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.

minimathmouse I suspect that those rich people you are referring to already pay for private health care! On top of that they are, as curlymama points out, also paying in more than anyone else for the services that we are all entitled to receieve - and thank the lord for it!

The public sector job losses are being staged over four years. Many of these will be through natural wastage - i.e. people retiring and moving to a new job but not being replaced.

DH is in the RAF and they expect a lot of their job losses to happen in this way. Making people redundant, particulary civil servants, can be very expensive.

It is not right for some people (no one on here, I'm not pointing fingers!) to imply that jobless figures will shoot up over night.

Yes I think they did. Was it Roosevelt? Not very good with American History (on account of the fact that they are evil capitalists.

In the 30's Germany rose economically through the keynes model of higher state demand=output=income. I think the Americans followed a similar model.

I think you've all forgotten that the income tax rises have already happened!

The top rate of tax went up to 50% from 1 April 2010, Personal allowances disappeared over a sliding scale for those earning £100k or more.

My own tax bill has increased significantly. And no, I didn't cause the recession either.

Keynesian policies won't work here - far too much sovereign debt already

And yes Labour did overspend massively. The only thing they spent on that I agree with was bailing out the banks. That investment is actually now already standing in the books at a profit.

The 'natural wastage' line is a load of rubbish, even with this my local LA 4 out of 10 will lose their jobs.

Banks are still paying massive bonuses. I think it is morally resprehensible to just stand by and watch the rich get richer whilst some families will lose their homes. I don't care if their homes are just rented council houses, why should the poor get on their bikes.

Some poeple are form families where the last person worked over 20 years ago, under maggie. These people lost all their work and with it all hope of a future. Why should people in the north and people from cardif, be pushed from their homes and made to find work somewhere else.

Soon there will be more empty streets and its sure as hell going to be crowded in the southeast!

''Why should people in the north and people from cardif, be pushed from their homes and made to find work somewhere else.''

Erm... to support themselves instead of relying on other people, perhaps?

I don't actually feel that as harshly as it is likely to come across, but people do have some responsibility for themselves surely?

I'm feeling a bit aggrieved for having to foot the bill for the Labour Party's excesses. I never voted for them. They had no mandate for that war.

An alternative strategy (and believe you me I am warming to this idea) is rather than make every taxpayer suffer and every benefit recipient suffer, we should insist that the entire deficit is repaid by those who voted Labour at the last election. That seems perfectly fair and reasonable.

I find it amazing that they have to introduce means testing for child benefit, but suddenly can afford to get rid of it for pensioners

'Why should people in the north and people from cardiff, be pushed from their homes and made to find work somewhere else.'

Because there are no homes where they think the work is. There is no work where they think the work is!!

Ian Duncan Smith believes that people should move to find work. Maybe some should and could do that. However with rising numbers of redundencies in affluent areas, where will this work be found.

I live in comuter land in Mid Sussex, I can assure you that there is very little work and even less affordable homes. Its simply not practical.

'An alternative strategy (and believe you me I am warming to this idea) is rather than make every taxpayer suffer and every benefit recipient suffer, we should insist that the entire deficit is repaid by those who voted Labour at the last election. That seems perfectly fair and reasonable.'

lol love it, (sadly for this policy) we have privacy in voting in this country and nobody would admit to voting labour if this were the case.

the figure quoted for public sector job cuts was 490000, i believe that is 1 in 10 public sector workers, not 1 in 10 workers and it will be mainly natural wastage, in fact i wouldnt be surprised if people were persuaded to retire a year or two early with a massive massive payment.

as for finding work, i left a violent marriage aged 31 with 3 children, as a matter of self respect i was determined to find work, i worked part time in an agency as a cleaner for a while, then worked for zero pay with a photographer for months before he took me on full time with a salary, sacrifices had to be made on a temporary basis in order to provide for my future. i left my ex with a 16k debt round my neck and literally no money to feed my children as my benefit just covered debt repayment, i learned very very quickly that the only way out was through work.
my life is so very very different now and i am living in a loving family with new DH and new baby paying 40% tax. my Dh only got to this level of income by making terrific sacrifices, such as working in unpleasant foreign situations in hot sweaty and corrupt nations and out at sea. we pay in taxes not much less than we bring home and dont begrudge a penny to those deserving cases such as seriously disabled, but i for one am getting seriously annoyed with people who think that as our gross pay is quite high(even though our take home is significantly smaller)we owe even more to the country than we already are paying out.

can anyone tell me this ? was there no deficit whatsoever when the conservatives were last in power ? this is a genuine question and i dont have time to google otherwise i will burn the chops

"here 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. "

Let me correct that for you - there will always be a private sector willing to pay a relatively small number of intelligent, driven people lots of money. And not a few fairly dumb people who happen to know the right people, of course.

