Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

These angry Tories can't see what 'no alternative' means

14 replies

ttosca · 03/09/2012 23:58

So blinded by dogma are they that the reality of the cuts to come has not yet hit home with Cameron's critics. But it soon will

'The UK economy is healing", said George Osborne this week. Did Treasury officials show him all the graphs upside down? If he believes that, it's truly terrifying. If he doesn't, then applying more leeches to the economic arteries is the only remedy he knows. No turning back, there is no alternative ? TINA ? is that old Thatcher song he reprises at double volume. The cabinet is united round death Plan A, as even Vince Cable at the weekend signed his name in blood: even he said "Tina", too.

Osborne's faith healing has shrivelled growth, and next year looks worse. Though unemployment fell recently, both the CBI and Chambers of Commerce say it will rise in 2013 as the next giant wave of public sector cuts casts staff adrift. Tax receipts are falling, public spending and the deficit rising. Money is borrowed to waste on the running costs of unemployment, not on investment. The Engineering Employers Federation reports manufacturing at its worst for three years and order books negative, with domestic and export demand down, despite the pound's one-third devaluation. The Federation of Small Business said a third of businesses find their growth plans stunted by lack of bank lending. Osborne's Project Merlin failed; so did the national loan guarantee. Funding for lending is not off the ground before more plans are announced for government bank guarantees on loans to business and builders. Good if it works. But even to consider government-backed investment is to admit that his old "crowding out" theory is proven wrong: he pulled the state back but private investment didn't flood in. Instead large companies sit on billions, afraid to invest in an economy he has drained of demand.

The only booming sector is luxury London property: the FT reports a £38bn ballooning of investment in Mayfair-type hotspots, attracting Europeans and Asians seeking a safe haven. Many of these properties will lie empty ? ripe reminders of the need for a land value tax or at least Clegg's mansion tax.

As parliament returned, the only non-payroll Tories echoing Osborne's "healing economy" fantasy with a straight face were those desperately hoping for promotion in the reshuffle. By the end of Tuesday the swollen backbench ranks of the demoted and the disappointed will be even less willing to pretend their party's future looks bright. The editor of the Spectator stalks the corridors reminding all and sundry that the national debt will have risen far faster and higher under Cameron than under Labour in 13 years. Read Telegraph commentators these days, and you find ruder abuse of the Tory leaders than on these pages: "Cameron at half time is a political tragedy in the making"; "Cameron and Osborne have wimped out like flabby schoolboys dodging PE"; "When Cameron speaks I feel that he's talking to someone else"; or "No better than Mitt Romney".

David Davis's thundering broadside on Monday caught the mood of the malcontents. He was entirely right in concluding the economy is moribund, "bumping along the bottom". But when he proclaimed "There is an alternative", all he meant was even more of the same ? a triple dose of George's marvellous medicine. Deficit reduction is "too little, too late", he said. Cut spending, apply "electric shock treatment". But as with all slashers and burners, he hadn't the bottle to name what specific cuts he meant. "Take a knife to taxes"; nurture, don't punish "wealth creators", but "radically cut" regulations for employee protection. "The state is too large, complex, powerful, intrusive, and expensive," he said, and his party would all agree. Punchy, pithy, pugnacious, it was the speech to make him chief rabble-rouser for all the policies that are likely to march his party into the wilderness at the next election.

Any government's backbenchers would be restive in the face of such alarming economic failure. But what's odd about the Tory malcontents is how little they understand their own leaders: for all the U-turns and bungling, there has been absolutely no slippage in the great austerity. Shrinking the state, come what may, is happening. Yet they seem ignorant of what's steaming down the track towards them. Do they know that more than 80% of the announced cuts are still to be implemented? Are they ready in their constituencies to deal with huge rail fare rises in January at the same time as child benefit is abolished for better-off families? Are they ready for April, when disability living allowance cuts mean 90,000 people will have their motability scooters and cars repossessed and two-thirds of disabled children start to lose their allowances? The benefit cap in April will eject thousands of families from their homes in more affluent Tory areas.

