All-round Budget thread

[longfingernails]

.

Very careful editing there Xenia!

Yes, the BMA have decided not to oppose the bill outright, though it was a close call.

"Dr Jacky Davis said: "This Bill is the final step on the way to the privatisation of the NHS. The Bill has few friends outside the private companies waiting to make billions out of it."

But her motion for outright opposition was opposed by 54 to 44 per cent.

The BMA Council will consider its next moves at a meeting today.

Its options include a ballot on industrial action ? which has not taken place since 1975 ? but this looks less likely after the meeting also voted to keep negotiating with ministers."

That is it in a nutshell Niceguy. We've only got so much money to spend, same as it ever was.

We need to decide where best to spend our money. Mr Lansley isn't funding these reforms from his own pocket, I'm fairly sure.

I would have also thought that the very worst thing for depression is to be at home benefit dependant. Isn't poverty and unemployment a major factor in depression?

So then give them a job. How patronizing of you to suggest that people would rather be unemployed, on benefits and depressed than working for a living.

Thanks to the recession, caused by the banking crisis, and furthermore thanks to the ideological cuts of this government, there are upwards of 2.5 Million unemployed, and quite literally not enough jobs to employ people.

www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2011/03/16/britain-unemployment.html

Nigella seems to be one big screaming Daily Mail headline - full of hot air, hatred and hysteria, but no substance whatsoever.

Because no one seems to be listening. There is no money. We are horrifyingly broke to the extent that we will not be bailed out by the IMF if we go cap in hand to them. We cannot afford to continue as we are without either massive tax hikes across the board , cuts or both.

There is plenty of money. Our debt to GDP ratio is much lower than other G8 countries, including Japan, Italy, and the United States. In fact, it has been lower for most of the 20th Century:

www.economicshelp.org/blog/uk-economy/uk-national-debt/

After WWII, the UK was actually bankrupt. Yet at this time, we created the NHS and built the welfare state. Spending and investing in public services actually steadily brought down the debt ratio, and jobs were created, people became healthier and more productive, and it generally facilitated the functioning of the economy.

Bollox.

Thousands upon thousands of Eastern Europeans and other immigrants have managed to find jobs in recent years. I can't remember the last time I was served food or drinks by a non immigrant .

Perhaps some people are unemployed because they are simply unemployable and have, in some cases, made themselves so.

So much hatred for the poor and vulnerable, here. So much reactionary nonsense.

Myth: "We have no money".

Reality: We are wealthier than we've ever been. Our debt to GDP is historically low, and lower than most G8 countries. We have enough money to reduce corporation tax. We are paying £3 million per day to fund the war in Libya, and the total cost may go up to £500 million.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/2011/03/22/the-true-cost-of-david-cameron-s-war-in-libya-115875-23006828/

We have enough money to give let off companies like Vodafone several billion pounds in tax which they owed after 'negotiating' with the treasury. An estimated £120 billion pounds annually is lost from tax - personal and corporate - avoidance and evasion. If we enacted the 'Robin Hood' tax on financial speculation at a rate of 0.05%, the UK could raise an estimated £20 billion pounds per year. (The US could raise about $200 billion dollars.)

docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:sYYsAJCkHLgJ:robinhoodtax.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/FAQ-Robin-Hood-Tax1.pdf

So spitting venom at poor people and claiming that welfare needs to be drastically reformed is complete and utter garbage. Your tax pounds are going to poor people. They're going to the very rich (corporate and individual), the political class, and the arms industry.

^Bollox.

Thousands upon thousands of Eastern Europeans and other immigrants have managed to find jobs in recent years. I can't remember the last time I was served food or drinks by a non immigrant ."

Oh, now immigrants are the problem, eh? For god's sake, Nigella. Seriously. Do you write for the Daily Mail? You are a serious nasty, bigoted and spiteful little sh*t.

"Not enough jobs are being created to match the expanding work force and the public sector cull has barely started," said Jonathan Loynes, chief European economist at Capital Economics.

www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2011/03/16/britain-unemployment.html

*Shadow work and pensions secretary Liam Byrne said this was a sign that the government could not rely on the private sector to create jobs.

"There are still five people chasing every single job and in about a hundred constituencies, 10 people are chasing every job," he told BBC News.*

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12477563

===================

Nothing but hot air from you.

'has the money for the bombing of libya come from a credit card or have we stuck Wales in hock...how have we afforded all those bombs and stuff...maybe it's come from the foreign aid budget or something.'

We already have the military hardware like the Storm Shadows and Tomahawks, and the submarines and Tornadoes. We are paying for the fuel and the deployment and eventually the replacement of the missiles.

