tories

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leicester Fan

What benefits would those be?

---

Theres a massive skills shortage in the UK construction sector.

Filled Rolls,

A: Criminal fraud and human error with regards to DLA (Disability Living Allowance) comes to over one billion pounds, according to 2005 figures from The Office of National Statistics. That's over a third of all benefit fraud.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Milky

Filled Rolls,

A: Criminal fraud and human error with regards to DLA (Disability Living Allowance) comes to over one billion pounds, according to 2005 figures from The Office of National Statistics. That's over a third of all benefit fraud.

---

Thanks for that information, I am well aware of people who are screwing the DLA, it seems like a lot of money. I have to say, I am starting to question whether it is for the state to support some of those who are not working due to "stress" and "depression".

I'm all for supporting those who can't work, but it seems to me that £225 a week mad money, plus getting your rent and council tax paid for you, doesn't give those who might work again, enough incentive.

Any idea what proportion of the total Social Security bill that is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibsbollah

Theres a massive skills shortage in the UK construction sector.

---

There's a massive job shortage in the construction sector and thousands of lads who can't get an apprenticeship.

Speaking as someone who's worked with women in the construction sector I can tell you that they are not up to it physically. They're only employed because councils insist on a certain percentage of women on the workforce.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Filled Rolls

Thanks for that information, I am well aware of people who are screwing the DLA, it seems like a lot of money. I have to say, I am starting to question whether it is for the state to support some of those who are not working due to "stress" and "depression".

I'm all for supporting those who can't work, but it seems to me that £225 a week mad money, plus getting your rent and council tax paid for you, doesn't give those who might work again, enough incentive.

Any idea what proportion of the total Social Security bill that is?

---

While people defrauding Incapacity benefit (as was) to a tune of approx £1billion is 'not good' for the deficit, HMRC estimates major companies dodge up to £13billion in corporation tax. 12 major companies pay no tax at all and companies like Sky TV actually use tax loopholes to gain money from the taxpayer. Predictably, not much fuss is usually made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibsbollah

While people defrauding Incapacity benefit (as was) to a tune of approx £1billion is 'not good' for the deficit, HMRC estimates major companies dodge up to £13billion in corporation tax. 12 major companies pay no tax at all and companies like Sky TV actually use tax loopholes to gain money from the taxpayer. Predictably, not much fuss is usually made.

---

Two wrongs....:wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Milky

Filled Rolls,

A: Criminal fraud and human error with regards to DLA (Disability Living Allowance) comes to over one billion pounds, according to 2005 figures from The Office of National Statistics. That's over a third of all benefit fraud.

---

I'm not sure it is a third of benefit fraud (but stand to be corrected). I think the ONS clarified that point in the light of misleading press statements (who would have thought?)

The billion-pound figure cited includes under-payment of DLA due to human error as well as over-payment.

The actual amount of fraud in those ONS figures was £40 million I believe :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IndieHibby

Two wrongs....:wink:

---

Indeed:greengrin But it would be nice to see both wrongs taken equally seriously.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibsbollah

You've posted a lot there that doesnt really advance your case:confused: Some of those jobs involve working with young offenders, and increasing women entrants into the construction industry, both of which have economic benefits that would potentially outweigh any cost savings associated with deleting their posts, as does 'environmental sustainablility' work.

---

You implied that there were no 'useless' council jobs, and in a short time I found several that, imo, are not necessary or can be achieved by public services that already have a remit over them. The 'environmental sustainability' one is actually just a 'carbon-neutral' one, which as far as I can tell, is not a proven public-service need. It is, in fact, a load of bollocks. If women want jobs in the construction industry, why can't they get them without the assistance of a council bureaucrat?

Being a teacher, I have spent quite some time reading the jobs pages of the Guardian. Anyone who has done the same over the last few years will be well aware of some of the nonsense people get paid to do for the council.

Quote:

---

I read your second paragraph, but I stand by my point that all political parties always say they can find 'pain-free' cost savings that previous administrations didnt notice, but theyve never been able to achieve it to any degree that would make a difference to a big deficit, certainly not one as elephantine as ours is.

---

The second paragraph was in response to your assertion that there is no such thing as red tape.

---------- Post added at 08:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:42 PM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibsbollah

Indeed:greengrin But it would be nice to see both wrongs taken equally seriously.

---

Granted :agree:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IndieHibby

You implied that there were no 'useless' council jobs, and in a short time I found several that, imo, are not necessary or can be achieved by public services that already have a remit over them. The 'environmental sustainability' one is actually just a 'carbon-neutral' one, which as far as I can tell, is not a proven public-service need. It is, in fact, a load of bollocks. If women want jobs in the construction industry, why can't they get them without the assistance of a council bureaucrat?

Being a teacher, I have spent quite some time reading the jobs pages of the Guardian. Anyone who has done the same over the last few years will be well aware of some of the nonsense people get paid to do for the council.



The second paragraph was in response to your assertion that there is no such thing as red tape.

