Who's coming on the anti-austerity march on 20 October? Sign in here

(58 Posts)
ninjasquirrel Tue 09-Oct-12 20:18:26

Given the anger on many other threads, I can't be the only one...

afuturethatworks.org/why-we-are-marching/

ttosca Tue 09-Oct-12 22:46:08

Hells yeah!

grovel Wed 10-Oct-12 00:25:41

That poster is drivel. I'm a sympathiser but I don't want crap like that promoting opposition. It says zilch.

niceguy2 Wed 10-Oct-12 06:10:33

Wow. Ttosca. You are really going to come back to the UK just to march against austerity? I'm impressed.

flatpackhamster Wed 10-Oct-12 07:38:10

I think that 'the anger' is the same fourteen posters. Luckily the marchers are laying on a whole coach, but you should be OK with three cars.

ttosca Wed 10-Oct-12 11:10:29

Facts: All figures are in the public domain and many of them are sourced under the Freedom Of Information (FOI) Act.

1) The Government “Deficit” was £83 Billion in 2010. Despite 2 years of cuts ... the “Deficit” has increased.

2) The major companies and corporations in the UK are sitting on reserves/profits in excess of £750 Billion.
...
3) They refuse to invest because they cannot make “a big enough profit”.

4) There is $21/£13 Trillion stashed away in Tax Havens, paying little or no tax.

5) £13 Trillion is equal to 10 times the total wealth produced in the UK annually.

6) Up to £120 billion is avoided/evaded in taxes by the corporations and the super-rich here in the UK each year ... where is the Deficit?

7) Less than 20% of the “Austerity programme” has been implemented ... 80% more to come. NHS sell-off etc, etc.

8) It is now confirmed that 73 people die each week after they had been passed “Fit for work” and lost their ESA (Sickness) benefit.

From January to November of 2011 ... 10,600 people who had been removed or transferred from Benefits died during that period of 11 months.

Tough choices? Fuck your choices.

ttosca Wed 10-Oct-12 11:11:37

Wow. Ttosca. You are really going to come back to the UK just to march against austerity? I'm impressed.

Haven't left the UK yet. Lived here for over a decade and half.

dreamingofsun Wed 10-Oct-12 11:28:35

ttosca - some of the facts you state are misleading. lots of people die who are working - i imagine ex ESA applicants are just the same. My father came home from work, went to bed and died.

So many people complain about these measures, but can't seem to come up with a better solution. Countries such as Greece are broke because they've spent more than they can afford and they are having to make really bad cuts now. The labour gov caused many of these problems - spending too much when the world economic climate was good, allowing lax banking rules.

lets have some solutions please rather than just moaning.

claig Wed 10-Oct-12 11:34:07

ttosca, are you moving country? Where are you going?

claig Wed 10-Oct-12 11:36:14

'lets have some solutions please rather than just moaning.'

I think Cameron's speech, just about to start, will be full of solutions and devoid of moaning!

ttosca Wed 10-Oct-12 13:03:46

dreaming-

That statistic, if I am not mistaken, is the based on the number of people who die within a month of having their support removed and deemed 'fit for work'. Sure, you could argue about the exact number. The assertion that many people are being deemed 'fit for work' when they clearly are not is not controversial. 40% of appeals are successful.

These 'fit for work' tests are having a devastating effect on disabled people:

Fear of fitness to work tests driving disabled patients to suicide, say 6% of GPs

[http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/fear-of-fitness-to-work-tests-driving-disabled-patients-to-suicide-say-6-of-gps-8197432.html]]

So many people complain about these measures, but can't seem to come up with a better solution. Countries such as Greece are broke because they've spent more than they can afford and they are having to make really bad cuts now. The labour gov caused many of these problems - spending too much when the world economic climate was good, allowing lax banking rules.

Actually, many people have suggested solutions. If you're not open to any solutions which don't involve severe austerity measures, then you won't hear them.

Here is an article you could read if you're genuinely interested:

www.pcs.org.uk/en/campaigns/campaign-resources/there-is-an-alternative-the-case-against-cuts-in-public-spending.cfm

And no, the Labour govt. didn't cause the deficit crisis. That was caused by the financial crisis which caused a recession. This govt. made the situation worse with its austerity measures, putting the UK in to the worst double-dip recession in 50 years.

www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jul/25/gdp-figures-recession-50-years

ttosca Wed 10-Oct-12 13:04:20

claig-

Have you changed teams yet again, then? Are the Daily Heil supporting the Tories this week?

claig Wed 10-Oct-12 13:39:40

'Are the Daily Heil supporting the Tories this week?'