Those who call for deeper cuts should look carefully at what trouble may be brewing in the NHS in their own patch ? or did they foolishly believe Cameron's no cuts pledge? Already in many areas people can only have one cataract on the NHS, while hip and knee replacements are rationed, along with 125 other procedures. Watch the outcry as units or whole hospitals close, or are reconfigured. Beware National Trust battalions ready to resume warfare against Osborne's latest green belt assault. Are these MPs ready for trouble when their councils struggle to collect council tax for the first time from the poorest homes, as councils themselves find it harder each year to identify yet another round of spending cuts? Capital spending gets yet another slashing next year ? an irony as the government tries to kick-start private infrastructure investment.

I suspect most of these angry Tory MPs are wilfully clueless. They have deliberately turned a blind eye to what's heading their way because they believe so passionately, so ideologically, in the theory of shrinking the state that they prefer not to probe its reality. They may share the public delusion that the worst of the cuts are over, as if announcements were deed. Those MPs now scornfully asking if David Cameron is a "man or a mouse" may find themselves doing a bit of squeaking before long.

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/03/angry-tories-no-alternative

OP posts:
flatpackhamster · 04/09/2012 08:53

Oh, look. Polly Toynbee being wrong about everything. Again. I love the way that she accuses other people of being ideologically blinkered. As if a weekly column on how evil the Tories are and how great socialism is makes you intellectually balanced.
Anyone else see her article on housing benefits caps, where she compared the £20,000 a year rent cap to the gassing of the Jews? Called it 'a final solution'.

NicholasTeakozy · 04/09/2012 09:24

In what way is she wrong? Austerity will not grow our economy. Private companies are sitting on billions of pounds they won't invest because they're worried about a triple dip. Unless there are massive U-turns we are fucked. There is not much left for the greedy corporate scroungers to take now they have more or less privatised the NHS.

Anybody who believes Gideon's economic policy will work is quite frankly an idiot.

ttosca · 04/09/2012 09:44

Oh, look. Polly Toynbee being wrong about everything.

...said the man who wants to abolish to anti-discrimination and minimum wage laws in the UK.

OP posts:
meditrina · 04/09/2012 09:58

What is the alternative then?

You might disagree with the Coalition programme, but I haven't seen anyone putting out a clear, costed programme with any form of supporting argumentation about why that alternative will be better.

Even the most (over) optimistic predicted income from additional tax on the "bad guys" won't cover the costs of any "spend" programmed I've seen. And borrowing even more (as we watch the next round of the Greek tragedy) is not a choice that will command support.

MrsMicawber · 04/09/2012 10:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ttosca · 04/09/2012 10:12

The fact that your put 'bad guys' in quotes when referring to tax evaders reveals exactly what sort of economic policies you would prefer, meditrina.

The real alternative to periodic crises and rising wealth inequality is, of course, socialism. Until humanity rejects the utterly irrational and pernicious system that is capitalism, we will be mired in class conflict, poverty, wealth inequality, economic crises, and warfare.

Socialism is going to take at least another decade, IMO... when the contradictions of Capitalism become utterly destructive and inescapable for the vast majority of the middle-class and poor in the affluent West.

In the meantime, the alternative to austerity, is the cessation of neo-liberalism and unsustainable wealth inequality. Part of the reason we're stuck in a recession is because people have no money to spend, so there is no demand in the economy. Making people jobless and then taking away their benefits - the Tory plan - is actively making the economy worse.

Raising the bottom income threshold for taxation, along with a living wage, and a cut in VAT, would do more to get the economy moving again than any bloodletting of the Osborne variety.

OP posts:
ttosca · 04/09/2012 10:14

The NMW needs to be raised so that wealth can filter down and the government can stop paying tax credits which do nothing more than enable employers to pay disgustingly low wages.

Agreed. It's insane how the government effectively subsidizes private corporation by paying their employee wages for them.

I also find it bizarre that the NMW doesn't automatically rise with inflation.

OP posts:
MrJudgeyPants · 04/09/2012 12:00

"The real alternative to periodic crises and rising wealth inequality is, of course, socialism."