---------- Post added at 08:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:42 PM ----------



Granted :agree:

---

I think you misunderstood my jibe about the mythical red tape. Im sure there is the occasional public sector job that is superfluous, as is the case in the private sector. I dont think I implied 'there are no useless council jobs' either. I used to do work for local authority departments and some people sat doing nothing all day. I've also got friends who have done the same for prestigious Edinburgh financial institutions for twenty five years since they left school:wink:

What yanks my chain is politicians promising that they can irradicate it pain free. If the Government wants to make big dents in the deficit now something extremely big will need to be considered.

It's funny how it seems okay to mock/dislike someone for being a posh Etonian, it's not as if Cameron can help his upbringing or schooling.

Anyway, I am ditching the Tories after all these years of voting for them, I reckon they have sold out by working with the Nats at the Intertoto parlaiament. Unforgivable for me, they are meant to be the ultimate Unionist party, they've neglected their duty to the remaining Conservative voters in Scotland. I will be voting Labour this time (it will be a vote for Gordon Brown as opposed to the party for me), as I think that Brown has been treated horrendously by the media, I also think he's a decent principled bloke, and most importantly he hates the Nats nearly as much as I do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by corrie greens

It's funny how it seems okay to mock/dislike someone for being a posh Etonian, it's not as if Cameron can help his upbringing or schooling.

Anyway, I am ditching the Tories after all these years of voting for them, I reckon they have sold out by working with the Nats at the Intertoto parlaiament. Unforgivable for me, they are meant to be the ultimate Unionist party, they've neglected their duty to the remaining Conservative voters in Scotland. I will be voting Labour this time (it will be a vote for Gordon Brown as opposed to the party for me), as I think that Brown has been treated horrendously by the media, I also think he's a decent principled bloke, and most importantly he hates the Nats nearly as much as I do.

---

There could be good reasons for him to have been treated this way. I can't think of a worse PM. Ever.

---------- Post added at 10:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:08 PM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibsbollah

I think you misunderstood my jibe about the mythical red tape. Im sure there is the occasional public sector job that is superfluous, as is the case in the private sector. I dont think I implied 'there are no useless council jobs' either. I used to do work for local authority departments and some people sat doing nothing all day. I've also got friends who have done the same for prestigious Edinburgh financial institutions for twenty five years since they left school:wink:

What yanks my chain is politicians promising that they can irradicate it pain free. If the Government wants to make big dents in the deficit now something extremely big will need to be considered.

---

That's a bit more like it! :thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye...®

I'm not sure it is a third of benefit fraud (but stand to be corrected). I think the ONS clarified that point in the light of misleading press statements (who would have thought?)

The billion-pound figure cited includes under-payment of DLA due to human error as well as over-payment.

The actual amount of fraud in those ONS figures was £40 million I believe :confused:

---

That's just the quote I took off the BBC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiMar

LH and Hibsbollah, correct me if I am wrong but are you both saying that substantial cuts in government spending is not really needed and that the structural defecit is not something that should unduly worry us?? :confused:

---

Meh, yes and no. But, mainly, it's not really a serious concern of mine - it's a false dichotomy. I'm going to constantly oppose cuts but not on the grounds of a firm belief in the Keynesian-esque economic position (except, perhaps, as a tactic).

I don't believe that any internal solution is available to the problems of capital and capitalism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by corrie greens

It's funny how it seems okay to mock/dislike someone for being a posh Etonian, it's not as if Cameron can help his upbringing or schooling.

Anyway, I am ditching the Tories after all these years of voting for them, I reckon they have sold out by working with the Nats at the Intertoto parlaiament. Unforgivable for me, they are meant to be the ultimate Unionist party, they've neglected their duty to the remaining Conservative voters in Scotland. I will be voting Labour this time (it will be a vote for Gordon Brown as opposed to the party for me), as I think that Brown has been treated horrendously by the media, I also think he's a decent principled bloke, and most importantly he hates the Nats nearly as much as I do.

---

I reckon Brown will get a surprisingly large number of 'sympathy' votes. Just remember though that most of the stuff in the press comes from briefings with his cabinet (or their 'close friends').

And if you think that the inter-party negotiations in Scotland are bad, imagine what it will be like if we end up with a hung UK Parliament.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beefster

I reckon Brown will get a surprisingly large number of 'sympathy' votes. Just remember though that most of the stuff in the press comes from briefings with his cabinet (or their 'close friends').

And if you think that the inter-party negotiations in Scotland are bad, imagine what it will be like if we end up with a hung UK Parliament.

---

I am sure you are right Beefster, It was the "poor spelling/dead soldier letter" incident that did it for me. I don't like his party, I don't think he's the greatest politician, but I do think he's had a very poor hand of cards, and I reckon he's been treated abysmally. Yes, it will be a sympathy vote, but I do reckon he deserves a better chance, given the mess he's inherited and had to deal with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LiverpoolHibs

Meh, yes and no. But, mainly, it's not really a serious concern of mine - it's a false dichotomy. I'm going to constantly oppose cuts but not on the grounds of a firm belief in the Keynesian-esque economic position (except, perhaps, as a tactic).

