Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Politics] rishi sunak



beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,237

ferring seagull

Well-known member
Dec 30, 2010
4,606
May wasn't a great leader and tied herself in knots with her Red Lines on Brexit which pretty much destroyed her piece by piece. Therefore she had no chance when dealing with the Tory lunatic fringe and the opportunist Johnson.

But, in her defence, she probably would have done a better job dealing with Covid and wouldn't have dared to throw the Saville jibe out or genuinely lie on a daily basis

Or a party in Downing Street !
 

Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Licker Extraordinaire
Oct 8, 2003
49,051
Faversham
That’s not the same as public spending. Services have been cut so where did the money go?
Perhaps it was the study into a new ferry service that didn’t have any ferries, or the £900K consultation on a bridge to Ireland that could never be built because of buried armaments in the Irish Sea?
In the meantime fire stations were closed, 10 in London alone, 50% of magistrates courts closed etc

I think you're wasting your breath. Some people long decided that every day in every way the conservatives do everything better. When it doesn't seem to be better, and all the evidence indicates it isn't better, this is your fault for not realising it is better.

And, whatabout Corbyn?
 


beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,237
I think you're wasting your breath. Some people long decided that every day in every way the conservatives do everything better. When it doesn't seem to be better, and all the evidence indicates it isn't better, this is your fault for not realising it is better.

and some wont accept the spending went up. so nothing is challenged, no one understands how public money is spent or why their service has been cut over others. carry on with a cliche instead :shrug:
 

SeagullsoverLondon

......
NSC Licker Extraordinaire
Jun 20, 2021
3,148
and some wont accept the spending went up. so nothing is challenged, no one understands how public money is spent or why their service has been cut over others. carry on with a cliche instead :shrug:
That's because in reality it's not true!
Spending went up on welfare benefits and pensions! Spending also went up on debt interest payments, and spending went up on international aid and development. Health spending was marginally up.
Spending on every other government department went down in real terms after 2010.

Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk
 

zefarelly

Well-known member
NSC Licker Extraordinaire
Jul 7, 2003
21,683
Sussex, by the sea
I think you're wasting your breath. Some people long decided that every day in every way the conservatives do everything better. When it doesn't seem to be better, and all the evidence indicates it isn't better, this is your fault for not realising it is better.

And, whatabout Corbyn?

If it wasn't for Corbyn we wouldn't be in this mess. OBVS! :rolleyes:
 


WATFORD zero

Well-known member
NSC Licker Extraordinaire
Jul 10, 2003
25,549
That's because in reality it's not true!
Spending went up on welfare benefits and pensions! Spending also went up on debt interest payments, and spending went up on international aid and development. Health spending was marginally up.
Spending on every other government department went down in real terms after 2010.

Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk

Makes you wonder why someone would keep repeating something which is clearly and obviously a complete misinterpretation of the facts, to everyone including themselves. Because it definitely wouldn't be a deliberate misinterpretation on this account, would it :wink:
 

beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,237
That's because in reality it's not true!
Spending went up on welfare benefits and pensions! Spending also went up on debt interest payments, and spending went up on international aid and development. Health spending was marginally up.
Spending on every other government department went down in real terms after 2010.

Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk

some positive input. you're accepting that the spending went up in areas. so we saw a policy of transfering to welfare and healthcare, away from non-core services. the first part is popular, the second not so much. i havent looked the real-terms for each department, you're probably right, though over all total spending kept pace in real terms. not alot of austerity, more like suffling the finances.
 

SeagullsoverLondon

......
NSC Licker Extraordinaire
Jun 20, 2021
3,148
some positive input. you're accepting that the spending went up in areas. so we saw a policy of transfering to welfare and healthcare, away from non-core services. the first part is popular, the second not so much. i havent looked the real-terms for each department, you're probably right, though over all total spending kept pace in real terms. not alot of austerity, more like suffling the finances.

I think that some might dispute your claim that education, transport, police etc are non-core services. Also factor in cuts to local government spending and you have local public services, libraries, local roads, etc declining. What we saw was a decline in public services over this period.

And remember that in real terms spending on health was still lower than the previous Labour government, and what you had was austerity, pure and simple Even George Osborne called it austerity!

The fact that pensions went up meant a redistribution of wealth from working age population to the elderly. However, perversely,many pensioners living off savings actually had a fall in income due to the low interest rate on any savings.

A very long but interesting report from the Institute of Fiscal Studies, an independent organisation
https://ifs.org.uk/publications/9180


Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk
 


beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,237
I think that some might dispute your claim that education, transport, police etc are non-core services. Also factor in cuts to local government spending and you have local public services, libraries, local roads, etc declining. What we saw was a decline in public services over this period.

indeed we did, i wasnt questioning that really. just the austerity cliche that is too easy when spending didnt drop in real terms. Osborne used it cheaply to pretend he was doing more than he was, it stuck. meanwhile how services are supposed to be funded goes unanswered.
 

usernamed

New member
Aug 31, 2017
763
indeed we did, i wasnt questioning that really. just the austerity cliche that is too easy when spending didnt drop in real terms. Osborne used it cheaply to pretend he was doing more than he was, it stuck. meanwhile how services are supposed to be funded goes unanswered.

Could I politely suggest we might use the mechanisms we’d used for the hundred or so years pre-Osborne?
 

SeagullsoverLondon

......
NSC Licker Extraordinaire
Jun 20, 2021
3,148
indeed we did, i wasnt questioning that really. just the austerity cliche that is too easy when spending didnt drop in real terms. Osborne used it cheaply to pretend he was doing more than he was, it stuck. meanwhile how services are supposed to be funded goes unanswered.
No, you are missing the point!
The reason why government spending continued to grow was because of the low growth in the economy which meant that the government was committed to spending more than Osborne planned. See Osborne's budget predictions in 2010: the budget deficit was going to be eliminated by 2015! The debt didn't come down so debt repayment carried on going up. If the economy had recovered faster, he would have cut faster.
Also, the government committed itself to the triple lock on pensions meaning that pension spending was guaranteed to rise in real terms. A commitment to health spending was also in the manifesto.

The only way to to cover for this and the £45-50billion debt repayment per annum was to cut what many people would call essential services such as schools and police etc.

Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk
 


beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,237
Could I politely suggest we might use the mechanisms we’d used for the hundred or so years pre-Osborne?

since it lead to a decade of cut services while increasing spending, maybe we should look for an alternative.
 

Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Licker Extraordinaire
Oct 8, 2003
49,051
Faversham
Just a quick question, when this first came out, if Bojo had admitted that he had done wrong and apologise there and then would this still be going on, or would we all just left it at that?

If it had been a single event, quite possibly. But there is a difference between accidentally touching a female guest's bum when doing the goodnight mwah after a boozy dinner party, and shagging four of your wife's mates, plus your wife's sister.
 

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports

Paying the bills

Latest Discussions

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Paying the bills


Top
Link Here