Absolutely disgusting that the Tories intend to freeze benefits for 2 years. Why should we suffer? Freeze all pay rises then. Hope they're out next May anyway.

I seem to remember 5 years ago you being thrilled at the prospect of Tory rule.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/77890000/jpg/_77890620_de27-4.jpg

 

Note that the proposed freeze does not affect pensioners, aka self interested Tory voters.

 

I love this quote:

Britain had the fastest-growing economy of any developed nation

 

Yes, once you include prostitution and drug sales into GDP! :lol:

Edited September 29, 201410 yr by Doctor Blind

I seem to remember 5 years ago you being thrilled at the prospect of Tory rule.

 

 

Well maybe but I've realised now that they never change and would be even nastier if, God forbid, they get a majority.

Absolutely disgusting that the Tories intend to freeze benefits for 2 years. Why should we suffer? Freeze all pay rises then. Hope they're out next May anyway.

People on benefits will notice if they lose some of their income (in real terms). The wealthiest won't notice so why bother?

Great speech from Cameron today. Most commentators saying so too. I watched it live and it was one of his best ever. Lots of raising of tax thresholds.

Great speech from Cameron today. Most commentators saying so too. I watched it live and it was one of his best ever. Lots of raising of tax thresholds.

 

Yeah really good. He's charismatic, and complete opposite of Ed Milliband speaking wise. Said lots of good things, and crucially stuff that will get people on the fence to consider voting Conservative. I'm probably in the minority thinking a lot of people that might vote UKIP in the election, are probably Labour/on the fencers voters, don't think too many Tory voters will actually defect.

 

However even as a Tory supporter, it's all well and good saying that these are good policies, but the saving to cut the deficit has got to come from somewhere. If it's not from the NHS then where, that's the bigger question. There's no inkling where they will cut, and I don't suppose there will be for some time. However Labour can put as much a negative spin on it as they want, but if they get elected they have the exact same problem with making cuts that people won't like.

Yeah really good. He's charismatic, and complete opposite of Ed Milliband speaking wise. Said lots of good things, and crucially stuff that will get people on the fence to consider voting Conservative. I'm probably in the minority thinking a lot of people that might vote UKIP in the election, are probably Labour/on the fencers voters, don't think too many Tory voters will actually defect.

 

However even as a Tory supporter, it's all well and good saying that these are good policies, but the saving to cut the deficit has got to come from somewhere. If it's not from the NHS then where, that's the bigger question. There's no inkling where they will cut, and I don't suppose there will be for some time. However Labour can put as much a negative spin on it as they want, but if they get elected they have the exact same problem with making cuts that people won't like.

 

Well these promises can't happen until say 2017-2018 at the earliest, if they get in to power. when the deficit is brought down more. As you say, where will more savings come from though? The two-year benefit freeze certainly won't bring it down that much really.

Edited October 1, 201410 yr by Common Sense

Well these promises can't happen until say 2017-2018 at the earliest, if they get in to power. when the deficit is brought down more. As you say, where will more savings come from though? The two-year benefit freeze certainly won't bring it down that much really.

 

Well I'm not expert in politics of economics, but I would expect both tax cuts to be brought in gradually rather than in one go, and of course with all these promises, it's by '2020'. I'm not glued up enough to know where cuts might occur, and it's easy to criticise that part, but whichever party gets in to power, they are going to have to make some tough cuts.

Yeah really good. He's charismatic, and complete opposite of Ed Milliband speaking wise. Said lots of good things, and crucially stuff that will get people on the fence to consider voting Conservative. I'm probably in the minority thinking a lot of people that might vote UKIP in the election, are probably Labour/on the fencers voters, don't think too many Tory voters will actually defect.

 

However even as a Tory supporter, it's all well and good saying that these are good policies, but the saving to cut the deficit has got to come from somewhere. If it's not from the NHS then where, that's the bigger question. There's no inkling where they will cut, and I don't suppose there will be for some time. However Labour can put as much a negative spin on it as they want, but if they get elected they have the exact same problem with making cuts that people won't like.