I don't know who the Daily Heil supports. I read Britain's most influential newspaper - the Daily Mail.

niceguy2 Wed 10-Oct-12 14:53:20

Sorry Ttosca. Must have got you confused with another regular ultra lefty poster then.

WRT the £13billion squirreled away in tax havens figure. I'm not sure where you got that figure but let's go with that at the moment.

What do you propose would be the solution? I'm assuming here that the vast majority of this figure has been legally earned, taxes paid and then later moved (again entirely legally) to an offshore haven. Plus I'd wager that much of this £13 trillion is probably earned globally and have sweet FA to do with the UK.

ttosca Wed 10-Oct-12 15:19:32

I read Britain's most influential newspaper - the Daily Mail.

No, that's Britain's most mocked newspaper. It's also supports fascists.

ttosca Wed 10-Oct-12 15:25:37

What do you propose would be the solution? I'm assuming here that the vast majority of this figure has been legally earned, taxes paid and then later moved (again entirely legally) to an offshore haven.

Then clamp down on offshore tax havens. It's really not rocket science. You can also help reclaim tax which they wealthy try to avoid by taxing in ways which are not avoidable - such as the mansion tax.

The problem, yet again, is not that it can't be done, but that there is no political will on the part of the Tory scum, most of whom are multi-millionaires and own mansions themselves.

Plus I'd wager that much of this £13 trillion is probably earned globally and have sweet FA to do with the UK.

Why would assume that?

niceguy2 Wed 10-Oct-12 15:39:27

But 'they' already are clamping down on tax avoidance/evasion and part of that has been to put pressure on havens like Switzerland Ft.com

The rich pay the most in tax and have seen the biggest tax increases. Combine that with the loss in allowances and you have to be careful you don't drive people away. Look at what's happening in France? [[http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/334520 Socialist gov't policies in France lead to mass exodus]

All your 'tax the rich until the pips squeek' policies result in, is the poor having to pay more taxes. The exact opposite of what you actually want.

ttosca Wed 10-Oct-12 15:48:17

Globalisation is a problem for the state collecting taxes, which is why we need to come up with a global solution to tax avoidance. We could create laws whereby companies who want access to european markets must pay a certain amount in corporation tax, for example. It is not likely that they would avoid this, given that the EU is the second largest trading market in the world.

Secondly, I think a better approach would to let the poorest keep more of their money. This can be done in numerous ways: no just by increasing the bottom rate of income tax, but by decreasing taxes which the poorest pay most such as VAT. You could also make day to day living cheaper by enabling rent controls and nationalising the railways.

The cost of living in the UK is completely out of control, and with wages stagnating for the past three decades, thanks for attacks on unions and workers rights, along with outsourcing, most people had to take on debt to survive. It is only the wealthiest who benefited from these political and economic changes. The vast majority of the new wealth for the past few decades has gone to the richest.

The Tory scum, though, are ideologically committed to immiserating the poor and vulnerable. They want to fix the economy through supply-side measures like making it easier to fire people. The problem with the economy is not supply-side, as much as the small-state ideologues would have you believe. The problem is demand-side. I.e. there is a lack of demand because nobody has any money and nobody can afford the cost of living.

If they genuinely want to help the average person and help the economy, they would institute demand-side measure to stoke demand - but they can't and they won't. They see this, instead, as an opportunity to permanently wreck the state and public services.

Opentooffers Wed 10-Oct-12 15:55:27

Lol Claig, yes lots mock the Mail readers. Brave or otherwise of you to own up to that.

amicissimma Wed 10-Oct-12 16:34:21

"Brave or otherwise of you to own up to that. "

It seems that 1,730,699 other people agree with claig enough to buy The Mail.

CelticPromise Wed 10-Oct-12 17:00:17

I'm going... I see thread has moved on a bit though!

ninjasquirrel Wed 10-Oct-12 20:08:25

Hello CelticPromise! Yes, it seems to have been, ahem, diverted...

domesticgodless Wed 10-Oct-12 20:14:21

Claig is a fair minded and interesting poster despite his/her to my mind bizarre daily mail fetish. His/her comments on the Cameron speech are balanced and refreshing.