Where experience tells us that cycles of affluence and austerity and rising wealth inequality are replaced by poverty, repression and preferential treatment for the ruling elite.

I'll stick with what I know thanks.

ttosca · 04/09/2012 12:35

replaced by poverty, repression and preferential treatment for the ruling elite.

Umm... what? What, exactly, do you think is the situation we have now?

i47.tinypic.com/e9uoog.jpg

OP posts:
ttosca · 04/09/2012 12:36

You can stick with whatever you want, JudgeyPants. You can't stop history.

OP posts:
MrJudgeyPants · 04/09/2012 13:31

"What, exactly, do you think is the situation we have now?"

As I said, we are in the austerity part of our cycle. Affluence will return one day if and when we get a new Iron Lady in number 10.

If you think that jailing rioters equates to repression of the people then god help us. BTW, what crime, which was on the statute books at the time of the financial crisis, covers the actions of the bankers? I'm not sure a prosecution is possible unless you forfeit the rule of law - which helpfully proves my point about big government and repression.

Rising wealth inequality is all bollocks anyway. Rising wealth for all is what really matters and, if it wasn't for the bloody state confiscating wealth off the poorest in our society, that is something that capitalism (present glitch excepted) is brilliant at delivering - the cost of most goods having decreased as new technologies and methods of manufacture have become available. Even the poorest can afford inventions (or at least have access to inventions) that were unthinkable just a few generations back. Telephones, washing machines and televisions were the preserve of the ultra rich 50 years ago yet are commonplace now.

MrJudgeyPants · 04/09/2012 14:54

"You can stick with whatever you want, JudgeyPants. You can't stop history."

Socialism is history. It should be left gathering dust in history books as a monument to how good intentions pave the road to hell. It should be left to the memory of the countless millions of innocents who died in the name of socialism, fascism, communism, maoism or every other authoritarian system you can think of.

We should nail the lid shut on its coffin once and for all, lest the insidious beast gets out again and reaps another hundred years of savagery on the people of the world.

The last thing we should be doing is celebrating it and actively trying to resurrect it and we pile up our own funeral pyres if we fail to understand this.

ttosca · 04/09/2012 15:22

MrJudgeyPants-

As I said, we are in the austerity part of our cycle. Affluence will return one day

Affluence for whom? The middle-class has been in decline for over 30 years, since the Reagan/Thatcher axis came in to power. Affluence for the majority has only ever been the result of the public and the unions fighting for their rights and welfare.

If you think that jailing rioters equates to repression of the people then god help us

it's not at all surprising to see that a person who can't read a graph, also has reading comprehension problems. That's OK, though. It's your problem.

BTW, what crime, which was on the statute books at the time of the financial crisis, covers the actions of the bankers? I'm not sure a prosecution is possible unless you forfeit the rule of law - which helpfully proves my point about big government and repression.

Actually, rigging the Libor rate, which was mentioned. There are several lawsuits with charges of fraud already being prepared. I just don't see any chance of anyone doing any jail time. What usually happens in these cases is that the big institutions are given a nominal fine, a slap on the wrist, and told never to do it again.

Secondly, your line of argument is very revealing. If committing fraud by rigging rates is not illegal (and that is to be determined), then there is obviously something very wrong with the system. Something doesn't cease being wrong because it is not illegal. There has always been practices throughout history which were wrong but not yet illegal: slavery, child labour, and racist discrimination to name but a few.

You also tellingly ignore all the other things listed, such as Tony Bliar illegally invading Iraq and killing at least 100,000+ people, and who now goes on tours to give talks for tens of thousands of pounds, instead of rotting in jail. Or the fact the 330+ people killed in police custody, without a single prosecution.

And yet a rioter, who stole some bottled water, was jailed for six months.

I think these are all pretty clear examples of a 'an elite' acting with impunity. They are outside of the law, and are not accountable to the public. You are so blinded by ideology, that this is all normalised for you.

