Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Politics

Dave's cuts are going be deep and they will hurt

1002 replies

FellatioNelson · 07/06/2010 14:26

I've been hearing this all day on the radio. I can't take the suspense any longer. They are going to affect the lives of 'every one of us'

I feel like a person wincing and clenching my teeth in anticipation of the big fuck-off needle the school nurse is wielding, and I'm next in the queue....

Come on then, what's it going to be?

OP posts:
edam · 09/06/2010 08:40

Sakura is talking about groups of people and Moondog is talking about individuals. Within the population of single mothers, as within the population of City workers, there will be the good, the bad and the indifferent. That's the human condition.

The issue is that, as a group, single mothers need more support than City workers. Especially as hitting single mothers actually damages their children - and even the most foaming-at-the-mouth, back-to-basics rabid right winger would at least pretend to agree the children would be entirely innocent victims.

Yet we are currently running our society the other way round - single mothers and ordinary people are funding the City, not the other way round. We are all paying for the mistakes of idiots like those smart alecs at Goldman Sachs who created products that were deliberately designed to fail, so one set of clients was sold a disastrous pup while another set were betting that they would be a disastrous pup. (And ordinary people were seduced into taking out loans they could never pay back at ruinous rates of interest.)

Goldman Sachs as a firm is a cheat and a liar and exploits its own clients and the rest of the economy. Yet firms like them have been propped up with taxpayers' money - even those who didn't directly receive a bail out are essentially benefiting from being underwritten by the taxpayer, as well as surviving on the central banks printing money.

I'm sure there are some decent people at Goldmans who weren't involved in those deals, btw. I wish the Tories would have the decency to extend the same grace to single mothers and other vulnerable groups.

sarah293 · 09/06/2010 08:41

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

edam · 09/06/2010 08:43

actually a decent NHS WILL save money - it depends what you include in the sums. If you include the economic benefit of keeping people well and enabling them to get back to work quickly, it is better for them, better for society and better for the economy. As in Raven's example.

Yet governments and the media almost always focus on the cost of the NHS, not the benefits in cash terms.

sarah293 · 09/06/2010 08:45

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

edam · 09/06/2010 08:49

Riven, I bet your heart bleeds for those poor management consultants you deprived of a good few weeks or months work there.

Former employer of mine, a magazine publisher, brought in outside consultants to redesign one of their magazines. Despite employing lots of designers and journalists. Consultants stood up with their powerpoint slides and tried to teach us to suck eggs - this was really basic stuff you learn in your first term of Media Studies/NCTJ course.

Nice work for the consultants, waste of money for our employers. Mind you, if the bosses are so thick it doesn't even occur to them to ask the workforce, they deserve to be fleeced.

sarah293 · 09/06/2010 08:52

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

edam · 09/06/2010 08:55

I was only joshing - I'm sure the consultants who would have done that work had it been available found some other daft employer to fleece! Or maybe, if I'm being really kind, actually found a client who needed some real help and did something valuable for them. Beyond burbling about six sigma and lean processes, I mean.

SanctiMoanyArse · 09/06/2010 08:55

It hugely sets the debate back to claim that no claimants are lazy, and that nobody from moss side or wherever can pull themselves up

We know that's not true

But the barriers are higher and everything is harder

I am from a nasty council estate, deprivation index, saw my first stabbing at 7 etc etc

I have a degree and had a good decent career in the charitable sector

I was about to do my PGCE or SSD training when disability in my kids took me out of earning potential.

It's those barriers we can tackle: certainly people's personalities palce barriers we cannot remove, but there are ridiculous physical ones that put people on the skids regardless of how hard they try and we can start with those surely?

As a carer I cannot access chidlcare, or even job centre support.

My income is taxed, and low (CA is under £60 pw) but despite having to prove I am caring 24/7 not classed as qualifying fotr TC's if I didn;t have a aprtner. My friend's CA claim for caring for her dying father with Alzheimers pushed them into the next bracket for TC so she actually had to get by on £10 left of CA per week.

We should start tehre. With the people who want to work but are prevented.

sarah293 · 09/06/2010 08:56

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

edam · 09/06/2010 09:01

Yup, and there would be fewer errors if doctors and nurses were allowed to conduct clinical handovers without interruption. That would involve employing more staff, so it doesn't happen. But ends up costing us more in the long term through hospital-acquired illness, injury and negligence.

It's that sort of short-sighted accounting the last Tory government was known for. I fear this one will run along the same lines.

moondog · 09/06/2010 09:26

Read this review of an amazing book (my current fave) on how damned easy it is to save money and get things right.

The Checklist Manifesto

I urge you to read it (both review and book).

AbricotsSecs · 09/06/2010 09:36

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 09/06/2010 09:49

moondog - it's as big a disgrace, and as large a testament to the inertia in the medical profession that this isn't implemented as it was when hand washing wasn't implemented for decades after it's efficacy was discovered in 1843

sue52 · 09/06/2010 09:52

Only 7% of children are privately educated and most parents would tolerate paying vat. I consider private education a luxury good. The numbers going into the state sector because of a VAT hike would be small. If some less financially stable schools were to go to the wall could they not change to academy status or even Michael Groves idea of free schools?

