Let battle commence!

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by WhiteRose, Jul 7, 2009.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. You must have been asleep, the in fighting started weeks ago, and by the sound of things is going to go on for a year or two. Yet another smoke screent to keep the pub lic's eye of what Gordon is or more likely is not doing to get us out of the mess he has made.
  2. Far from asleep. Yes, the bickering started weeks ago (some would argue they haven't stopped since the last SDR). Now this is the official Green Paper bickering but it does strike me of a distracting paper shuffling exercise rather than a full blown spending review.
  3. Trident will run on without a replacement and at a reduced capacity, half a loadout of missiles and no permanent on patrol boat?

    F-35 will be cancelled, no F-35, no need for the carriers to fly them off.

    Result? £20 Billion or so saved at a stroke to help pay the huge and increasing benefits bill.
  4. Levers_Aligned

    Levers_Aligned War Hero Moderator

    Dead easy to pin the root cause of the spending black hole on 'the benefits system'. No one would deny it is unwieldly and wrong, but I feel the population has some blame to share for their inability to plug into politics and understand that to live on a small island nation and effectively cut ourselves off from major trading blocs, align ourselves with the world's crassest regime and basically live off the legend of the past is a punishingly costly affair. Of course, Johnny Taxpayer won't hear any of this - he wants the country run on feck all, he wants to stay out of the scrutiny of goverance and just have his 42" telly and all the trappings for next to nowt, or at least on a sixty month deal. We create our unemployed - lazy bastards as some of them are - by destroying what we see as enemies such as the Trades Unions and crowning marketing monsters like Thatcher and Blair. Sure, they'll drive down your tax bill, whilst beknighting avaricious greed within industry and leave the workers of this nation completely bereft of power. Consequently we have now a fourth generation of dole scroungers, instead of the much vaunted 'jobs for all', or balance thereof against the old system of ten people to sweep one street.

  5. Spot on sir.
  6. Levers

    A lot of good points there and if you add to that we have as a PM some one who has not the guts to admit he screwed up as chancellor and is screwing up as PM, that he has been screwed by blair and is being screwed by the Prince of Darkness, we are in for a pretty dismal period of sod all of real imprtance being done for another 12 months. Mind you Brown doing nothing is probably favourable to Brown doing anything.

    Brown was supposed to usher in greater efficiency from the serpents, and has proved it can be done, because many posts have been done away with, unfortunately the serpents themselves are no in non jobs on full pay, so no savings at all.

    I am certain every administrative department could cut it's admin wage bill by at least 20% by simplifuing what they did and only doing what was really needed. That cash could then be applied to things like paying of Broen's debt, a little more for the services and some effective poverty relief both here and oveerseas. Always remeber every one you take out of poverty is another consumer, and right now we need lots of new consumers to get things going again.
  7. Levers

    An interesting take on history you have there.

    I seem to remember the winter of discontent was caused by the very unions you promote. The entrepreneur is king as they are the ones who create the jobs the workers need. Sure it is the job of unions to protect the workers rights but not to the point where business cannot flourish.

    Smashing the power of the unions was the best thing Thatcher did in her time of power and paved the way for Blair and Brown to go squandering trillions in taxes earnt during the 90s boom by creating jobs that don't exist and don't return anything to the economy. This country had the chance to be great again but Labour threw it away AGAIN. Time for a change back to Tories to cut taxes and get us back on an even keel.

    The welfare state is ultimately the root cause of much unemployment and is the reason why so many people were prepared to migrate across Europe to take jobs that British people would not do. There was nothing wriong with the jobs, which obviously had fair pay otherwise people wouldn't have travelled halfway across the continent to do them. The problem is the sloth classes who are too used to government subsidies to fund their flat screen tellies.

    Unions out, tax and spend Labour out.
  8. I think there is a middle ground between a socialist economy and an excessively liberal economy as you are advocating.

    Capitalism is predicated on competition, and organised labour has a very significant part to play in the competitive position of market participants. The winter of discontent demonstrated that the unions had far too much power, and the Thatcherite response was understandable, and in many ways what the economy needed at the time. Throughout the 90s the unions played a part in helping UK PLC remain highly competitive in some areas, although the legacy industries lamented by some had to go.

    What w've seen of late is a swing by the unions towards a much more adversarial approach, undermining competitiveness rather than contributing to it. Not helped by a tendency towards classical socialist protectionism and state intervention.

    Personally I'd say that liberalising the economy and freeing a number of state monopolies of the dead hand of government was the best thing she did. Breaking the unions made some of that easier, but they still manage to make a complete pigs ear of some of them.

    I think you're being a little idealistic here.