Rising wealth inequality is all bollocks anyway. Rising wealth for all is what really matters and,

This is just wrong. It's just a moral point, but it has been repeatedly shown that wealth inequality has drastic effects on the welfare and coherence of society as a whole. In any case, wages have actually dropped in real terms over the past 30 years for a substantial minority of the population. Most people's wages have stagnated, while the rich have become insanely wealthy.

if it wasn't for the bloody state confiscating wealth off the poorest in our society,

You're right, but it does this because we live in a Plutocracy. The rich make the rules, and government is by and for the rich. It's basically Capitalism for the poor and socialism for the rich. We subsidize companies and bail them out when they fail. Meanwhile, the welfare state is being attacked.

that is something that capitalism (present glitch excepted) is brilliant at delivering - the cost of most goods having decreased as new technologies and methods of manufacture have become available. Even the poorest can afford inventions (or at least have access to inventions) that were unthinkable just a few generations back. Telephones, washing machines and televisions were the preserve of the ultra rich 50 years ago yet are commonplace now.

I think you'll find there is more to democracy, welfare, and happiness than widescreen TVs. There is a democratic deficit in the West. That's why millions of people are taking to the streets. If this is not fixed, it will erupt. Mark my words.

OP posts:
MrJudgeyPants · 04/09/2012 17:06

"Affluence for the majority has only ever been the result of the public and the unions fighting for their rights and welfare."

And nothing to do with entrepreneurialism, technological advances, the division of labour and the specialisation of skills? Are you sure it?s absolutely none of those things? Blimey!

"If you think that jailing rioters equates to repression of the people then god help us

it's not at all surprising to see that a person who can't read a graph, also has reading comprehension problems.

You're the one that can't read the bloody graph!

"Secondly, your line of argument is very revealing. If committing fraud by rigging rates is not illegal (and that is to be determined), then there is obviously something very wrong with the system. Something doesn't cease being wrong because it is not illegal. There has always been practices throughout history which were wrong but not yet illegal: slavery, child labour, and racist discrimination to name but a few."

Well, secondly, I have never said that there is nothing wrong with the system. The difference between you and I is that I'd much rather the government told us what was illegal up front rather than apply laws retrospectively. Sure, occasionally some event may happen which we don't have an applicable law on the statute books and the 'bad guy' goes free, but this is the price of abiding by the rule of law. If you think a new law is required then lobby for one just as William Wilberforce did about slavery or Richard Oastler did for child labour.

"You also tellingly ignore all the other things listed, such as Tony Bliar illegally invading Iraq and killing at least 100,000+ people, and who now goes on tours to give talks for tens of thousands of pounds, instead of rotting in jail. Or the fact the 330+ people killed in police custody, without a single prosecution."

I have absolutely no idea what point you are trying to make with this paragraph. If it helps though, I think Blair should face prosecution for misleading parliament and one hundred thousand counts of murder, whilst deaths in police custody should be tried under whatever existing law we have - most probably manslaughter.

"This is just wrong. It's just a moral point, but it has been repeatedly shown that wealth inequality has drastic effects on the welfare and coherence of society as a whole."

Quite, a moral point and not an economic one.

"I think you'll find there is more to democracy, welfare, and happiness than widescreen TVs. There is a democratic deficit in the West. That's why millions of people are taking to the streets. If this is not fixed, it will erupt. Mark my words."

Why are you separating wealth from what you can do with wealth? It makes no sense to look at the money that way. Even if there is a democratic deficit - I actually agree with you on this point but I don't see why socialism has to be the answer - why are you linking this to wealth, and then to protest because of wealth, unless you intend to use democracy as a cover for asset stripping the rich? This is why I find such a view to be objectionable ? you are framing the debate with reference to your own prejudices.

As for your hope for revolution, I wouldn't go holding your breath if I were you. I've yet to hear a single narrative of what these beloved protest groups would do that holds any water whatsoever. If they are so coherent, so informed and have such a clear strategy for fixing this country, putting together a manifesto and standing for election should be a doddle. I suspect though that the driving force for most of them is youthful naivety and a desire to be involved with a movement. They will, in the end, be comprehensively defeated by the most determined and unlikely of opponents -those who want a quiet life and have acquired moderate wealth for themselves; in other words, their parents.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page