Can someone explain why our borrowing has gone UP when there have been all these cuts?
What is it being spent on?
You can see a breakdown of the UK's spending on ukpublicspending.co.uk . Nearly £60Bn a year - half the cost of the NHS - goes in to merely paying the interest on our debts. Not paying them off. Just keeping them going.
Am I the only one who sees the potential for this thread to go on for another 10 pages, yet continue to go round and round in circles?
*Not convinced that IT and politics mix*
Gibbo (26th January 2013)
The problem is not borrowing per se. The problem is the deficit which, if I remember correctly, is the difference between how much the Government collects in taxes and other revenues and how much we spend keeping the country working. Since 2001 we've been spending more than the Government generates and so borrowing goes up to cover the difference. Until we eliminate the deficit borrowing will continue to increase. Since 2010 the deficit has been dropping quiet sharply, thanks to the austerity measures, but we continue to borrow because we are as a nation still spending more than we can afford.
The bad news is that the national debt is so large that the interest payments are about the same as we spend on our defense budget - around £30bn! The big three money pits are benefits, health and education. So to make any kind of dent in the deficit this is where he has to cut from - or raise taxes.
The UK's Budget Deficit Explained
United Kingdom national debt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
However, I'm not convinced that an online forum is the place to do it. The arguments become the same, throughout, and threads DO go round and round in circles. You only need to look back at all the other political threads!
The people at the top actually seem to care less and less for those below as the years pass. Are benefits REALLY the source of problems? Not the massive influx of immigrant workers, so there are less jobs for those on benefits to aim for? Or possibly the multi-national companies that pay next to no tax, despite having operations worth billions?
All of these ARE factors. But no-one really wants to admit to what must be done!
I would like to see child benefits only paid to those with BOTH parents appearing on a birth certificate (making an father absent or not legally responsible with no exceptions) - even deducting an absent fathers benefits to go back into the pot to cover.
Anyone applying for state pension PROVE that they were not able to contribute to a private pension scheme, by submitting bank record history.
my list is not exhaustive lol.
CHR1S (25th January 2013)
Why is it that whenever you critisize this current government, everyone assumes you're a labour supporter? Every argument from the "tory" people on this forum boils down to "WELL LABOUR WERE MUCH WORSE MAN!!!!!!" and I'm sick of it. I think all politicians are universally terrible and only out for their own ends, I'm just criticising the party in power.
Tory/right-wing/this-government-aint-so-bad people: How about you actually respond to the points raised in the arguments instead of finger pointing at the previous establishment? Whatever you might think Labour did, they aren't in power now. Playing the blame game isn't going to solve anything, and nor are ol' Georgies current policies. The sooner we can agree on that the sooner we'll see a proper alternative presented (like maybe getting companies like Vodafone to pay their tax? naaaaaaaah)
andyturpie is NOT in government!
So, let's get this straight.... You would take money AWAY from children, whose Father is not on the birth certificate? Does the phrase "Child Poverty" mean nothing to you???
Secondly, the "prove that they were not able to contribute..." ....Unbelievable! What people CHOOSE to do with THEIR money is their lookout. I have, so far, paid 27 years worth of NI contributions and tax. In another 25 years, I shall be able to retire. I will do this with (probably) a minimum pension. This is not because I chose family holidays, etc, but because of what the current government have done to my (former) savings.
ButterflyMoon (28th January 2013)
Tabloid sensationalism, probably a lot less than you're imagining.How many other families live like this? How much money is the country pissing away giving lazy families an easy life?
A-men!I would love to quit my job and play xbox all day.
Agree totally.The whole lot needs looking at and starting again <snip (no needed)>
Funny you should say that. I don't think I get paid enough to have a private pension, so I don't. I much prefer the PS3 and odd Holiday, thanks!Most decide not to buy into any pension scheme which allows the cash to be invested in regular family holidays, new technologies etc.
Because £144 a week is enough to live off of, I'm not in any way worried about the prospects of retiring. No doubt I'll die working - flipping burgers at McDonald or something!The reason I am more worse off is that I have been a member of a pension scheme since my 18th birthday. When these people reach 65 (or what ever the pensionable age will be) will still have had a blast of a time whilst working and still manage to pick up a state pension!
Besides, Everybody gets the same state pensions and it's not means tested. Maybe I should start complaining that your going to get your nice shinny private pensions and an extra £144 a week off the tax payer on top of that? Some nice safety net you have there!
aerospacemango (25th January 2013)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)