TartyMcFarty · 09/06/2010 10:00

I'm a teacher and would like to see top-heavy SLT budgets cut. My school has a Principal (overseeing a partnership between the secondary and affiliated primary school), a Head of Secondary and four Assistant Heads as well as a Business Manager. This is in addition to an inefficient pastoral structure overseen by non-teachers which replaced a highly effective Head of Year arrangement. The school is fairly big with 1200+ on roll, but I definitely believe that if it is any example of what's going on across the country, SLT budgets can comfortably be cut.

edam · 09/06/2010 10:03

I'm dubious about free schools - school governors are already the largest volunteer workforce in the UK (300,000 of us), are there really that many more people who want more involvement in their local school?

strandedatsea · 09/06/2010 10:24

thebride - yes, agree about inefficenies. But then it costs more to make them more accountable. Then you are spending money on the dreaded paperwork. I really, really don't think we should give up on the UN. It's far from perfect, but it's the best we've got. The UK has been trying (along with others) to reform it for years. At least now it looks like the security council will be more representative.

Isolationism is certainly a word! Used often in context of US's foreign policy.....

sue52 · 09/06/2010 10:39

Agree on the need to do away with outside consultants in local and national government. While I'm at it, get rid of team bonding sessions. Do we really need to pay for these people to lob paint balls at each other?

DanJARMouse · 09/06/2010 10:41

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7146447.ece

Just to stick the knife in deeper hey DC!

Flighttattendant · 09/06/2010 10:45

Oh My Good Lord.

Thanks for the link Jarm...I can barely believe they have the nerve to do this, so soon after the election.

Tory fcking bstards. I KNEW it.

DanJARMouse · 09/06/2010 10:50

I have a thread on "in the news" about it too flight.

I am just so scared right now. If I have to start sending the kids with packed lunches, my shopping bill is going to go up and up again.

I cant afford it!!!!

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 09/06/2010 10:53

DanJARMouse - the article only talks about cancelling an extension to the program - they haven't said they will remove it from those who already get it.

FellatioNelson · 09/06/2010 11:45

Sakura, I believe it's our duty to help the most vulnerable in society too, I just have a slightly different idea of how to achieve it than you do. (and I think, of what constitutes vulnerability.)

If you want to teach a child to swim, you have to gradually let air out of the waterwings, whilst offering words of encouragement. You can be as encouraging as you like, but if you never let out the air, they sure as hell ain't swimming forwards, they are just floating aimlessly.

I understand very well how people get 'stuck' in a life of benefit dependency. It's ok for you to use the word 'stuck' because you are 'on their side' but when I used the phrase 'benefits trap' you and Riven were at me, because I am the big bad elitist wolf! It's very easy to assume that everyone who thinks like me has never known what it is to be poor or disadvantaged, or just plain average. That's a lazy assumption.

Neither I nor my DH come from a silver spoon background, though his spoon is quite good quality stainless steel, whereas mine is more your rusty old tin. You'll just have to trust me when I say I have NEVER been handed anything on a plate.

My DH works at MD level in merchant banking/investment banking. (but please don't make any wild assumptions about how outrageous our income is, because I'd hate to have to disappoint you. It's good, but not that good)

He has no degree. He started as a cashier behind the counter in a provincial high-street branch of Natwest, after A levels, 30 years ago. He is where he is, because he is driven, diligent and talented, and has worked incredibly hard. Not because he came out of the 'right' school, and Daddy had a word with an old pal at the Officers' Club....

He does a job which is pretty complex by anyone's standards and your average person on the street couldn't begin to grasp it in a million years, nor would they want to. Neither would they want the long hours, the pressure or the flack. Oh, but they want his pay packet.

And as Alouiseg pointed out, it's been a very long time since there was elitism in the city - it's an extremely egalitarian place - anyone can work there. It's no good people being jealous just because they didn't think of it for themselves! My DH could get jealous that he doesn't earn anywehere near as much as some half-literate 20 year old footballer, but then again, he never been that good at football, so what would be the point?

On single mums: I never said, (nor would I, EVER) that we should not help and support single mothers who have hit hard times through no fault of their own, or who become financially vulnerable through no fault of their own.

What I am saying is that in supporting them, and not stigmatising them, we have misguidedly created a burgeoning situation that is putting more children into disavantage than it is taking out. It's allowing people to apply an instant gratification logic to babies. 'I want one now, I'll have one now, I'm entitled, and I'll rely on the state to take care of the boring details, like where we'll live, and who will pay for us'.

OP posts:
Heathcliffscathy · 09/06/2010 11:52

guys if you think that labour wouldn't have had to make cuts that hurt you're on another planet.

the school dinners thing is pulling back on something that was promised, not that already exists...and frankly most stuff that was promised when the exchequer had any kind of money at all will have to be pulled, that's what goes first, then you look at what you need to cut that is already in place.

our debt means that this will hurt. it is not a party political thing. labour are lucky to be given the opportunity to regroup whilst not having to make the changes that would have lead to their even deeper unpopularity.

FellatioNelson · 09/06/2010 11:55

Exactly sophable - people are running around in a panic over the school dinner thing, but it is just a withdrawal of the planned proposal to extend teh provision to an extra 50,000 children who were not already eligible. Spreading the net of benefits ever wider. Labour would have had to renege on half these things in the end anyway.

OP posts:
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.