Where's the money been found.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by BBKing

There is money in the kitty, the cutbacks are *ideological ones*, in order to reduce taxes for the rich. The clue is in the words 'Conservative Party'.

What you mean the nasty, evil, party the LibDems are in a coalition government with and, last time I heard, are backing the cutbacks?

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Osem

What you mean the nasty, evil, party the LibDems are in a coalition government with and, last time I heard, are backing the cutbacks?

As I remember they remained against it. Then they saw the 'books' and opinions changed.

Given the cuts are happening to apparently give tax cuts to the rich it does seem rather odd that they are accompanied by tax increases across the board and an income tax cut at the lower end of the scale.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

As I remember they remained against it. Then they saw the 'books'.

Yes that was/is the claim, which would sort of back up the Tory position on the gravity of the financial mess Bliar's cohorts got us into and hence the need for cuts of the magnitude we're facing.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Chris

Chris

Excellent

I must admit, I have to kind of agree where Arthur is coming from on this.

Having recently had my income / expenditure gone through with a fine tooth comb and had to make cuts myself, you have to ask, when the country is in the dire straights that we kept being told it is... Why are we not cutting stuff like this to look after local jobs / projects?

Should charity not begin at home, should we not get our own house in order before attending to others? As harsh as that sounds, I do feel we should be taking this stance rather than trying to be the nice guy all the time.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Tuftus

I must admit, I have to kind of agree where Arthur is coming from on this.

Having recently had my income / expenditure gone through with a fine tooth comb and had to make cuts myself, you have to ask, when the country is in the dire straights that we kept being told it is... Why are we not cutting stuff like this to look after local jobs / projects?

Should charity not begin at home, should we not get our own house in order before attending to others? As harsh as that sounds, I do feel we should be taking this stance rather than trying to be the nice guy all the time.

Per previous this isn't some decimation of the public sector, reducing it to running the entire state on a shoe string over a period of a couple of months, it's reducing spending to the percentage of the country's productivity it was in the middle of the last decade over a period of five years.

Again - this is small change - the scale of cuts required to correct the government's overspend is enormous. This budget is ring fenced and already accounted for. There is no need for us to stop sharing some small part of our prosperity with the rest of the world so that we can continue to mortgage our children to gorge ourselves on an unsustainable state.

I wish I had 70 million in small change.

There are plenty of charities in this country that would love a slice of 70 Million. Time we started looking a little closer to home instead of the rest of the world all the time.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Per previous this isn't some decimation of the public sector, reducing it to running the entire state on a shoe string over a period of a couple of months, it's reducing spending to the percentage of the country's productivity it was in the middle of the last decade over a period of five years.

Again - this is small change - the scale of cuts required to correct the government's overspend is enormous. This budget is ring fenced and already accounted for. There is no need for us to stop sharing some small part of our prosperity with the rest of the world so that we can continue to mortgage our children to gorge ourselves on an unsustainable state.

Yes, I get the point you are making. But as Paul M has pointed out, £70M is not small change, certainly not in my book anyway.

IF the money is to go to charity, it should be one in this country at least.

At the end of the day, when cuts have to be made in *my* budget I am sorry to have to say that charitable donations are the first to go.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl...est-world.html

This is the most recent link I can find..Seeing as Arthur yet again failed to do so..this is the only article I can find that mentions £70 million though at one point it starts as £60 million.

Me thinks that Arthur isn't as naive as he tries to make out..as yet again he posts (without linking) in outrage about an issue and then barely makes any further contribution to the debate.

A sort of light blue touch paper and retire sort of debate.

[Ignitionnet]

I am ignoring the political impact of these donations by the way. There is, of course, a less altruistic reason behind these increases. Foreign policy is like PR, and when a company is struggling for cash PR is most certainly not the first thing that gets cut.

Having Pakistan on side makes sense for many, many reasons within the current climate.

Make any more sense now?

[Pog66]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Having Pakistan on side makes sense for many, many reasons within the current climate.

...very likely to be undone if the current cricket crisis escalates

Anything to do with cricket backhanders?

Too slow there wasn't I Pog66?

International aid is rarely done for totally genuine reasons and more often then not has strings attached so that it is worth our time and money awarding aid. Seriously no country is that good it gives out money for nothing anymore then we as individuals do if we give them even 200 million you can bet your house we know we will get more then that back in oneway or another.

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

.... Seriously no country is that good it gives out money for nothing anymore then we as individuals do if we give them even 200 million you can bet your house we know we will get more then that back in oneway or another.

Like when we donated £234m to Malaysia to build a dam, with only one string attached - they bought their military equipment from the UK.

...helping to preserve some 25,000 British jobs.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...s-1402036.html

[Escapee]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

I am ignoring the political impact of these donations by the way. There is, of course, a less altruistic reason behind these increases. Foreign policy is like PR, and when a company is struggling for cash PR is most certainly not the first thing that gets cut.

Having Pakistan on side makes sense for many, many reasons within the current climate.

Make any more sense now?

It makes sense. But god help us if we ever got into trouble, because I would not bet any of my hard earned on Pakistan helping us out in return.