Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Politics

Do we really need to make so many cuts?

55 replies

JoyceBarnaby · 17/01/2011 09:25

I'm not happy about the cuts for manyreasons but I know if I start a conversation about this with my Tory BIL, he'll just say they're all necessary because Labour fucked us up and left us with so much debt, we have no choice.

Is this true?

I don't want to discuss individual cuts, I just want to know whether people think making so many drastic cuts is really necessary to save our economy from certain doom.

OP posts:
ssd · 17/01/2011 09:33

course its true, DC said so

and anyway, don't forget "we're all in it together", when you're putting food into your trolley in asda and wondering if your card will be rejected at the till, you can be sure all the tory millionaires eg. the cabinet will be feeling the pinch too

NOT

MummyBerryJuice · 17/01/2011 09:40

Before the banking crisis the Tories were promising to match Labour's spending penny for penny.

That says more to me than almost any other comment regarding who/what is responsible for the current financial situation.

dreamingofsun · 17/01/2011 09:42

if you, as a household, were vastly overdrawn and paying such large amounts of interest that you were likely to pass your debt onto your children what would you do - make cuts or carry on spending at your current level which is way beyond your means?

JoyceBarnaby · 17/01/2011 09:44

Sorry to be so completely dim, MBJ, but do you mean the banks are to blame? If so, does this mean labour are not responsible at all and would just be dealing with the fall-out differently?

OP posts:
MummyBerryJuice · 17/01/2011 09:47

Exactly.

throckenholt · 17/01/2011 09:51

I think it is ideological and the financial situation gives them a good excuse and a cover for what they wanted to do anyway.

They have always hated the local authorities (despite claiming they don't want to centralise things) - and are happy to hammer them into the ground at any opportunity.

Yes things needed to be sorted out - but not in the way they are determined to push through. I think a lot of good stuff will be lost along the way - and not in a way that most people wanted or are even aware of.

nymphadora · 17/01/2011 09:52

Cuts are needed but some are drastic & not thought through. Some short term cuts lead to problems getting worse/ costing more as is seen regularly in local authorities( they still cut the same though)

onimolap · 17/01/2011 09:53

Before the 1997, Labour were promising to match Tory budget plans for 3 years. From 2000, they started overspending, and putting us in a place where we were unable to withstand the banking crisis (remember - the countries who did worst were this who were most overdrawn and dependent on continued borrowing).

We need to get back to a balanced budget. The cuts announced so far do not yet take us to that. It seems people do not yet fully realise how far we have been living beyond our means.

JoyceBarnaby · 17/01/2011 09:56

Dreamingofsun - surely, though, the choice is not between drastic cuts and continued massive spending? My personal finances are not that black and white. I understand some cuts in spending are definitely necessary, but I'm not convinced the Tories are going about it in the best way.

OP posts:
Chil1234 · 17/01/2011 09:56

"Truth is rarely plain and never simple....." :)

Attempting to take politics out of it, the bald financial picture at the moment is that the country spends more on public services, benefits and other government funded initiatives than it is receiving in tax and other revenue. The country is borrowing significant amounts of money every month and the national debt is increasing very rapidly.

Some (like the Labour party) say that this is not an urgent problem, all countries borrow money, that state funding is needed for investment, to keep people in employment & spending in the shops and that, as the global economic situation improves, the UK's fortunes will be taken along with it.

Others (like your BiL and the coalition) say that high levels of national debt and borrowing are not a responsible way to run an economy, will put off overseas investors, will saddle future generations with the problem of paying it back and that economic growth alone is not enough to fix matters.

If you agree with the 'not an urgent problem' view then cuts aren't necessary because you do nothing & keep spending at the same rate. However, if the economy doesn't improve, you're faced with the same decision and bigger numbers a few years down the track

If you agree with the 'it is an urgent problem' point of view the choices are broadly to increase revenue (raise tax) or reduce outgoings (spending cuts)... or a combination of the two.... until the spending and the revenue are more in line.

Then it comes down to philosophy. A right-leaning government that believes in 'small state' is more likely to cut spending than raise taxes. A left-leaning government that believes in 'big state' is more likely to do the reverse.

throckenholt · 17/01/2011 10:06

The problem is that in a stagnant economy making lots of extra people redundant doesn't help. It increases the payout on unemployment benefit, decreases the tax revenue, helps to depress optimism which means less spending and investment by individuals and companies. There are also knock-on health costs particularly mental health problems for people who thought they had a professional career and no are told they are not wanted anywhere.

