To not understand why people are blaming the coalition for the cuts

[tetrea]

The Labour Party were in power for the last 13 years and it was the Labour Party that racked up a structural deficit of £160 billion and an annual debt interest payment and there is a broad consensus that this needs to be eradicated. Why are some people having a go at Cameron/Clegg/Osbourne/Cable etc for doing what the majority of experts say is needed.

AplinePony 'Jacqueline - you're being somewhat aggressive, extremely rude, extremely judgemental and quite frankly rather nasty' -- Good that is exactly how I wanted to sound.

Well done you escaped DV at 21 thankfully with your whole life ahead of you. Some women aren't lucky enough to escape DV at 21 and need help 10-20 years down the line when they finally want to leave with their children and start a safe life. They need help financially and emotionally, as do their childrenn. Take this support away and I'm sure I don't have to tell you what the effect would be.

Also I doubt your savings would cover the cost of the adaptions that would be needed if you did become quadraplegic tomorrow.

How is life in your world, it must be great living in a bubble.

Riven none of the partys set out a list of cuts they would make before the election.
The Lib Dems opposed the Iraq war

They would all be 'fiddling while Rome burnt'

Perhaps the issue of fairness would be better explored by getting those like Philip Green and main Tory supporter/sponsor (Ashdown) to pay and do the responsible thing ...

I know very little about these things, but as far as I can see, cuts have to be made. As one of the countrys biggest expenses is benefit, why shouldn't it be looked at?

It's not like disabled people are about to be left to starve or freeze to death! They will just have slightly less money to live on. The vulnerable people in this society should of course be looked after, but compared to the majority of the world they are actually looked after really well. We should think ourselves lucky that we have that at all.

I don't think it's fair to make out that only sick and disabled people will suffer, these cuts will affect almost everyone. Of course if you're super rich it won't be too hard a blow, but if you're already handing over 40% of what you earn you probably feel like you are more than doing your bit. What with all the spending you do and the services you use and the people you keep employed.

I think the only things that should be completely protected from cuts are the NHS, and primary and secondary education. I'm sure plenty of people will come along to tell me why I'm wrong to think that, but it's only one irrelvent opinion.

Labour did propose that they would halve the deficit in this Parliament and the coalition discovered when they got into Government that the Labour Party had planned £55 billion of cuts but hadn't specified where they were going to make these cuts.

they might not starve but a lot will loose their independence, you only have read the threads about it.

I believe these cuts are idealogical. I also think that the Lib/cons are making a huge mistake.

By all means roll back the state, but not at this rate. By all means make savings, but not at the expenese of the most vulnerable in society. I think we are headed into hell. How can we cut the welfare bill whilst actively putting people out of work. The welfare bill will rise and tax income will fall.

The governement are taking huge risks and the likely effect is missery for the very poorest. I live in the southeast, where there is a housing shortage. I read today that 80,000 people will be moving out of london. How the hell can the home counties accomodate all these people. We don't have houses or jobs for everyone. Whole streets in the north with empty houses. No work for years in some areas in the north and in wales because of the last conservative government. Now these people are told to get on their bikes and look for work! Look where? somewhere where there are no homes? Bunch of idiots like the last conservative government.

ALINEPONY, your comments about others pesonal circumstances are nasty.

'I'd love to know why you personally don't scoot back to the US and coin in a bloody fortune using your husband's scientific skills rather than scrape by week to week getting more and more upset about what you see as a personal afront to your well-being.'

She's British. As is her child. Why should she 'scoot off back' to a place that isn't her home and where she can't get in, anyway?

And you obviously don't know a thing about living in the US if you think a quadraplegic will get health insurance.

You'd fit in great over there with that attitude, though.

Curlymama, admits to knowing very little. I concur! Why should the most vulnerable in society suffer most from these cuts.

Why not cut the NHS budget, Bankers and the top wage earners could take the load off and go private. They could do their bit, by paying for their own health care. Whilst scant resources could be used for the rest of us.

"[...]look East towards Germany. Softly, softly catchee monkey. A country whose economy was strong enough to absorb East Germany and is currently carrying several of its european members, yet still is not going to hell in a handcart... The Germans are what we like to call "prudent"."

Hmm. Many German economists don't seem to agree with the cuts Der Spiegel

Should we still be looking east AlpinePony? Or perhaps we should just be looking at people who agree with you.

Although good luck finding anyone who agrees that people with disabled children should leave the country if they cannot wholly fund their care

Tetrea those are my thoughts exactly. The cuts seem to hammer the middle earners as the high earners can probably afford to lose benefits such as CB etc and those on long term benefits wont be affected by the cuts to CB, and earners on lower incomes wont lose their benefits.

www.economicshelp.org/blog/uk-economy/uk-national-debt/

Between 1998 and 2002 under Gordon Brown, Tony Blair and the Labour Party UK national debt fell, their spending percentage wise was inline with what the Tories had been spending under John Major.

People are blaming the coalition because public and international faith in our economic stability is falling, leaving us at risk of slipping back into a recession. People are blaming the coalition because Vodafone have been allowed to walk away from between £1bn and £4.8bn of owed taxes http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/22/vodafone-tax-case-leaves-sour-taste
www.topnews.in/chancellor-george-osborne-start-india-tour-vodafone-launch-and-tata-talks-2267739 They have cut corporation tax, whilst also cutting benefits, the poorest are hit hardest once again http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/oct/21/ifs-spending-review-cuts-poor-hit-hardest but it's ok because we're in it together

I also think any Lib Dem voters have a right to blame them as they appear to have abandoned an awful lot of what they stood for previously.

Suply and demand.Under labour the state grew and with it demand. Government drive demand for good and services in almost all sectors. No demand, no money moving through the system.

The economist Keynes believed that a government could lesson the effects of a recession by employing staff and driving building projects for roads, houses and new schools. In turn these employed people could pay higher taxes. I beleive the government should adopt this model, it is morally and economically correct. IMO

I don't quite get why the rich (a relative term at the best of times) should forego any state aid and be penalised.

There should be a fairness to tax - 'Golden Goose' anyone???

US is doing very little about their deficit and problems and it is getting worse.

mini, I feel that the services that benefit everyone should be the ones touched last.

I think you'll find that the bankers and high wage earners do their bit when it comes to paying tax. Private health care does not cover everything that the NHS does, and as these people pay more for the services than the majority of people, why should thay not access them.

This country needs rich people to allow the poor people to get anything at all. Apart from the money they bring in, they quite often do jobs that lots of us aren't capable of either. I just don't see why they get slagged off all the time and made out to be this evil force of rich people swimming in gold coins and laughing at the poor.

Tax rises will come. Don't forget last week was the result of a "spending" review.
We'll get the tax rises come the budget next year.

so what will it mean for the average person, when all the cuts have been made? what great benefits can we all look forward to?

In response to "evil force of rich people" No the rich are not demonic but the system that allows such a disparity between the rich and the poor is.

The tax hikes will have to be huge to make up for the loss of tax income from the soon to be unemployed and to make up for the lower rate in corperation tax.

I can see that point mini, and agree to some extent, but what are the government supposed to do about that? There will always be a private sector willing to pay intelligent, driven people lots of money, and there will always be people that either aspire to nothing, or can't better themselves for whatever reason.

Would you prefer to make the rich poorer or the poor richer?