[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I mean really. There are people out there who actually buy into the rhetoric that the economy is recovering. They're like "yaaaay it's over!! Thanks, Tories!". It must be quite nice to be so blissfully unaware of the fact that we're all ****ed.

With a minimum of 4 more years still to come of severe austerity cuts again at least.
Which were all supposed to be done with by 2014/5 on this lots 2010 policies.

Doesn't sound much like even just a fair recovery,never mind a good recovery to me either.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

With a minimum of 4 more years still to come of severe austerity cuts again at least.
Which were all supposed to be done with by 2014/5 on this lots 2010 policies.

Doesn't sound much like even just a fair recovery,never mind a good recovery to me either.

To be fair joey, Labour left the finances is a massive state, spending money they didn't have, borrowing more, and now they're demanding the Tories not only clear up their mess but they've put a time limit on it! Ridiculous really.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Livia

To be fair joey, Labour left the finances is a massive state, spending money they didn't have, borrowing more, and now they're demanding the Tories not only clear up their mess but they've put a time limit on it! Ridiculous really.

To be fair,no matter what govt; had been in when the banking and financial crisis hit, not just the UK but most of the global financial world too,would have left some big problem to deal with after it.

I believe the Conservative party if in govt; in 2008,would have too bailed out the banks, the pressure from people with bank accounts would have been too great not to.
In fact, that crisis could have been worse that hit the UK, as the then Conservative opposition led by David Cameron wanted 'less' regulation of the banks,not 'more'.

Labour should have built up good reserve to fall back on I agree,however they presided over 11 years of unprecedented growth in the UK,between 1997 and 2007,with no hint of recession until this worldwide crisis hit.
No one foresaw it coming really either and certainly not on the scale it did.

The Conservative way to deal with recession is usually to allow unemployment to soar,(unemployment a price worth paying), that is likely the route they would have taken had they been in govt; in 2008 but I say again, I still think for sure they too would have had to invest in and bail,out the banks.

So Labour left a big financial mess to sort out,no argument at all there, the Conservatives however would have,I believe, left the UK with a massive human cost as to jobs lost and livelihoods shattered via unemployment to sort out, with then likely millions of people left on the unemployment scrapheap for 5 to 10 years or even more.


It was also the Conservative party in 2010,no one else, that said it would sort things out in 5 years and have the deficit cleared by 2015.
Labour planned to only halve the deficit over 4 years, making no major cuts in the first year after 2010 and making at least 20% less cuts.
They did have the UK out of recession and have growth in place of around 1% by the end of 2009 and early 2010.

It is only this govt; that set the target of having things cleared up by its savage and extreme austerity programme over the 5 years from 2010 to 2015.
Even the Lib Dems in 2010 were saying the deficit didn't need to be cleared in 5 years it could be done much more slowly over time.

It is David Cameron and George Osborne who set the time frame for success in sorting things out, no one else, and they have failed as they are only halfway there at best.
Now they are asking for the same time again, to do the same things, to achieve that same first target they set in 2010.

A Uni lecturer once said to us, there are no prizes for failure.
Well for me this govt; has failed and to say it intends to inflict even more cuts and austerity measures for at least another 4 years,with only at best half off the deficit, on an altered measuring of how the deficit is now calculated from how it was measured in 2010.
That amounts to me, not just failure but failure on a grand scale.

Having failed to realise their unfairly planned austerity measures have probably in part stifled success rather than really been instrumental in helping success.
The worst part was them not planning for the austerity measures failing by having a back up plan to counteract unnecessary and heartless effects on those most vulnerable.
That is something that to me is unforgivable,especialy when they are being told by endless support gorups and charities and organisations.

All govts; get things wrong, all the time, no matter their makeup.
However,punishing,trampling and scapegoating the weakest in any society is however the lowest of the low as to things to carry out.
For me it is anyway.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

To be fair,no matter what govt; had been in when the banking and financial crisis hit, not just the UK but most of the global financial world too,would have left some big problem to deal with after it.

I believe the Conservative party if in govt; in 2008,would have too bailed out the banks, the pressure from people with bank accounts would have been too great not to.
In fact, that crisis could have been worse that hit the UK, as the then Conservative opposition led by David Cameron wanted 'less' regulation of the banks,not 'more'.

Labour should have built up good reserve to fall back on I agree,however they presided over 11 years of unprecedented growth in the UK,between 1997 and 2007,with no hint of recession until this worldwide crisis hit.
No one foresaw it coming really either and certainly not on the scale it did.

The Conservative way to deal with recession is usually to allow unemployment to soar,(unemployment a price worth paying), that is likely the route they would have taken had they been in govt; in 2008 but I say again, I still think for sure they too would have had to invest in and bail,out the banks.

So Labour left a big financial mess to sort out,no argument at all there, the Conservatives however would have,I believe, left the UK with a massive human cost as to jobs lost and livelihoods shattered via unemployment to sort out, with then likely millions of people left on the unemployment scrapheap for 5 to 10 years or even more.