The vast majority of people will always be relatively low-paid by comparison. Our economic model depends on it. If lots and lots of people were paid lots of money all that would happen is that inflation would go through the roof.

To frame this fundamental economic principle as a difference between intelligent and driven people versus the rest is wildly missing the point.

mini - the banks that are paying those bonuses are largely investment banks, not the banks who had shares bought by the government. So as private institutions they can pay whatever they like.

Quattro - good point about tax rises, for those that are suggesting this as the 'alternative' to cuts. DH is a 40% taxpayer, and now pays a huge amount more NI than he did because the cap on NI has been removed, so his tax bill has already gone up significantly.

A1980 - "Earners on lower incomes won't lose their benefits". Total tosh! The new benefits cap WILL see lower earners losing their benefits, AND being forced to decide whether to continue living in their high rent area where their job is, or moving to a low rent area and being out of work. And for anyone that thinks the counties near London have lower rents than London, that (certainly in my commuter town) is total rubbish. My rent here is JUST as high as it would be at least in outer London.

And I see no reason why very high earners can't be taxed more, low earners had their tax bill doubled from 10% to 20%.

I think a much fairer way to tax would be : No tax at all on incomes up to £25K (thus abolishing the need for any tax credits). Tax on incomes from £25K to £50K at 20%. Tax on incomes from £50K to £75K at 30%. Tax on incomes from £75K to £100K at 40%. Tax on any income over £100K at 50%.

Unfotunately Loudlass, your figures don't add up. Can't be bothered to do the maths but you've probably increased the deficit by at least £10 billion

The reason for this is that the %ge of people who earn over £100k a year is very small - around the 5% mark.

Loudlass - £100k earners already pay 50% tax, and in addition have had their tax free personal allowances removed. They also pay NI at 12% over a certain threshold, whereas NI used to be capped. A lot of 40% taxpayers also pay much more NI now too, because of the cap being removed, and pay some at 12% rather than the 11% standard rate.

The 50% tax rate kicks in at incomes over £150k, but otherwise agree with you Ali

Personally it worries me ever so slightly that a group of people who get to decide how much their pay/pension is and who for the most part will be totally unaffected by the cuts , are allowed to make decscions about the countries finances. I do believe that the conservative spin machine is doing a sterling job at the moment .I also believe that to a certain extent the cuts are idealogical. What i would like to see is some accountants and im sure there must be a few good ones on here ,have a proper look at the books of every department etc and see where cost savings can realistically be made before the present 'cuts' are introduced .Call me old fashioned but i always think the best person for the job is the one who is trained to do it .

Loudlass you're plan would greatly increase the deficit and lead to a bloodbath on the markets.

Quattro - yes sorry :)

OP, YABU. People are blaming the coalition for the cuts because they are proposing deep cuts, made mostly on the poorest, and they are enjoying it (witness the response to the CSR statement in the House). They are cutting further and faster than many economists believe necessary. If we're getting into counting Nobel prize-winning economists, I think the latest score is that 2 support the cuts agenda, and 5 think it is a mistake.

The Coalition and their friends/masters in the media are doing a good job of blaming Labour for the cuts. But until the (global) banking crisis happened in 2008, the Tories supported Labour's spending plans - at that point the deficit was 3% of GDP, which is not excessive historically. But I haven't heard any Tories saying what they would have done differently. Perhaps some posters could enlighten us?

And I am worried that the cuts are going further than is necessary, that they are targetted on the weak and vulnerable, and that they are ideological. So I do blame the Coalition.

What happened in the summer of 2007 ?that seems to be when the net debt (as a % of gdp) went totally sky high ? From 1998 it actually went down significantly for a number of years ,whilst under the demon spenders labour

I agree with all who say Labour overspent and now we are paying the price.

I don't agree with those receiving all the benefits saying tax the earners more so we can keep all of our benefits.

I don't have a real solution unfortunately and I have to say find some of the cuts quite harsh, but we simply cannot keep on funding this 'entitled to' culture any more.

I am worried about all of the job losses though and wonder how many will survive these cuts.