I will be going on the march Ttosca and hopefully bringing ds1 but
We may stay on the sidelines as he's only 9 and police herding tactics worry me. Pm me if you know where you'll be starting off.

claig Wed 10-Oct-12 20:24:55

Thank you domestic. I try to be as fair minded as I can, which is why I stick up for the Daily Mail and the Daily Mail reader when they are scurrilously abused and mocked by the ignorant.

I'm thinking about it.

Ttosca are you a pcs member?

CommunistMoon Wed 10-Oct-12 23:50:50

Sadly I cannot attend the march as I am working. Have pledged my support here: afuturethatworks.org

ttosca Thu 11-Oct-12 11:28:44

Oliver-

No, UCU.

domesticgodless Thu 11-Oct-12 17:07:07

Another UCU here.

Leithlurker Sun 14-Oct-12 22:54:03

ttosca, you ill know one of my best friends she was president of UCU a couple of years Back, has a passion for steampunk dresses.

elphiemcdork Sun 14-Oct-12 23:16:08

I'm definitely going, along with family. As a youth worker with a disabled husband we've been smacked right in the face with these cuts - two local authority youth services I used to work with don't exist any more, loads of my youth worker friends have lost their jobs and we're genuinely concerned about what's going to happen with the husband's disability benefits and access to support he's getting. I definitely think these cuts are preying on the most vulnerable.

Solopower1 Sat 20-Oct-12 11:49:06

Good luck to all ye marchers! Thanks for going on my behalf. I hope to make the next one - and there will be a next one ...

niceguy2 Sat 20-Oct-12 15:38:18

All this will be is a lot of economic flat earther's protesting about the fact they dislike the world is round.

The real irony is Miliband being at the march spouting his usual rubbish.

CogitoErgoSometimes Sat 20-Oct-12 17:09:20

Milliband was soundly booed....

Solopower1 Sat 20-Oct-12 17:59:50

If you mean we just have to accept the status quo, Niceguy - no we don't. How very defeatist of you.

Is that a gloat, Cogito?

Solopower1 Sat 20-Oct-12 18:34:58

It would be strange if you were glad that they booed Miliband, Cogito, when he said a Labour govt would also have to make cuts. Would you rather he lied? I thought you were in agreement with austerity measures, or have I got that wrong?

ttosca Sat 20-Oct-12 21:30:52

It would be strange if you were glad that they booed Miliband, Cogito, when he said a Labour govt would also have to make cuts. Would you rather he lied? I thought you were in agreement with austerity measures, or have I got that wrong?

You probably know this, but:

Cogito is in agreement with the austerity measures which are harming the economy and killing jobs.

He mentioned Milliband being booed because he's very much a supporter of Team Conservative and spends a lot of time on these boards defending the Tory scum and attacking Labour. It's all about partisanship.

niceguy2 Sat 20-Oct-12 22:55:11

It depends what you mean by the status quo Solo.

If you want to talk about what we should cut then fair enough.

But if you (or anyone else) thinks that protesting against cuts will erm....stop the cuts...then there's no point in debating that.

Like I said, it would be akin to demanding that the government makes the world flat.

Personally I think Miliband has miscalculated by appearing on this march. The audience today has no apetite for any cuts and believe the solution is simply to tax someone else. In that context standing up and trying to say "I agree.....but we need to make cuts!". Well....it doesn't make sense and even if it did, it's not a message the audience wanted to hear in the first place.

Lilithmoon Sat 20-Oct-12 23:05:52

If you went, can you spot yourself here: pics?
niceguy how do you know what 100,000+ people, including me, think?

niceguy2 Sat 20-Oct-12 23:09:45

Lilith. I don't know what you are thinking. I don't pretend that you do.

What I'm saying though is if you think there's no need for any cuts then you are deluded. If you want to debate where to make cuts then that's fine.

Lilithmoon Sun 21-Oct-12 08:40:23

niceguy you said of the people at the rally 'The audience today has no appetite for any cuts and believe the solution is simply to tax someone else'. You can't be sure what all those people were thinking.
I certainly don't think that the solution is as easy as tax someone else.

CogitoErgoSometimes Sun 21-Oct-12 09:02:45

Wow you people are touchy! (And I'm not a 'he' thank you) The previous post said that Milliband was spouting his usual rubbish and I pointed out that he was booed. It's interesting because he's the Opposition leader. He's meant to be the alternative. So if the mob don't like the Coalition austerity measures and they don't like the Opposition's slower, shallower austerity measures 'lite', I wonder who they will be voting for when the time comes?

