TUC National Demonstration Against Cuts

[OrangeBernard]

Who's going? I've just booked my train tickets. Its my first protest, any advice or tips? Bit worried about kettling.

What's kettling?

It's when the police do something for a change (as opposed to handing out lollipops in community engagement projects) and keep sanctimonious whingers out of everyone else's way.

Jogon, I think it would certainly be unrealistic to expect the lovely Mr Green to pay for it all himself.

If the deficit is running at £40bn a year, that £25bn would be a canny start, surely?

Thanks for pointing out the figures, Jogon. Welfare - especially pensions - is the main financial commitment.

Tell you what. Everyone's shouting for Mr Green to pay more income tax - even though, legally, he doesn't have to (and don't forget this was the case for the 13 years that labour was in power so don't blame the coalition).

So, go on then, pay more. And while you're at it, you're clearly loaded so you don't need any more money so you may as well drive your businesses to the wall. Sure, people will be out of jobs and the high street will be affected but, hey, you can't be arsed now, can you? - there's no incentive. And don't bother investing any money in anything. You don't have to - keep it to yourself. Don't give any money to charity and don't invest in training young people in retail. Just sod it all.

The amount of tax that is paid on dividends that Philip Green's wife pays, perfectly legally, is exactly the same as any foreign investor in a UK company will pay. If you tax Philip Green (or his wife), you will have to tax every other foreign investor.

That'll be good for the economy won't it? Tax Mrs Green, tax every other foreign investor, lose investment in all sectors, and then see jobs go - and, no - the investment and the jobs won't be coming back soon.

We are in a capitalist society - people build business for financial gain. People invest for financial gain. Business brings income and employment - help the businesses, especially the small ones. Create a flexible workforce - not one that's stuck in the dark ages supported by unions where change isn't permitted.

You won't get an argument from me about closing tax loopholes.
However, still leaves a deficit of 15 bn not even talking about the debt.

Jogon, I posted this link previously.

It shows (according to the Daily Mail) the breakdown of public spending under the last financial year under Labour.

According to the Mail, who I'm sure have no reason to under play the costs, the total benefits bill (including pensions) came to £148bn. Has our benefits bill really increased that much under the tories?

I've been asking about what Alternative. This year's borrowing, even after the cuts isn't £40b, it's £146b.

The only answer so far was deal with tax avoidance

• well if that raises £25b, so if you leave the current cuts, then this year's deficit will be around £121b. Or is part of the plan to increase the overspendng and thus the debt? By how much, and what are the future interest payments?

• the other was "get back what we gave the banks": aside from the snag that selling the equity now would bring HMG a loss (waiting might break even or even bring profit), how would the alternative programme do this?

The welfare bill is crippling us. That is a fact that has to be addressed whilst protecting the genuinely needy.

The tax payer should not be paying for housing benefit for homes far more expensive than most working people can afford to buy.

It should not be paying for healthy adults to live a lifestyle that is far from the breadline.

It should provide the very basics.

Wish I could have been there, I just could not possibly afford to get to London :( The cuts are disgusting and unnecessarily harsh, the Tory led coalition are making full use of the fact the there is a budget deficit to act out their ideologies.

LFN's posts really go to show how George Osbourne supporters really are mentally ill.

I agree, the taxpayer shouldn't have to foot the bill for working families who still can't afford to pay their rent.

I think business should pay their employees a decent living wage from their massive profits, rather than expecting the tax payer to prop up their profits.

Look at the figures Jogon. Of that £148bn, almost half of it is payments to pensioners. Another almost £26bn is paid to the ill and disabled.

Housing benefit is not only paid to the unemployed. It is paid to the disabled and those on low wages.

@Jogon - "It should provide the very basics."

Wholeheartedly agree - pay for housing that's appropriate for the number of people who are in the house, vouchers for food, clothing, bills - the necessities - not for extras like alcohol, smoking, sky tv, etc. Not for socialising, e.g. going to the cinema, etc. That should be their right. No more, no less. Incentivise people to get more. People on low incomes who work hard for the pittance they receive have to juggle money and have to make tough decisions about what they spend their literal pennies on. If they can't afford luxuries, they don't buy luxuries. The state should not be paying for luxuries.