 

But there's been a deficit for something like 100 of the last 150 years, and nothing bad has ever come from it :lol: Today showed even the Conservatives don't care about it since they're happy to give money away with tax cuts. I mean, we have a very big deficit now, but we're still considered one of the "safest" economies in the world, because the deficit is pretty much irrelevant to that.

 

I predict that, no matter who wins the next election, there will still be a big deficit by 2020. And nobody will care.

Edited October 1, 201410 yr by Danny

But there's been a deficit for something like 100 of the last 150 years, and nothing bad has ever come from it :lol: Today showed even the Conservatives don't care about it since they're happy to give money away with tax cuts. I mean, we have a very big deficit now, but we're still considered one of the "safest" economies in the world, because the deficit is pretty much irrelevant to that.

 

I predict that, no matter who wins the next election, there will still be a big deficit by 2020. And nobody will care.

 

Yeah true. Tho as far as I'm aware, it needs to be cut to manageable levels especially with interest levels so low at the moment. Past governments got a bit carried away, and together we all collectively need to pay it off.

 

People don't care because by and large it doesn't effect them (though it does) and it's something not often picked up upon my the media. Guess this shows in surveys when it's always near the bottom of most important points, which means PR can be spun, even though it's vitally important that we pay it off otherwise we all suffer long term, especially the younger generation.

Yeah true. Tho as far as I'm aware, it needs to be cut to manageable levels especially with interest levels so low at the moment. Past governments got a bit carried away, and together we all collectively need to pay it off.

 

People don't care because by and large it doesn't effect them (though it does) and it's something not often picked up upon my the media. Guess this shows in surveys when it's always near the bottom of most important points, which means PR can be spun, even though it's vitally important that we pay it off otherwise we all suffer long term, especially the younger generation.

 

The level of debt we have atm would only really become unmanageable if the economy wasn't growing strongly. To take Japan as an example, they're caught in a vicious spiral but it's not really because of the debt/deficit itself, it's because their economy is in a long-term slump -- because their population is so "old" on average, they have tons of people whose pensions and healthcare need to be paid for, but relatively few people who are still young enough to work to actually pay for it. So their level of debt is mounting up all the time. In the UK it's different because our population is so much "younger", the balance of people in work compared to the retired is much healthier, mainly thanks to immigration actually. As long as that continues, there's no real reason to think our debt burden isn't sustainable.

Edited October 1, 201410 yr by Danny

Yeah really good. He's charismatic, and complete opposite of Ed Milliband speaking wise. Said lots of good things, and crucially stuff that will get people on the fence to consider voting Conservative. I'm probably in the minority thinking a lot of people that might vote UKIP in the election, are probably Labour/on the fencers voters, don't think too many Tory voters will actually defect.

 

However even as a Tory supporter, it's all well and good saying that these are good policies, but the saving to cut the deficit has got to come from somewhere. If it's not from the NHS then where, that's the bigger question. There's no inkling where they will cut, and I don't suppose there will be for some time. However Labour can put as much a negative spin on it as they want, but if they get elected they have the exact same problem with making cuts that people won't like.

 

 

This statement really sums up the attitude of tory supporters and the British media in general to Tory economics. Its indifference and general support for any tory economic proposal without calculating the risks and benefits of it - they would rathr focus on personality issues within the party (such as the back benchers moving towards UKIP) whereas when Labour talk about economics the medias focus is on policy and where the money would come and go - such bias!!

 

The reality is the money is there if people want to use it. When theres the prospect of a third Iraq war the money is found to become involved with their allies in the Washington consensus but when it comes to creating decent public services the vulnerable rely on there is never enough money to help them.

 

As Tony Benn said 'if you can find money to kill people, why cant you find the money to help people as well??'

The response to the speech provides a further illustration of how biased the UK press is and how the BBC are afraid of being called biased if they subject Tory policy to any scrutiny. I didn't see the speech - I value my television too much to run the risk of throwing something at it - but it seems to have been typical Cameron - all style and little substance. There are plenty of actors who could deliver a speech brilliantly but that doesn't automatically qualify them to be Prime Minister.

