyaching about a small amount spent on making the world a less unequal - and potentially less lawless place does no-one any credit.
|
>>
>> A criminal waste of money.
>>
Depends if you've still got it (?) or whether you spent it on goods and services, keeping the economy going, and keeping someone in a job:)
|
|
I just hope that any cuts in the armed forces don't jeopardise their ability to defend the UK in the event that we are attacked/invaded.
|
"Depends if you've still got it (?) or whether you spent it on goods and services, keeping the economy going, and keeping someone in a job:)"
So taxing people and wasting money is a good thing?
Give me strength..
The NET effect is nil... or rather -ve....
|
>> So taxing people and wasting money is a good thing?
>>
>> Give me strength..
>>
>> The NET effect is nil... or rather -ve....
Ach - I guess you missed the :) which was meant to convey "or so those who have a vested interest in maintaining an unwieldy and wasteful system would have you believe".
I appreciate that's a lot for a poor little :) to do on its own. I'll be clearer next time.
:)
|
|
Snail - As an "Ex-Defender" I can assure you that we have a minimal ability to defend anything! 50 years ago the sole purpose of our Air Defences was to defend our nuclear bomb capable aircraft and our nuclear missiles. Thus if we were attacked we could make a nuclear response. The idea that the RAF was for defending our cities was allowed to lurk in people's minds so that they slept easier at night. With the what are optimistically called Forces, available to us at the moment, we would not be able to defend ourselves realistically against a land, air or terrorist attack of any sort. Note that we shall soon have one aircraft carrier and no aircraft to fly off it for 10 years! Chocolate fireguard anyone?
Last edited by: Perky Penguin on Thu 21 Oct 10 at 10:52
|
>> Snail - As an "Ex-Defender" I can assure you that we have a minimal ability
>> to defend anything!
Seconded, our politicians are more interested in "Projecting power" to boost their ego's. They even got that wrong, aircraft carriers with no aircraft, madness.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 21 Oct 10 at 14:43
|
>> I just hope that any cuts in the armed forces don't jeopardise their ability to
>> defend the UK in the event that we are attacked/invaded.
Defence of the realm is the first duty of government but it has to be based on a realuisitc threat assessment.
Attack by rogue aircraft, certainly require an air defence capability in the form of the Tornado, Typhoon or surface to air missile.
There is, at present, no prospect of invasion of the UK. Where might such a threat come from in future and how soon could it materialise?
Defence of our few remaninig overseas possessions is more of a problem. The Falklands are secured. Gibralter remains subject to Spanish claims but an attempt to assert that claim militarily is unthinkable. Is there anywhere else?
|
>> I just hope that any cuts in the armed forces don't jeopardise their ability to
>> defend the UK in the event that we are attacked/invaded.
from who? do you think we were *ever* capable of defending an invasion by the Soviet Union?
I'll answer that for you. No
|
What "threats" does the UK face?
Invasion? By whom, from where and for what reason? Its not a threat, so no need to cover it.
Aerial Bombing, Only from Russia, and I doubt the badgers and backfires are capable these days. ICBM? always been a threat you cant handle it so why bother. The threat of nuclear retaliation is the only defence.
Nope, today's threat are economic sabotage, cyber war, or terrorism.
The armed forces are not equipped, set up, or trained to deal with any of those threats. In short, we don't really need an airforce or army. The navy submarines are useful to be able to deliver cruise and trident. Its really all you need in the 21st century.
The only reason the government keeps an army is to crush any rebellions at home.
|
They should make you Prime Minisiter. You clearly have a crystal ball that no one else in the world possesses. A few cruise missiles are the panacea of all our military problems. Such knowledge and understanding is astounding!
>>"The only reason the government keeps an army is to crush any rebellions at home"
Do you really believe this ?(although it would explain a lot!)
|
Ok what are the primary threats against the UK?
and how would an army, navy or airforce combat them?
|
No, No. Please do regale us with your peace keeping abilities. You have stated we don't need an army or airforce. Lets get rid of them. I'm interested to know how far your ability to see into the future goes. Next week, next year, 10 years? Afghanistan is A war, it is not THE war. The world is more dangerous now than it has been for 50 years and I'm grateful we've got dedicated men and women in our (decimated) armed forces willing to go where lesser men fear to tread.
We just about managed to stave off defeat in 1940 after frantic arms production during the previous two years. There were plenty in the 1930s who said 'why do we need an army and air force'. Sadly we can't knock up an aircraft in a few weeks like they could in 1939. Once we lose a capability it's gone, full stop.
