cuts - Wednesday's Spending Review

[mrsbaldwin]

Brace yourself ladies - these cuts are big, there will be tens of thousands of public sector redundancies and it's said (by the Fawcett Society amongst others) that they will disproportionately affect women.

Some workers will get some sort of payoff, and some will be pleased to go. Some will find new jobs.

But I reckon the overall effect (licks finger and holds it in the wind) will be to drive down women's wages, meaning that once you are made redundant from your public sector post you may find more work but it will be at a lower rate and the extra competition for jobs across the board will drive wages down across the board. This may be true for men as well but I think it will affect women - mums - more.

If you are watching the press coverage on Weds, what do you think the effects of the cuts and the job losses for women (and mums) will be?

Huddspur, can I just knock on the head this thing about Liam Byrne saying there's no money left? It was a JOKE. When there's a change of government, ministers often leave jokey notes for their successors, who they have built up a relationship with over the years. In this case, because of the coalition, Byrne was succeeded by a LibDem (David Laws), who he had no working relationship with so the joke misfired. He had been expecting his Tory opposite number, who he knew well.

I'm just sick of it being quoted as proof of Labour profligacy.

mamatomany

oh there around no one denys it trouble is people see it and presume everyones the same check out the mil online talking about benefit cuts and there lead story family with 10 kids complaing council house not big enough and that why shouldnt they have more kids

yet no feature on the other side of the coin

Here's a cuts calculator.

I've just done it. It's bloody depressing. I thought we were going to get off lightly as we're both in full time work and not relying on any benefits but according to this we'll still be £1k worse off :(

It only takes a minute.

Just did it 2K+. How does that work out though. I didn't think I used any benefits (I suppose its schools and health and local authority things)

We rely on the state for very little so it will not affect us apparently in that social care of which we receive none will be cut by £770 I take it my share is being used by someone else then ?
I honestly think if you expect nothing from the state and plan accordingly, you won't be disappointed.

Finally equality on retirement age. Women cannot have it both ways. You will now have to retire at the SAME AGE as a man instead of having an earlier retirement age but you never heard the Fawcett society complaining of THAT inequality for women. You want sex equality on your terms not on equal terms. You are not the "weaker sex" so why do you need ealier retirement.

Who youa rguing with, matey?

holy moley

I just looked at that and according to that wer elooking at being 4k worse of

"I honestly think if you expect nothing from the state and plan accordingly, you won't be disappointed."

The bit where you say "I honestly think if you expect nothing from the state you won't be disappointed." makes sense.

I'm just not clear how you "plan accordingly".

Would this be where you plan which railway bridge you want to sleep under and check out the best begging spots?

Presumably you don't honestly think you can plan your way out of anything that life might throw at you with no help from anybody else?

trouble is i could not plan for ds3 or for my marriage to break down

as my wanker of xh did not want in his words a retard for a son but hey ho it was ok as i did not want a wanker for a dh so he went out the door with my foot up his arse

cinnamontoast with a deficit that is the equivalent of 12% of GDP it is not just a joke, Byrne wrote that because its true, we have lived way beyond our means and now we face the consequences.

yes huddspur but not all of us lived the high life and yet were going to be paying for it

peasant I love you- the way you discuss your ExH is pur gold and he deserves it!

We planned ; we had a house enar a nice school, a carrer plan each, penions, a little bit of saving. Not so much they would keep us when I had to drop out of the workforce and Dh was amde redunant. I doubt very many poeple can save thier own salary a year though can they? What with that being pretty much what is needed to keep us.

The real problems started when labour had to bail out the banks due to the GLOBAL crisis -Labour's actions landed us in major financial problems - but it was necessary and Brown was praised globally for his management. Up til 2008 the Tories were promising to match labour's spending - they certainly weren't advocating caution. They also wanted LESS regulation of banks - so don't think we'd have faired any better under them. I am not a new labour fan - but I was a single mum under Thatcher and know full well what the Tories are capable of - and this lot are worse than her. The cuts are ideologically driven.

yep i planned to had a council house a job and a marriage now i have none of them

i actually gave up my council house as was not suitable for ds3 and after 4 years of being promised help when they turned round and admitted it wa snever going to happen .

I felt for ds3 sake i had to walk away from security of council housing and find somewhere he could have more independence oh and a better school to

The problem is that Labour started to run a deficit in 2004 as Gordon Brown believed he had abolished the economic cycle. This meant that the public finances were not not in good shape before the recession in 2008. Added to that the Government spent money during the recession that they thought would stimulate the economy that had little or no impact further worsening the fiscal situation.

Hudd, we get yu don;t like labour, honest we do.

But a lot of people affected by this never voted LAbour in their lives; good, honest people who've never falsely claimed but go ill or redundant or whatever.

it's fine to make ideological and historical points but at the back of it is a lot of people suffering and you don;t seem willing to enange on that level, which is what I thought MN is for?

I'm very sympathethic to those who will be hurt my the cuts but its when I see people slagging of Cameron/Osbourne/Clegg/Cable saying their deliberately setting out to hurt the poor and the vulnerable I want to scream. They are having to do this, if Labour were in power this would also be happening.

huddspur symathy is nice but its not going to make up for the loss of money loss of services that will hit ds3 and my family

And when we see that the richer ones are not going to be hurting and mean real hurting then yes were going to slag Cameron/Osbourne/Clegg of becuase if it was them there be shouting to oh i forgot they are moaning as Cb goes and that tax gone up so it only be 3 holidays in carribean this year darling

School Coat Garden House School Chelsea

Maybe Labour would make the same cuts, maybe they wouldn't. Politicians have been terrified of increasing tax in line with expenditure for decades.

Doesn't mean that 'there isn't any money' isn't a subjective statement.

Taxes are already very high and there is very little scope for increasing them further particulary as we need a private sector led recovery or we're dead in the water

Yes but what about the pension age increase for women? 60 to 66!

An extra 6 years working - that's nearly half my working life to date....I may keel over and die before 60 with them mere thought!

huddspur

taxes may be hgh yes but im betting that there not weighing up heating or food for those that paying high rate tax becuase that is something that people are facing

Why shouldn't women have to work to the same age as men. We have a higher life expectancy.

Why would tax increases stop private sector recovery. I thought we were all in this together?