 

Cameron has promised that all GP surgeries will be open from 8am to 8pm seven days a week. A nice aspiration but where is the money coming from? Does he seriously expect exciting GPs to cover all the extra hours for no more pay? What about other staff like the receptionist? Are they too expected to work extra hours without any more money? If it is going to cost more, which parts of the NHS will face cuts?

 

Then there are the promised tax cuts worth £7 billion. Where has that money come from all of a sudden? At the beginning of the week Osborne was saying that there was no money so benefits (otherwise known as handouts to landlords and subsidies to low-paying employers) would need to be cut even further. Now suddenly money has been found to bribe voters. Of course, if the Tories do win the election, that promise might go the way of many of their promises at the last election such as not abolishing EMA (they abolished it), not increasing VAT (they increased it) and, of course, "no top down reorganisation of the NHS".

 

In 2008 Cameron said "You cannot talk about tax reduction unless you can show how it is paid for. The public are not stupid". Clearly his view of the public has now changed.

 

I didn't disagree with everything. He described himself as "not complicated". I agree. He is very simple.

Agreed with you Suedehead - where was the vision? It was all style and very little substance. Osborne tells us there is no money and benefits have to be cut, and then suddenly Cameron finds £7 billion from nowhere to fund tax cuts for the wealthy (oh, and I suppose for the poor too).

 

Anyway, I rather enjoyed Eddie Mair tearing Cameron's speech apart on PM and ripping into Nicky Morgan. :D

The response to the speech provides a further illustration of how biased the UK press is and how the BBC are afraid of being called biased if they subject Tory policy to any scrutiny. I didn't see the speech - I value my television too much to run the risk of throwing something at it - but it seems to have been typical Cameron - all style and little substance. There are plenty of actors who could deliver a speech brilliantly but that doesn't automatically qualify them to be Prime Minister.

 

Cameron has promised that all GP surgeries will be open from 8am to 8pm seven days a week. A nice aspiration but where is the money coming from? Does he seriously expect exciting GPs to cover all the extra hours for no more pay? What about other staff like the receptionist? Are they too expected to work extra hours without any more money? If it is going to cost more, which parts of the NHS will face cuts?

 

Then there are the promised tax cuts worth £7 billion. Where has that money come from all of a sudden? At the beginning of the week Osborne was saying that there was no money so benefits (otherwise known as handouts to landlords and subsidies to low-paying employers) would need to be cut even further. Now suddenly money has been found to bribe voters. Of course, if the Tories do win the election, that promise might go the way of many of their promises at the last election such as not abolishing EMA (they abolished it), not increasing VAT (they increased it) and, of course, "no top down reorganisation of the NHS".

 

In 2008 Cameron said "You cannot talk about tax reduction unless you can show how it is paid for. The public are not stupid". Clearly his view of the public has now changed.

 

I didn't disagree with everything. He described himself as "not complicated". I agree. He is very simple.

 

Yup. All true. Some of the policies are to be aimed for by 2020. Plenty of time to about face.

 

As for tax cuts, it would have to be one hell of a tax cut for me to even get back to the wage levels I was on in 2008.

 

Heard "hard-working families" from a Tory politician on TV yesterday. Still flogging that dead horse, eh.....?

What he really means is so much more entertaining.

 

 

Thank you cassette boy! :lol:

Edited October 3, 201410 yr by Kath

Nick Clegg's conference speech doing the impossible by making Miliband's look good. Piously claiming that he'll give "economic competence" AND protection for public services and the poor. Will someone please tell him (and his counterparts on Labour's Progress wing) that the two things contradict eachother.

Edited October 8, 201410 yr by Danny

Odd cos I thought he was pretty good said what he had to say pious or not. As someone who's had personal experience of useless and variable mental health care - and good too - I'd like to hear the 2 parties who've ignored it say they will also adopt the policy. They have nicked plenty of the others so why not....

I've just seen some of the highlights of Clegg's speech and it was OK. For the first time he attacked Cameron which has to be a good thing. The last 4 1/2 years of coalition mean that he no longer has to pretend that there is any chance of a majority Lib Dem government. He can talk about the Lib Dems being part of the government. He - and the rest of the party - needs to spend the time between now and the election explaining how much difference a Lib Dem presence can make.