Newcastle and the North East - Local Politics, Local Politicians, Local Political Activities, Protests & Demonstrations, etc

[johnnypd]

i'd like to see more taxes on the rich and specifically on the banks - to recoup money they've taken from us in full. i also think brown's NI rise is welcome. i'd like to protect public services as much as possible.

tory tax cuts for the rich and married couples just don't seem right to me.

[bigchrisfgb]

I can't see whats wrong with not taxing 3,000 of the countries richest people more. They maybe rich by it being passed down, or earning it, but surely we should all be taxed on the same level, and right now this country needs to try and keep a lot (who I'm part of) shouldn't automatically be given rights and better tax breaks then the rich, we should all be taxed on the same level, we all should work together and not against each other. Quite honestly a political party of any sort who favours one class of people over another is wrong.

Anger, Ahmed, and PD have done well to relise that theirs more parties then Labour and Tories, and just because someone isn't voteing Labour it doesn't mean they are voteing Tory, and Vica Versa, and to be honest both of those parties need to relise that and a hell of a lot of people across this country need to relise that their is more then just two parties.

I've said in the past that it has been between the Tories, and the Lib Dems for my vote with me leaning towards the Tories, I can now say I have made my mind up for who I'm going to vote for, and it is one of those parties, but I'm not saying who.


Oh, and I have read the manisfesto's of all 3 parties.


Also may I add that I agree, the public sector shouldn't be exempt from these cuts, this region has been truely scerwed over with the fact that we rely almsot entirely on the public sector. Labour have basically wrapped up the Labour vote in this region because of that, having a lot of the work force in the region here in the public sector and Labour promising non of the public sector work will ever be cut even if it's needed has given them a massive vote. The region needed the right balance between the public sector and the private sector and it failed, more needs to be done to get more private sector jobs here in the region.

[Seamaster]

Originally Posted by bigchrisfgb

Quite honestly a political party of any sort who favours one class of people over another is wrong.

You may have heard the stories that surface from time to time of elderly men, found deep in the Burmese jungle, who still think the war's on. Well, there's a certain kind of unreconstructed lefty still fighting the "class war". They don't realise that that war's over too — and they lost.

[Geordie Ahmed]

Originally Posted by AngerOfTheNorth

I'll be voting Lib Dem too.

In terms of the economy, my view is that the next few years are going to be pretty horrible in terms of public services (with a possible knock-on effect on unemployment etc). I also think that in terms of who will pay off the deficit the quickest, I don't think that there's as much difference between the parties as we're being told. All of them will cut anything that isn't desperately neccessary, with a couple of exceptions.

So the question is, whose policies for paying off the debt seem to suit you best, or seem the most fair. From what I can tell:

• The Tories will put a lot more tax onto VAT, which always hits those on lower incomes the hardest whilst protecting the better off.
  
• Labour will attach more of the additional taxes to income, which means that those who earn more pay more.
  
• The Lib Dems will do the same as Labour, but will also get rid of income tax on people's first £10k, which will help most people - particularly the poorest - plus provide greater incentives to get into work for low-skilled unemployed people.

As I say, my view is that all three parties will have to tax the deficit out of us pretty ruthlessly, but will do it in slightly different ways. It's a case of picking the medicine that tastes the least foul.

Though I agree with the Lib Dems in wanting to save money by not wasting it on ID Cards and also not committing to Trident already

[anonymous1]

Well frankly, the Tories idea to cut £6bn this year is crazy.

This leads to fall in aggregate demand, and so a fall in GDP, and so a fall in employment and so a fall in consumer expenditure.

This leads to potential recession, pissed off voters etc.

And more unemployment causes lower tax revenues, and higher benefit costs.

Crazy stuff.

[Seamaster]

Originally Posted by anonymous1

Well frankly, the Tories idea to cut £6bn this year is crazy.

No it isn't. That's £6bn kept in the real economy.

Levying a tax on jobs when unemployment is (as usual) higher than when Labour came to power — now that's crazy.

[anonymous1]

Originally Posted by Seamaster

No it isn't. That's £6bn kept in the real economy.

Levying a tax on jobs when unemployment is (as usual) higher than when Labour came to power — now that's crazy.

A £6bn cut in government spending isn't money left in the economy. The Government has run a budget deficit for absolutely ages.

Can you explain how this £6bn cut is kept in the 'real' economy when the only proposed tax cut by The Conservatives in the inheritance tax?

Government spending is one of the 4 main groups that account for GDP. To cut GDP will lead to either little growth, or negative growth. Cutting government spending by 6bn isn't going to cause any of the other factors to rise accordingly.

Then there's the multiplier effect.

[Seamaster]

...and believing that government spending is the answer is really crazy.

[Chatton11]

Originally Posted by Seamaster

VAT @ 20% is a no-brainer. Taxes on consumption every time. Make those buying a Royce pay the most.

