Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35021025)

Second post you've made with that exact last paragraph in.

From what I can see people who voted the other way to you aren't complaining. Why? Because we understand, unlike most Labour supporters, that there isn't an endless pot of money to throw at public services and welfare and buy votes.
Snippedy snip snip

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35021025)

Second post you've made with that exact last paragraph in.

From what I can see people who voted the other way to you aren't complaining. Why? Because we understand, unlike most Labour supporters, that there isn't an endless pot of money to throw at public services and welfare and buy votes. We accept that the bills have to be paid and I'm sorry to inform you that we don't blame the new administration for it - we blame the previous administration that chalked up the deficit that needs paying.

The simple fact is that the economic woes were bad, however even without that Labour were happily chalking up ever increasing deficits that were not sustainable in the long term.

It's what they do, spend and spend and tax and tax and borrow and borrow if they don't feel it politically convenient to tax enough to pay for the spending. They were handed a prosperous economy in surplus and urinated that away throwing money at inefficiently run services, welfare and bribing and expanding their base.

We're not in the state Greece were, but the fact remains either we deal with the deficit as a country or the deficit deals with us by causing us to lose our AAA credit rating and our interest bill go up further increasing the amount of money being spent unproductively and on overheads instead of servicing us the people.

This won't be pleasant, but sadly those who are pragmatic enough to grasp it will accept the need. I appreciate this may well not include many who think that they can live off the state, that it should look after them and all their needs and don't grasp that the money for it has to come from somewhere and their relatively small or non-existent tax bill really doesn't come close to covering it.

Nice try :)

Originally Posted by RizzyKing (Post 35021083)

Funny isn't it to labour supporters their beloved party did nothing wrong for the thirteen years they held power but they are so happy to have a go at the poor sods that havn't been in for three weeks about this mess. Get real and take off those red tinted specs and see the complete mess that labour have left us all in and all of us are going to have to pay for it oneway or the other. But one consolation for you the majority of the public in this country are so damn short sighted come the next election they will forget who caused all this and will punish those who sorted it out letting the lunatics take over the asylum again.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35021097)

Increasing taxes ,taking more of our wages will only create hardship that the state will pay for in the form of wellfair handouts .Other ways of reducing the deficit will have to be found other than taking it of the workers through increased taxes

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 35021102)

The point I'm trying to make is everytime extra cash is need they go "I know lets screw the motorist again".

I know taxes need to be raised, but they have said they cannot put food up as it will affect the poorest. but obviously the poorest don't own cars.

Well the way things are going there will come a point when motorists will snap, and no doubt fuel protest will raise there head and I will join them.

I have never said that Labour where perfect, and my glasses are very clear.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35021114)

There has to be a balance of cuts to services and tax increases. Cut services too much it causes hardship through job cuts causing an influx on a job market that might not be able to take the strain, and reduction of services people have come to, right or wrong, rely on. Increase taxes too much it disincentivises work and deters investment.

The Tory plan had the balance shifted more towards cuts than tax increases, Labour's was skewed more towards tax increases, the Lib Dems' was in between the two.

The point is due to the mess we can't have no cuts or no tax increases sadly, it's a balancing act. We'll see if the balance we get from ConLib is the right one.

?

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 35021102)

The point I'm trying to make is everytime extra cash is need they go "I know lets screw the motorist again".

I know taxes need to be raised, but they have said they cannot put food up as it will affect the poorest. but obviously the poorest don't own cars.

Well the way things are going there will come a point when motorists will snap, and no doubt fuel protest will raise there head and I will join them.

Originally Posted by PeteL (Post 35021141)

a fuel price stabiliser is a excellent idea i have been wondering why labour never did this... i dont drive but maybe they could go ahead and use some of this extortionate amount of tax and filling in the millions of potholes ?

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35021122)

I not sure I agree with all of that though. Speed cameras do seem to work, accidents overall down, accidents near troublespots where cameras are installed way down.

Also road tolls work well in Europe. Awesome roads there.

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 35021168)

Well IMHO speed camera are pointless, most sat navs have locations of them in, you can buy devices exclusively for them.

Originally Posted by Derek S (Post 35021173)

They still catch plenty of people going over the limit.