to think that spending £30 billion on the UK's infrastructure is a stupid idea?

[belledechocchipcookie]

10 billion from the government, 20 billion from private companies. Isn't it a better plan to invest in people so that it will filter down?

1000 more nurses and teachers (or whatever) would pump more money into the economy as they will need somewhere to live (bonus to house building) and have money to spend in the shops (bonus to shops and manufacturing).

Improve the roads means people will get from A to B quicker. It's pointless going from A to B if you don't have a job and you can't afford the petrol. It seems very ill thought out and stupid to me. Could someone explain it to me please

Hello belle,

Of course I can explain it to you.

Nurses and teachers are generally womens jobs. Roads and railways are mens jobs.

BTW, I completely agree with you.

Plus, it is fairly well proven that when you increase roadage, within a couple of years the traffic increases to fill it.

traffic increases anyway. more people make more journeys of all kinds - that's the trend. train passengers numbers have also increased.

and the proper dual carriageway sections of the roads round here work fine. leaving in one-lane bottlenecks on major roads ...there's just no excuse for it in a 'modern' country.

Ahh, good point Chicken! I expect there will be a few 'women's jobs,' someone has to do the admin and make the tea

This government is turning out more sexist than anyone could wish for. To be fair, it is good that they are finally investing in the economy.

Other things they could do include uprating all benefits - there is a case for this considering energy prices have risen by 13-18%. This would

• significantly aleviate fuel poverty and child poverty
• support the high street particularly as this is looking like another disastrous christmas for them (and their employees).
• particularly target those areas which have been badly hit by recession.

I suspect that they are trying to re-introduce the class system into the UK. The poor are becoming poorer, the rich are becoming richer and the divide between the two is more noticable. I wouldn't be surprised if they brought back the workhouses.

what, you don't think women drive? or run businesses ? or work in construction? (plenty of female QS's out there)

and you think investment in construction projects is to do with class-ism????

Roads are diabolical, railway is worse. I think it's a long overdue investment.

Women do drive but, generally, they have jobs that are closer to home. Construction wise, it's generally men who do the building. I've never seen a female working on the motorways. I'm sure they do exist but isn't there a higher proportion of men doing these jobs??

Driving is expensive also so it will be a class issue. How are those in need supposed to travel when they can't afford the petrol/insurance/tax?

As the wife of an engineer I can state that there are lots of women working in construction. They may not be generally laying the tar but the construction industry is not just builders. It is also consulting engineers, QSs and the like and these parts of the industry will also be involved in the work generated from this investment. Many of then are women.

Good to know indy

absolutely. analysis of the effect of government policies shows a very clear trend:

the poorer you are, the greater proportion of your income you lose.
the richer you are, the greater proportion of your income you keep.

It is exactly a reverse-robin hood situation.

I remember them saying that they would protect the vunerable of society That's worked well hasn't it!

Have looked at HM Treasury Map of plans for infrastructure. Shocked to see it does not cover Wales. (Should have realised this)

I think if the Government is going to seek to stimulate the economy then this is the right way to go. Upgrading the countrys infrastructure helps increase supply in the long and medium term which will allow the economy to be able to grow long into the fure. Increasing benefits doesn't really do anything for the long term.

actually, rail travel is disproportionately for better-off people.

road travel and fuel duty represents one of the most unjust taxes on the working poor. consider - you earn £15k and spend £1200 pa on fuel vs someone who earns £40k and spends the same amount on fuel...

congestion causes higher fuel consumption (which may be tax-deducatable so long as it is less than 39p a mile), and other increased costs that particularly hurt small businesses (typically husband and wife teams)

up my benefits (and i am claiming a plenty) and i spend more in Tescos. great. Up spending on construction, and short term, plenty of small sub-contractors benefit, medium term, plenty of small businesses benefit.

Crossword - some things were listed for Wales, but Wales has its own budget to spend too.

Why is it that you think that nurses wages will 'trickle down' into the economy through spending, whereas road builders wages won't? People, quite frankly who are going to need to spend a higher proportion of what they earn. If you are the government and you employ 3 people on £15k each a year, they are more likely to spend every penny they get after tax. You employ 1 person and pay them £45k, they are more likely to save a chunk of that - and you've got 2 more people's benefits to pay.

As others have said, some parts of the country really do need improvements to infrastructure, it makes sense to do it now when those areas also need jobs. And not everyone is cut out to be a nurse or work in a highly skilled job, those people need chances too, infact, they need help more than the sort of person who can get the A levels needed to get on a nursing degree.

There is no 'trickle down', this is a tory myth.

'Trickle up' is what happens, thats how people get so rich.