Sure, if we want a state that does pay for people and to mollycoddle people and look after their every whim, that's a completely different scenario - and, trust me, there would be public uproar if the government interfered to that extent.

Studying hard, you think everyone on JSA is having a whale of a time? I guess all those public sector workers getting sacked have nothing to worry about then, if it's so cushty.

Funny that anyone would bother working for a pittance, when it's so easy to sit on their arses all day and be much better off.

Tell you what, why not stick the fuckers in a workhouse? That'll teach 'em.

And if the police need more money to fund extra staff and hours, put up speed cameras on every road so that the stupid, gullible drivers who think they can break the law wherever they are get fined.

"
Save police jobs, get more speed cameras!
Save police jobs, get more speed cameras!
Save police jobs, get more speed cameras!
Save police jobs, get more speed cameras!
"

Can someone tell me what's wrong with that? There's nothing forcing people to drive over the speed limit.

Studyinghard - would that include then, someone who has just left an abusive relationship and is too traumatised to find work?

@wubblybubbly - no, I don't think that everyone on JSA is having a whale of a time. I really hope they are not. They should just have the basics - not the luxuries - that's all I'm saying.

i had the pleasure if seeing a man walk along the traffic punching every taxi he came across, apparently he was protesting against the cuts?!?!?

Oh and love the way some of the "protesters" are so proud of what they were doing that they kept their faces covered!!

What luxuries do you think you can afford on £65 a week? Even if your rent is paid, you've still got to eat and heat.

@wubblybubbly - vouchers, vouchers, vouchers - for food and utilities. There are loads of threads on websites like moneysavingexpert about how to eat well and cheaply.

@manatee - "too traumatised to find work" - that sounds like there's a need for counselling. Support that person with the basics and give that person the counselling, mental support to overcome the trauma.

Can everyone remember that LFN is actually a revolutionary socialist, attempting to DISCREDIT the views she pretends to uphold by being as unpleasant as possible.

I'm suspicious that Glasnost might be doing something similar as well....

@manatee - "too traumatised to find work" - that sounds like there's a need for counselling.

Ah yes, but course of course counselling is the panacea for all of modern society's problems.

Sit in a small room snivelling to a not very bright woman with large earrings and a Clarks shoes habit and voila!. All your problems will be magically rinsed away.

I personally found counselling very effective. However, it's massively underfunded and unlikely to recieve any additional funding any time soon.

Wubbly than-you so much for that link, it's amazing I love it and shall be printing it out, to hand out to ill-educated morons everyday.

Studyinghard - are you suggesting that part of the benefit package is free internet access so that those on the poverty line have access to these sites you mention.

I was at the march - thousands of people protesting peacefully against the cuts. Critics say there is no alternative to the cuts. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development published a report last week.

www.oecd.org/document/38/0,3746,en_2649_34569_47283558_1_1_1_1,00.htmlthe OECD report. The summary says:

"The government is pursuing a necessary and wide ranging programme of fiscal consolidation and structural reforms."

Every party, not just the government, knows we have to take necessary steps to reduce the deficit. It's the nature of those steps that is causing concern. Yes, the steps are wide-ranging - OECD is stating the obvious, not necessarily giving approval to these wide-ranging steps.

Page 2 of the summary says: "A broad based recovery started in end-2009" (I thought the Labour party were in power then) but the UK "faces significant headwinds during 2011, which can be mitigated by monetary policy remaining supportive" (Question: is the monetary policy being pursued by the government supportive or not?).

Page 2 also says, "Monetary policy should hence remain expansionary...to support the recovery".

Now, I'm not an economist, but I thought an expansionary fiscal policy meant increasing public expenditure. The report also said that the government must tackle "banks that are too big to fail".

Many countries have been in this problem before but none has tried to reduce their deficits by relying so much on cutting public expenditure. The government's policy is a risky experiment - and one that no other government has pursued after a deep recession.

fullfact.org/sites/fullfact.org/files/Full_Fact_The_Economy-The_Big_Question.pdf

You're welcome Jacqueline. Enjoy the educating!