It was also the Conservative party in 2010,no one else, that said it would sort things out in 5 years and have the deficit cleared by 2015.
Labour planned to only halve the deficit over 4 years, making no major cuts in the first year after 2010 and making at least 20% less cuts.
They did have the UK out of recession and have growth in place of around 1% by the end of 2009 and early 2010.

It is only this govt; that set the target of having things cleared up by its savage and extreme austerity programme over the 5 years from 2010 to 2015.
Even the Lib Dems in 2010 were saying the deficit didn't need to be cleared in 5 years it could be done much more slowly over time.

It is David Cameron and George Osborne who set the time frame for success in sorting things out, no one else, and they have failed as they are only halfway there at best.
Now they are asking for the same time again, to do the same things, to achieve that same first target they set in 2010.

A Uni lecturer once said to us, there are no prizes for failure.
Well for me this govt; has failed and to say it intends to inflict even more cuts and austerity measures for at least another 4 years,with only at best half off the deficit, on an altered measuring of how the deficit is now calculated from how it was measured in 2010.
That amounts to me, not just failure but failure on a grand scale.

Having failed to realise their unfairly planned austerity measures have probably in part stifled success rather than really been instrumental in helping success.
The worst part was them not planning for the austerity measures failing by having a back up plan to counteract unnecessary and heartless effects on those most vulnerable.
That is something that to me is unforgivable,especialy when they are being told by endless support gorups and charities and organisations.

All govts; get things wrong, all the time, no matter their makeup.
However,punishing,trampling and scapegoating the weakest in any society is however the lowest of the low as to things to carry out.
For me it is anyway.

Fantastic post joey! How much have the welfare reforms actually saved, that would be interesting to know, I wonder if it's as much as IDS has spent?

"The Department for Work and Pensions has spent £700 million on Universal Credit since the programme began in 2010. However, very little progress has been achieved on the front line. Fewer than 18,000 people were claiming Universal Credit by October 2014, out of around seven million expected in the longer term – just 0.3% of the eligible population.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/co...ogress-update/

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Fantastic post joey! How much have the welfare reforms actually saved, that would be interesting to know, I wonder if it's as much as IDS has spent?

"The Department for Work and Pensions has spent £700 million on Universal Credit since the programme began in 2010. However, very little progress has been achieved on the front line. Fewer than 18,000 people were claiming Universal Credit by October 2014, out of around seven million expected in the longer term – just 0.3% of the eligible population.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/co...ogress-update/

Firstly thank you Livia, for your comments as to my post above,(sorry it was so long), well one of them anyway
I love how we can be on different sides yet hold massive respect for the others view without any sarcasm and unnecessary tit for tat.
You know too I hope, that although I don't agree with you as to the Conservatives now, I do respect your views and I also can take a lot on board that you say too.
So thank you again.

Now Kizzy, I have little doubt the welfare reforms are costing way more than anything saved.
I really also, unless they were even more heartless and stupid enough to do so,believe that it will stay that way unless they actually slashed benefit entitlements.
If they are not going to remove from the more well off pensioners for example,the winter fuel allowance and other extra benefits, then they will have to hit those relying on benefits.
They cannot possibly reduce the welfare bill any other way as pensions and the extra's to that, make up the greater bill for welfare anyway.

So I cannot see where the reforms are ever going to bring in anything worthwhile at all.

I also don't like the idea of Universal credit either, it is costing way too much too,it is behind schedule despite what Ian Duncan Smith would tell us, in most places it is operating only for new claimants.
There is the massive backlog of existing claimants, and all that will cost, to get through yet.

I hate its proposal that those claiming it will be paid every 4 weeks.these are benefits for goodness sake, not actual wages.
I also disagree strongly with for those on housing benefit and cpuncil tax rebate, that it will be paid directly to the claimant and not to the local authority or landlord.
That is going to cause really big problems in my view.

The old system, in my view, from what I have come across, just needed tightening up, not having payments of different benefits all paid on different days of the week.
Universal credit will do that but claimanats should have the option of being paid weekly, fortnightly or monthly, not have it forced on them.
In my recent work, I came across someone who got pension credit on a monday,their ESA on a thursday and their DLA paid monthly on a Wednesday.
Crazy,absolutely crazy.

These are badly thought out welfare reforms, that have caused massive confusion and distress to claimants.
Saving very little, in relation to the welfare bill overall in the long run but costing near the earth to do.
You are right to point out the slow progress of Universal credit, which means even more delays and problems due the ime involved in setting it up for people actually in need.

This is an area of funding that even Margaret Thatcher pulled back from, as to changing it too much.
After seeing the chaos from Ian Duncan Smith's reforms, it is easy to see why she largely left it be too.
Take in the costs too of those who have had their benefit cut or stopped altogether, who have then had to wait almost up to a year at times to get it sorted in court,with the ruling then that the cut or stopping them was wrong.
All the costs of putting that right must eat further into anything saved as benefits.

I also for the life of me, cannot see why we have to pay multi millions to an American company to re-assess our claimants,in order to in effect likely save a pittance as opposed to what it will all cost to do.
Far better take on more jobcentre staff and move more experienced staff up to do such re-assessments for the DWP.