But those in the public sector who've had their nests nicely feathered for the last thirteen years need to feel some pain. Sorry and all that.

Careful Seamaster, I said something to that effect in a throw away comment to my NHS employed wife, and it did not go down well!

[AngerOfTheNorth]

Well the idea of the government pumping money into the economy to keep it afloat is what they've done throughout the downturn. The question regarding the extra £6b is whether we need to continue to put money in to ensure that we don't drop back into recession.

Bearing in mind how weak the recovery has been so far, it seems pretty clear to me that we do need to. The Tory idea that it is "wasted" money because the proposed job cuts would make things more "efficient" sidesteps the point entirely. These cuts need to be made, but not yet.

[Seamaster]

The idea that spending is the answer to debt is crackers. Any Grantham housewife will tell you that.

And I believe it was Einstein who said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing again and again and expecting different results.


‘Trust me, I’m the right person to get us out
of this mess.’

[AngerOfTheNorth]

Originally Posted by Seamaster

The idea that spending is the answer to debt is crackers. Any Grantham housewife will tell you that.

And I believe it was Einstein who said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing again and again and expecting different results.

I'd agree that maybe voting Labour over and over could be judged as "doing the same thing again and again", but Keynesian economics make complete sense. Essentially you're arguing against the bailout completely, without which we'd be in the depths of the most incredible depression for nearly a century. That's insanity.

Anyway, sod it, we'll all vote whichever way we're going to vote.

[anonymous1]

Originally Posted by Seamaster

The idea that spending is the answer to debt is crackers. Any Grantham housewife will tell you that.

And I believe it was Einstein who said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing again and again and expecting different results.

And an economist will tell you the answer to a recession is spending. Would you rather still be in recession or have government debt?

[Seamaster]

I've no problem with spending money we have. It's spending money we don't have that's madness. Look up "interest", comrade. We pay now, or we pay more later.

When you're in a hole, stop digging. It's as simple as that.

[anonymous1]

I'm not the one digging a hole here. What I'm saying makes sense.

We've had a deficit for ages. Then the recession comes along and makes this worse.

Why?

Naturally, a recession means lower income tax revenues, lower VAT revenues, lower corporation tax revenues etc.

At the same time. Higher benefit expenditure is needed. More people take up JSA, council tax benefit, housing benefit etc.

So the deficit automatically gets worse, even by doing absolutely nothing. Labour didn't even need to do anything and the deficit worsened. Or would you have preferred a Libertarian approach was taken and everyone was left without state help?

Then of course they bailed out the banks worsening the deficit more. Would you prefer this wasn't done?

Would you prefer we go back into recession now(and what I've just mentioned happens again) to save a couple of quid on interest payments? Only 5% of current spending goes on interest.

[bigchrisfgb]

I would of prefered the banks to of been regulated more in the first place in order to of prevented it from happening, still we haven't regulated the banks 3 years after the first effects of trouble.

For the future I would like to see products that are made in other countries but are available from our own country to be taxed so that they are are more expensive to import from other coutnries and encouraging people/comanies to buy from companies here in the UK. I would also like to see our goevernment buy foreign companies and set up companies here in the UK, similar to what the German government were going to do with GM Europe last year, which had 50% of it's work force in Germany, but if the German government bought it they would of brough the other 50% workforce (25,000 workers) to Germany, giving germany a fully international company based in Germany with a full German work force.

I would also like to see more encouragement from the UK government for British companies to stay British, and not to sell out to companies from elsewhere. This I believe could bring jobs to the UK for the future and increase our economy, however maybe I'm being silly, stupid, and unrealistic.

[anonymous1]

I think in theory tariffs may sound good. But I don't think they're workable. We can't put tariffs on anything from the EU and most of our stuff comes from there.

America put a tariff on UK steel in 2002, but it ended up actually harming domestic steel makers.

And a tariff makes things more expensive for everyone. So although it may be good for domestic firms, it is bad for consumers.

Deregulation was used as a supply side policy in banking, and it was going well until America's sub-prime problems.

[AngerOfTheNorth]

Tariffs are a non-starter. If you start doing it to other country's goods, they do it to yours. Suddenly, you find yourself unable to sell goods that you want to export (a huge part of the economy) and at that point you're in a real mess.

The banking system does need a massive change though.

[BMS100]

Originally Posted by AngerOfTheNorth

Tariffs are a non-starter. If you start doing it to other country's goods, they do it to yours. Suddenly, you find yourself unable to sell goods that you want to export (a huge part of the economy) and at that point you're in a real mess.

The banking system does need a massive change though.

Regarding tariffs. In the perfect world it's best to have none.

However, in reality countries (Japan) for example simply refuse to remove them unless the threat of similar action on their goods is made.

[Tyr]

Tarifs are bad. Free trade all the way.