Solopower1 Sun 21-Oct-12 10:14:58

Look at it another way, Niceguy. If no-one protested, the govt would think we didn't mind being hacked at.

People march in order to raise awareness of the issues as much as anything else. Demonstrations can change things - at the very least, they force those at the top to think very carefully about any possible alternatives.

But they also raise morale among the marchers and can make others, who are also suffering, realise that they are not alone. They give us hope. They show us that there are people working on our behalf, even if we feel we can't do anything ourselves.

We do not have to accept the government's version of events. It doesn't make us flat-earthers just because we disagree with them. There are other ways of dealing with this crisis. In fact the only way out imo is to use our imagination and think of something that hasn't been done before. We have to keep up the pressure on the govt to do this.

There were lots of people who didn't boo Miliband at the march. They might well agree that some cuts are needed. Have you ever heard anyone say that no cuts are needed at all?

The govt are like toddlers, testing our boundaries. We need to show them when we've had enough.

CogitoErgoSometimes Sun 21-Oct-12 11:14:09

"There were lots of people who didn't boo Miliband at the march. They might well agree that some cuts are needed"

By the same token there were a huge amount who weren't on the march at all. Would it be right to assume that a sizeable chunk of them also agree that some cuts are needed?

Solopower1 Sun 21-Oct-12 11:18:33

Yes.

I suppose it's a question of who/what should be cut. A lot of people I know think that the people who hold the biggest responsibility for causing the crisis should be targeted first.

And the people who have no responsibility at all for harming anyone else and who are hanging on for dear life should be left alone or helped.

marmaladesandwich Sun 21-Oct-12 14:28:37

I agree with Solopower1.
I went on the march with my family (I am in UCU, partner is in UNISON). We had a great day and made our voices heard. The atmosphere was great, police light touch and smiley (anything to do with them realising they are just "plebs" too, d'you think?)
I was able to have some good conversations with my children about how you find strength in unity and cooperation with others, and there was some good (and some not so good!) music too.
Suggesting that you don't protest about something because noone will listen is tantamount to saying democracy is dead, and I wish half the people who told me they'd "be with me in spirit" had actually turned up.
Tory, Labour, whatever, you have to agree that over 100,000 marching is a large number and pointing out that the entire population of Britain less 100,000 didn't march is disingenuous and doesn't take into account why and how people protest.
I believe there have to be cuts - a lot of the people on the march felt there shouldn't be any at all. Miliband was booed, but not by everyone by any means and he was applauded too. Other speakers were also booed as well as cheered, but obviously that's not news. My concern - and why I marched - is that the cuts are being imposed for ideological reasons with which I disagree entirely, and I have yet to see evidence that they are saving money or reducing the deficit.
I came on mumsnet after a long absence (and a name change) to see if many MNers had been on the march. Looks like there's been a bit of a right-wing invasion, not surprising since it was getting a bit of a reputation as a leftist forum. smile .

Billfunk Sun 21-Oct-12 15:09:14

Solopower
"We do not have to accept the government's version of events. It doesn't make us flat-earthers just because we disagree with them. There are other ways of dealing with this crisis. In fact the only way out imo is to use our imagination and think of something that hasn't been done before. "

Sounds great! Specifically what should we do?

grimbletart Sun 21-Oct-12 15:45:34

I suppose it's a question of who/what should be cut. A lot of people I know think that the people who hold the biggest responsibility for causing the crisis should be targeted first.

Every single person except those who have lived within their means is to blame. But biggest responsibility was the Labour Government for economic innumeracy, the bankers for stupid risk taking and toxic debt and then every single person who took out a mortgage they couldn't afford or who maintained their living standards via credit cards and loans.

ttosca Sun 21-Oct-12 16:22:32

grimble-

Every single person except those who have lived within their means is to blame. But biggest responsibility was the Labour Government for economic innumeracy, the bankers for stupid risk taking and toxic debt and then every single person who took out a mortgage they couldn't afford or who maintained their living standards via credit cards and loans.

You realise, don't you, that if businesses 'lived within their means' and never took out loans, then they couldn't grow or expand anywhere nearly like they can when they have access to capital, and that many projects would never get off the ground, because it would be impossible to accumulate enough Capital within a reasonable time frame to fund it?

You do also realise that if consumers all 'lived with their means' then consumer demand for the past several decades would have been minuscule, given that wages have stagnated for the majority of people since the 1980s?

Capitalists want to have it both ways: they want to decrease the cost of wages to run business and reduce taxes which pay for services but also want to make sure consumers keep buying their products. The only way to square this circle is with access to credit.