(I take it you'll never request the use of a SAR helicopter or aircraft now you want our airforce disbanded) Actually, forget the aircraft bit, Our Dave has just scrapped the ones we've paid for, which would have been the most capable Maritime patrol aircraft in the world
|
>> Our Dave has just scrapped the ones we've paid for, which would have been the
>> most capable Maritime patrol aircraft in the world
Our dave is a bit of a tango roger alpha tango.
|
>> Our dave is a bit of a tango roger alpha tango.
>>
Don't you mean whisky, rather than roger?
|
|
I was trying to figure that one out as well - but I'm not as "down there" as I used to be.
|
>> No, No. Please do regale us with your peace keeping abilities. You have stated we
>> don't need an army or airforce. Lets get rid of them. I'm interested to know
>> how far your ability to see into the future goes. Next week, next year, 10
>> years? Afghanistan is A war, it is not THE war. The world is more dangerous
>> now than it has been for 50 years and I'm grateful we've got dedicated men
>> and women in our (decimated) armed forces willing to go where lesser men fear to
>> tread.
>>
The armed war in Afghanistan is lost. By us anyway. we had no right being there.
We lost the war in Iran. Our armed forces were completely ineffective. We had no right being there. 50 years of Government of left us with an ineffective armed forces capability.
I simply gave you an opportunity to discuss the current and foreseeable threats and how we should equip ourselves in defending them, and I don't think that called for personal insults against me that you seem to be intent on today.
So with that in mind, how would you defend us against terrorism, cyber war, and economic sabotage?
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 21 Oct 10 at 16:35
|
Our Forces went into Afghanistan while the laughable "Doctor John Reid" was defence Secretary. He said they were going on a Hearts and Minds and build the infrastructure mission and that they would be in and out in 3 years without a shot being fired! Whether it is called a war or a mission to quell insurgency it is utterly futile and unwinnable. Look at the time, weaponry and manpower the Russians put in there years ago. Where did they get? Home with their tails between their legs. We put an ill-equipped force of some 3500 men into an area about the size of Wales and thought they were going to achieve something. No outsider has ever bettered the Afghan tribes or won anything useful there. They love to fight and if we/NATO aren't there will fight amongst themselves, as they always have.
The terrorist training camps have moved to Yemen and Somalia and the London bombers were UK passport carrying residents of the UK who had been trained in Pakistan or Afghanistan. How do we defend ourselves against that threat? The new big budget for GCHQ and intelligence gathering looks better value for money and more sense than a carrier with no aircraft, for a start.
|
>> Our Dave has just scrapped
>> the ones we've paid for, which would have been the most capable Maritime patrol aircraft
>> in the world
>>
Yes terrific for finding Russian submarines. The Nimrod is cold war junk 30 years out of date, why do we need it now, even updated? If we really need it, buy the Orion (Hercules based) maritime patrol aircraft off the shelf from the Americans. I have flown as Nimrod crew, they are well past it.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 21 Oct 10 at 19:38
|
Basically the primary threat is local home produced muslim extremists...
And the fringes of the IRA.
We obviously need Trident to nuke Leeds and Stormont.
Then there is cyber attacks so Tornado will bomb the Israelis who attacked Iran's nuclear stations with computer viruses.
And finally we will have problems with illegals coming into Britain via uncontrolled ports and airways.. so the two aircraft carriers will solve that problem.
We are running our defence strategy as if we have an Empire.
The Army spent millions on a new landing carft (I kid you not) so we could mount amhibious invasions
.
www.naval-technology.com/projects/lpd/
|
|
And the landing craft that are in these ships are basically the same design in WWII. I suppose if they work then why redesign them?
|
I doubt anyone would physically invade the UK anymore. There isnt anything here worth coming for.
I think the only physical invasion, if you want to view it as such, is that of radical Islam, which is quietly happening under peoples noses, but whether or not one should be concerned about it Im not sure.
It would certainly be the 21st century way of invading rather than turning up at the border with a tank. Far better to infiltrate authorities/government and there are some theorists who believe it could happen.
|
I'm struggling to understand the link.
The LPDs are highly capable ships that have recently been used in disaster relief (which is what any 'aid' should be about). What have the army got to do with it? We are an island nation and the savage cuts (that £11.5 billion bribe (sorry aid) money would have gone a long way) that the Navy and airforce are suffering shows our Dave to be as clueless as the criminally incompetent Brown.
|
I actually think in terms of the purchasing of hardware for the military someone needs to institute procurement in a similar way to the private sector.
From what I've seen of military projects they are a licence to print money for the vendors, due to an unfortunate mixture of mutual back scratching and general incompetence at the MOD. If the car business was run the same way as the military procurement business, cars would cost about a million pounds each.
The medical equipment business is similar, but that's a different story.
|
Spending Cuts - fuel. - FotheringtonTomas