I think it is a case of too much too fast for ideological reasons.

dreamingofsun · 17/01/2011 10:17

i think if you just tincker with this it isn't going to have much impact to the massive amount of money owed,

yes the banks are partly to blame, but its the labour gov that overspent. they shoulder some of the blame for the banking crisis as well as they were in charge of regulations at the time

complimentary · 17/01/2011 11:24

Get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, it will saves lives, plus billions. I don't agree with so many cuts, when money is wasted in other areas, and this is just two.

JoyceBarnaby · 17/01/2011 15:54

Thank you very much everyone - you've made some excellent points. You've also been far more eloquent than I am when discussing such matter with my BIL!!

OP posts:
onimolap · 17/01/2011 18:47

Complimentary: we pulled out of Iraq in mid 2009. The Government announced in July last year that we will be out of Afghanistan in 2014. So no persuasion needed there, and I suspect projected savings have already been factored in.

ThisIsANiceCage · 17/01/2011 18:56

So Chil, what's your take on Reaganomics - right wing deregulation, tax cuts and reduction in govt spending that, er, doubled the US deficit and trebled its national debt?

I remember being puzzled at the time, but wasn't interested enough to learn economics.

clutha · 17/01/2011 19:01

the gov said they are hoping to leave afghanistan by 2014 if conditions are right.

darleneconnor · 17/01/2011 19:04

no, it's ideological

Takver · 17/01/2011 19:40

JoyceBarnaby, you might find this website here helpful before you talk to your BiL next time :)

I think its a good summary of the alternative viewpoint - that the cuts planned are not the best way to deal with the current economic problems.

(This page here is a good summary of the scale of the problem, btw)

newwave · 17/01/2011 20:19

Ideology in almost every way, protect the rich, screw the poor and unemployed and hope the "middle classes" stay on side with a few "sweeties" before the next election.

They will provoke the public sector unions into strikes and attempt to divert attention from their policies.

If it was all about saving money they would announce the cacellation of Trident now.

The NHS shake up is not about better patient care it is about diverting money from the NHS into the coffers of "big business" more cash for shareholders less for patient care, more people forced to use private and even more money for big business.

The good thing is people are starting to wake up and see the Tories for what they are.

huddspur · 17/01/2011 20:34

Yes we do have to make cuts, the Government is spending far more than it is receiving in tax revenue and so is borrowing billions of pounds every month on the bond markets. This is neither sustainable nor sensible in the long term if spending and tax revenues are not brought back into line then it will lead to economic ruin. Of course you can increase taxes as well as reduce spending in order which the Government is doing as well with things like the VAT rise and CGT rise.

dreamingofsun · 17/01/2011 20:48

newwave - i don't call my children paying an extra 18k in uni tuition fees and child credit going protecting the rich. i think you've been watching the BBC news too much

longfingernails · 17/01/2011 20:57

Of course we need cuts of this scale - in fact, we probably need even more.

Labour borrowed and borrowed and borrowed before the financial crisis, because they thought they had abolished boom and bust.

The financial crisis merely laid our structural economic problems bare.

The root cause of our present predicament has its genesis in the years 2002 onwards, not 2008 onwards.

And the root cause of our present predicament is very simple: Labour overspending.

newwave · 17/01/2011 21:14

Off course Labour spent money, they spent trying to put right the social damage of the Thatcher years, crumbling schools and hospitals. patients dying whilst waiting for treatment.

The Tories blew all the North Sea money on tax cuts for the top rate tax payers, they sold the nationalised industries at rock bottom prices and now "big business" screws us on prices for energy and rail fares.

If you want an example of money wasted then ask what happened to the North Sea windfall, most of it went into the pockets of the well off and well connected not on infrastructure.

Every time the Tories leave office they leave social destruction behind them.

byrel · 17/01/2011 21:24

newwave- How is spending more than you have repairing social damage surely its just building up more problems in the future. If Labour wanted to spend the money they did then surely they should have increased taxes, not build up so much debt that we have to shell out 10s of billions to service it

Swipe left for the next trending thread