I don't believe that any internal solution is available to the problems of capital and capitalism.

---

Hee hee that sounds like some sort of threat!!

I get you, I think...you will oppose cuts simply because you don't believe in shrinking the influence of the state, maybe we should import Chavez instead of Cameron and really go for it :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye...®

You've not been lazily stereotyping have you? :greengrin

---

Rumbled :grr:!

Seriously though, those were the first ones that I could find. So maybe I should put a disclaimer in that not all of these may be completely useless.

But there is a huge amount of wasteful spending by the state.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IndieHibby

Could it be that this rhetoric was toned down in the face of polls suggesting that his Thatcherite 'cuts, cuts and more cuts' was losing him the lead in the run-up to the election?

I think most people know that big cuts are already in the post. Labour have whimpered at the thought of it so far, but should they win the election (indeed, whoever wins the election) they will be forced (IMF, Bond markets :wink:) to slash spending anyway.

Knowing this, it makes no sense to campaign on cuts if your oppostition are gaining ground by pretending that they would make the pain less severe.

Anyone who believes that is even more deluded than out Yam friends.

---

Today:

Howard Archer, economist at IHS Global Insight, said: "Households face still very challenging conditions, including high unemployment, still markedly falling full-time employment, low earnings growth, high debt levels, and January's VAT hike. Meanwhile, still serious concerns about the economic outlook and jobs are likely to maintain consumers' desire to improve their personal finances."
In light of the subdued economic news, David Cameron has apparently softened the Tories' language on spending cuts, proposing that any reductions in the deficit in the first year of a Conservative government need not be "extensive", amounting to little over £1bn.
However, this has further undermined the government debt market, with investors worried that without further deficit cuts, the Government could fall victim to a sudden increase in its funding costs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiMar

Hee hee that sounds like some sort of threat!!

I get you, I think...you will oppose cuts simply because you don't believe in shrinking the influence of the state, maybe we should import Chavez instead of Cameron and really go for it :wink:

---

Not because I don’t believe in ‘shrinking the influence of the state’ per se – I don’t see ‘the State’ as an intrinsically good thing. But because I oppose a number of things inherent in the cuts;

a)The worst-off in society facing the brunt of the ‘solution’ (of course, it isn’t a solution, more of a momentary stabilisation – if that) to the crisis.

b)The worst-off in society facing the brunt of a crisis that was none of their making.

c)The people who had no role in the crisis being asked (made) to pay not once but twice. The massive redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich via the bail-out and now paying off that through cuts that will predominately affect those who have already paid.

d)The crisis being used as a way to reconstitute the economic base to the preference of the best-off in society.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by corrie greens

Anyway, I am ditching the Tories after all these years of voting for them.

---

Wow. :shocked: :dizzy:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibsbollah

While people defrauding Incapacity benefit (as was) to a tune of approx £1billion is 'not good' for the deficit, HMRC estimates major companies dodge up to £13billion in corporation tax. 12 major companies pay no tax at all and companies like Sky TV actually use tax loopholes to gain money from the taxpayer. Predictably, not much fuss is usually made.

---

It goes without saying, as far as I'm concerned. The corporation tax loophole is one that sickens. I can't remember who, but one corporation actually brags about how little they have to pay.

I'm really trying to get a handle on how many people are claiming Incapacity at the moment. In a sense I've been working in the front line lately, and I think I might have a skewed version of the overall picture.

If it is an inconsequential proportion of what is payed out, then I would accept that some of these wasters are just an unfortunate by product. It just seems to me that certain pockets of our society are costing a lot of money, and that is money that could be better spent on the really sick people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Filled Rolls

If it is an inconsequential proportion of what is payed out, then I would accept that some of these wasters are just an unfortunate by product. It just seems to me that certain pockets of our society are costing a lot of money, and that is money that could be better spent on the really sick people.

---

It is my perception that a lot of people subscribe to this view (right or wrong, disnae matter). So many, in fact, that this issue (along with others of a similar ilk) are key areas of concern with voters and whichever party shows, overtly or otherwise, that they are serious about addressing it, will win many additional votes.

Those who have been playing by the rules SEEM to be getting shafted...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IndieHibby

It is my perception that a lot of people subscribe to this view (right or wrong, disnae matter). So many, in fact, that this issue (along with others of a similar ilk) are key areas of concern with voters and whichever party shows, overtly or otherwise, that they are serious about addressing it, will win many additional votes.

Those who have been playing by the rules SEEM to be getting shafted...

---

That's the whole point, the perception is that people are getting away with doing their bit. Whether they are or not I don't know. :thumbsup:

It would be nice to quantify the problem. I would rather a small amount of wasters were kept by the state rather than have people in need go without.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Filled Rolls

That's the whole point, the perception is that people are getting away with doing their bit. Whether they are or not I don't know. :thumbsup:

It would be nice to quantify the problem. I would rather a small amount of wasters were kept by the state rather than have people in need go without.

---

What about the the tax evaders/avoiders? :greengrin