The money for the bombing of Libya has come out of the treasury's contigency reserves

ttosca bracket your links!! Check down below how to if you dunno.

cakeretention (and others): I can't walk/garden/cook/go shopping/get on a coach/train/bus unaided, etc etc etc. I'm still going on that bloody march tomorrow though, because my opinion of Clegg/Cameron and their supporters is completely unaffected by my disability. They're Tories; this is what they do. Had you considered going after Philip Green who salts it all away in Monaco to avoid tax, or Barclays bank which paid 1% tax last year? or are you sticking with attacking the fraudulent claimants? They are an easier target after all. Don't worry, I and the other scrounging crips are quite happy to get humiliated by privateers Atos to ensure you're not wasting your money. This kind of witch hunting affects every single disabled person in the country. Hope you enjoy spending the cash you save as much as we enjoy getting it wrung out of us. Loving your work, sister.

glasnot

Will do. Thanks!

I don't think debating why there is so much employment done by immigrants when we have 2.5 million unemployed necessarily makes one bigoted - in fact I think a lot of our problems come from even discussing or questioning things like this is just a taboo and people shout others down as 'bigoted or racist' too soon.

Prinnie

No, talking about immigration policy or immigrants doesn't make one a racist or bigot, but using immigrants (along with welfare recipients, pensioners, and the poor) as a scapegoat for your imaginary ills because of what you read in the Daily Mail most certainly does.

There is plenty of money. Our debt to GDP ratio is much lower than other G8 countries, including Japan, Italy, and the United States.

That is such a ridiculous argument. In layman's terms you are essentially saying "There's plenty of money. Look, all my mates are all in more debt than I am!"

Well so what? Do you want to spend like them until they're bankrupt first? Or do you want to look after your own finances in a sustainable manner?

Alice. Hope you enjoy the march and don't get kettled. Seriously. It's your right to protest and I wish you every luck.

But just bear in mind that had (heaven forbid) Labour had won the last election, they'd have made pretty much the same level of cuts. You may think this is nasty Tories cutting benefits to the poor. But actually the work had started albeit very slowly under Labour. The transfer of people from IB to ESA was a Labour policy. The rules to compel lone parents to work when their child was school age, another Labour policy.

If you read around, even on MN, the 1% Barclays tax thing was widely regarded as a incredibly sloppy piece of journalism. 1% was worked out using some very dodgy accounting and based on earnings made during Labour's reign which made them criticising it all the more laughable!

My point is that whilst it's easy to throw scorn on the "nasty Tories", just bear in mind that economic realities mean that it didn't matter if they or Labour were in charge. We'd still be here in practically the same boat. It would just be a different colour.

Niceguy, we all know that a Labour government would've had to make cuts, it's the speed, level and and nature of the the cuts that they disagree on.

I also cannot imagine we would have heard cheering from the labour back benches as those cuts were announced.

Good on you Alice.

Niceguy2

That is such a ridiculous argument. In layman's terms you are essentially saying "There's plenty of money. Look, all my mates are all in more debt than I am!"

It's not a ridiculous argument, because these countries aren't all enacting such drastic cuts to public spending. As I showed earlier, the amount of debt owed by the UK, as a percentage of GDP, has actually be greater for most of the 20th Century. After WWII, it was it's highest ever, peaking at over 200%. The country was actually bankrupt - yet it is during this time that the welfare state and the NHS were created.

These cuts are ideological in nature and part of the neo-liberal agenda to reshape Western economies into smaller-state, free-market, highly privitised economies. You're right that New Labour probably wouldn't have acted differently. They stopped sticking up for the average working person when they became 'New Labour'.

So please explain to me, guys, why 'cuts are necessary', given the things I pointed out many many times on this thread:

a) Our debt/GDP ratio is better (lower) than many other G8 countries, including the US, German and Japan. The US is not enacting huge cuts in public spending. Their economy is moving along better than ours.

b) Our debt (in the UK) has been higher for most of the 20th Century. During it's peak, just after WWII, we created the NHS and the welfare state.

c) Cuts - especially such drastic cuts - are more likely to harm the economy than help it by putting hundreds of thousands of people out of work, increasing welfare costs, and reducing consumer demand. Conversely, many economists agree that you can't cut your way out of a recession, you need to spend your way out.

d) There are many, many ways of reducing the deficit (annual sum added to the debt) without cuts. I mentioned many of them on this thread several times. Tax evasion and avoidance is said to total about £120 billion. The 'Robin Hood' tax of 0.05% on speculative financial transactions could raise anywhere from £20 to £40 billion per year for the UK annually - this alone would halve the deficit in three years.

e) Trident will cost £3 Billion per year to renew until completion and is a complete waste of money. Scrap it.

f) More suggestions and alternatives to cuts:

www.leftfutures.org/2010/06/an-alternative-to-cuts/

www.pcs.org.uk/en/campaigns/campaign-resources/there-is-an-alternative-the-case-against-cuts-in-public-spending.cfm

Cuts and recycling are the new heavenly virtues, as we appear to have got rid of religion.

We need to make cuts to reduce the structural budget deficit which amounts to about to around 11% of GDP.

Jesus Christ, huddspur - did you actually read anything I wrote in my post? Anything at all?

Yes I read your post but you fail to take into account the difference between the structural budget deficit and the national debt. They are not the same thing.