    I wouldn't disagree too strongly, but I do think that a big part of it is that only lip service is payed to developing skills in the available labour force. The system could do with a bloody good shake up though, it's over complicated and costs a fortune to run.
  9. redassnotdragass. That is a fair point but Mrs T went rather too far and destroyed the Industries in the process. Whether that was “scorched earthâ€, to teach the Unions a lesson or fundamental ignorance, I don’t know. Either way, we now have almost sod all to export to cover all the stuff we import. Anyway, who worries about “balance of payments†any more. Perhaps “export or die†was a requirement only valid in the ‘60s.

    Remind me, how much we pay to the EU every year against how much we get in return?
  10. P_O_L the industries that didn't survive where the ones that were unsustainable without subsidy. Subsidies are bad for several reasons I can think of: firstly they cost a fortune as the industry gets more and more inefficient the subsidy has to increase, as the American steel workers are finding out this can't continue forever. Second subsidies are illegal under European law. Thirdly, subsidising an industry just causes your competitors to subsidise theirs with the net result of no gain but a huge tax bill - this is one of the major problems with protectionism.

    We used to have a European rebate until Nu Labour gave it away.

    Karma I would suggest that the sell offs of the major untilities has created false competition in the markets and in fact the company that can sell you gas, electricity and home telephone lines the cheapest aren't allowed to in the name of "competition". Also I would suggest that the liberalising of the economy went hand in hand with the reduction of power of the unions, one would not have been achievable without the other, which you see as more important is personal opinion and I won't argue with your point of view too strongly. I think Lady T did a brilliant job of sorting out the deadwood in the economy.

    I'm being a bit picky here, but I did state in my OP that there is a place for unions, but without jobs they are pointless. I don't advocate an excessively liberal economy however I think the unions are getting too big for their boots again threatening government just this last week over public sector pay.
  11. I wouldn't disagree too strongly, but I do think that a big part of it is that only lip service is payed to developing skills in the available labour force. The system could do with a bloody good shake up though, it's over complicated and costs a fortune to run.

    I totally agree that skills and training are vital, and a key area that Govt should be actively involve in. I was all for T Bliar's Education, Education, Education. Shame he didn't follow it through.
  12. Quote:
    Time for a change back to Tories to cut taxes and get us back on an even keel.

    I think you're being a little idealistic here.

    You're right that is too simplistic. It is going to take us years to pay back the debt that Brown has acquired. So much for his much vaunted "Golden Rule" of tax revenues matching spending over the economic cycle, fricking liar.
  13. The devil as ever is in the detail!

    They are talking about INCOME TAX. which if I recall is only one of the 25 streams of tax revenue.

    Scarry but simplezzzz
  14. Maybe Pinch, but it's still saying that we pay out more in benefits to people not working than the people in work pay in income tax. No matter how you try to dress it up with big words and spin, it doesn't take a genius to work out the situation is a mess.
  15. I said idealistic, not simplistic. Idealogically there is little to distinguish labour and tories at the moment. They're both centre left and advocate quite a socially interventionist approach. For all the rhetoric Cameron hasn't come up with anything credible about improvement, all vague promises.

    But to the point, this review doesn't appear all that credible. No discussion of foreign policy which is a bit of a concern given that the MoD exists to execute HMGs intentions in our relationships with other sovereign states.
  16. My bad, brain interpreting the wrong way - fully agree with the idealogical statement though I think the Tories do want to cut taxes there's just no scope for a few years and they don't want to raise expectations.

    The "Green Paper" is just sleight of hand, and lets face it, it's going in the bin after the next election whoever wins.

    Edited to correct sausage fingered moment.
  17. Levers_Aligned

    Levers_Aligned War Hero Moderator

    The pendulous swing between socialism and it's vicarious power through trades unions and capitalism and it's wonderful free market idealism is laid bare over forty odd yars to see. I don't advocate trades unions wielding absolute power as they did pre-Thatcher, but her role in crippling what rights workers had is now paying dividends, in a negative sense. When she bgran the wrongness of selling off the state's assets, instead of reviewing and restructuring, out with the bathwater went any notion of people who go out and work being entitled to a stake in their employment. It was all placed in the hands of businessmen - many of them overseas investors - and their fickleness in business. The clappy-hands glee of 'the people' owning a stake in things such as British Gas, British Telecom and anything else once believed to be owned by the taxpayer anyway. And so it comes to pass that we are using British taxpayers cash now to bale out banks, transport, energy and anything else royally fecked by incompetence and greed. Nothing to fall back upon - thousands cast onto state benefits and bankruptcy and those fine fellows who set this in motion best remembered for starting wars and retaking distant islands.

    Meanwhile, Rome smoulders gently in the distance.


  18. And there we have it in a nutshell.

Share This Page