So, in reality, the whole economic model needs to be looked at. It's a cheap shot to blame consumers for taking on credit in order to keep up with the cost of living and pay for goods and services because their wages are so poor.

I work for UNISON and me and colleagues travelled down there. Had a fab day, think this year there was more support from the public which shows we are getting our message across grin

Solopower1 Sun 21-Oct-12 16:57:46

Billfunk - what should we do? Go on marches, sign petitions, post on Mumsnet, write to newspapers, challenge the official version of events ...

What should the government do? I'm not a trained economist, but there are plenty in government who should be able to come up with a plan that's better than what they're doing now.

There is plenty of money around. If the Govt wanted to share it out a little more fairly, they'd soon find a way. But if we don't tell them that is what we want, they won't see any reason for change.

grimbletart Sun 21-Oct-12 17:24:57

Yes ttosca - no need to lecture me. I'm retired but spent half my working life of 45 years as an employee and half as a business person so I think I may have gathered a little information over the years as to how capitalism and the world works.

I understand perfectly what you say but I think you have overlooked my qualifying phrase i.e that they couldn't afford.

Paradisefound Sun 21-Oct-12 18:34:54

I was speaking to a friend today. His daughter moved out to Greece about 10 yrs ago. The daughter says things are so bad out there people are giving up their own kids.
The government has no choice - the cut backs are necessary to protect every bodies future.

niceguy2 Mon 22-Oct-12 08:32:28

OK Solopower, let me revise my earlier statement to be more accurate then.

The anticuts protest is made up of two groups:

1) Economic flatearther's who don't believe any cuts are needed despite the fact we still need to borrow £120 billion per year. That we should keep borrowing because hey....we need to spend our way out of a debt crisis!?!?! It's a bit like an alcoholic saying he will quit drinking tomorrow.

2) Economic NIMBY's who believe that a few cuts are needed but not any cuts which affect them personally.

JuliaScurr Mon 22-Oct-12 14:00:40

<waves to marchers>

Has everybody read 'The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists'?

Claig & co should smile

ttosca Mon 22-Oct-12 15:15:27

'nice'guy-

Your ignorance knows no bounds.

Please provide a reference for the £120 Billion figure. It looks hugely unrealistic. Secondly, the current deficit is bound to be large because we are in the middle of a double-dip recession caused by the financial crisis, which means tax revenue has dipped.

The structural deficit below the recession occurred was at 3%, which was slightly about EU average. Now with cuts in spending, it's more likely to be around 2% - which is roughly where it has been for the past few decades.

Secondly, It's nothing like an alcoholic needing more alcohol, as has been explained to you 1000 times before. Spending can actually increase growth and pull the country out of a recession, resulting in greater tax revenue and lower welfare costs, ultimately decreasing the deficit.

Cutting drastically, harming the economy, is a false economy, since it exacerbates and prolongs the recession. How many times, 'nice'guy? How many times?

niceguy2 Mon 22-Oct-12 16:19:20

....and makes it more likely that Osborne will succeed in trimming borrowing for 2012/13 to 120 billion pounds from 122 billion in 2011/12 (source)

We can spend to fuel growth. But said spending should come from our existing tax revenues, not from borrowing more money. It's just nonsensical to say that the answer to our debt problem is to borrow more money.

ttosca Mon 22-Oct-12 16:31:16

We can spend to fuel growth. But said spending should come from our existing tax revenues, not from borrowing more money.

If we're already in deficit, then any money we spend will, by definition be borrowed. Or are you saying we should stimulate growth only when in surplus?

It's just nonsensical to say that the answer to our debt problem is to borrow more money.

A national budget is nothing like a household budget. A national budget is nothing like a household budget. A national budget is nothing like a household budget. A national budget is nothing like a household budget. A national budget is nothing like a household budget. A national budget is nothing like a household budget. A national budget is nothing like a household budget. A national budget is nothing like a household budget. A national budget is nothing like a household budget. A national budget is nothing like a household budget. A national budget is nothing like a household budget. A national budget is nothing like a household budget. A national budget is nothing like a household budget.

niceguy2 Mon 22-Oct-12 16:35:09

No, i'm saying we use some of the money we're saving via cuts to fund growth projects. Rather than keep spending regardless and borrow more money in the hope that one day it pays off.

And I think something's wrong with your computer. Maybe you need a new keyboard?

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now