2015 post UK election discussion

[Tree13]

Totally this.

Firstly I had total confidence in my own abilities to generate income, and secondly in the very unlikely event it was required my taxes paid more than justified state support.

I suspect not everyone shares your drive and abilities mate. People facing this same decision at 18 years old, fresh out of school with minimal or no qualifications and no job, who haven't yet paid much into the system - should they take the same attitude towards the risk that you do? Are their odds of beating the risk as good as yours? What is the impact to them, their hypothetical child, the welfare state's limited pot of money and society as a whole if they don't in fact use their new-found parenthood as a catalyst for earning more and bettering themselves for their child's advancement?

 

[peteblue]

Oh do they! Let's see it then! They have a mandate now don't they, a majority in parliament - go for it!

Unfortunately, all I see is cutting councils all over the shop and thrashing the poor in these areas of the country disproportionately.

You live in cloud cuckoo land on this.

Well, perhaps when you stop throwing around a view of where I live, just answer this 'what do the Tories get from Liverpool ?'. The answer of course is nothing, apart from grief........Manchester is going to grow and keep on growing, Leeds will ultimately do the same.....There is a once in a lifetime game being played in the North and NorthWest and at the moment Merseyside can't even get a team together........

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Absolutely nothing. He's a left wing whopper. He does more damage to our city than good.

But to say that his stance is somehow preventing investment up north is ludicrous. If the Tories had an appetite to help the north, they could do it.

It was a question, not a statement I have no idea what he does, but see his role is to attract the kind of investment you speak of, so wondered how good he was at doing it. As per my previous post, state spending per head in the North West seems fine (although it doesn't break it down per city), so what's going wrong?

 

[Tubey]

As an aside, if you look at state spending per head for each region of England (index of 100), then the North West has a rating of 104. The North East has 108, and London 110. They're the only parts of England above 100.

That's a flawed index - look at GVA and council spending, which look at overall spend in relation to infrastructure and area wealth gain.

 

[peteblue]

That's a flawed index - look at GVA and council spending, which look at overall spend in relation to infrastructure and area wealth gain.

So you've had Labour Governments and Tory Governments and Labour Governments and Tory Governments and still nothing has changed.......maybe if we had a Labour Government.........

 

[Tubey]

It was a question, not a statement I have no idea what he does, but see his role is to attract the kind of investment you speak of, so wondered how good he was at doing it. As per my previous post, state spending per head in the North West seems fine (although it doesn't break it down per city), so what's going wrong?

A lot of that is benefit driven, not infrastructure driven. It actually supports the argument that a stronger economy across the country benefits all, as state spending would be required less.

It's like I said - a see-saw; if private enterprise flourishes, cut the state, save money. If it isn't flourishing, spend more on infrastructure to make it flourish. Spending per head drops when economic growth occurs.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

It certainly didn't. New Labour were even closer to the City than the Tories in many ways.

But I'm not defending Labour with what I said - the north has suffered since the 80s under every government as there's been no appetite to threaten the status quo. My argument is that you can help the north and make the country as a whole stronger, while causing little to no damage to the core in place in the south.

I'm not advocating "financial socialism", where there's no economic stronghold in London, but what I am saying is there needs to be an aim at reducing the gap, as it's causing widespread issues.

How though? State spending per head seems alright. The city has two decent universities (and several more in relatively close proximity. What is missing?

Unemployment in the NW is 7.9%, yet it's 12.1% in Liverpool. What's behind that?

 

[Tree13]

Oh God yeah. Totally intentional. Nothing the Tories want more than to lose the Scottish seats at Westminster.

I was saying this during the discussions on here about the Scottish referendum, and I'm pretty sure many on here disagreed on the basis that Cameron had to keep the Union intact. it seems fairly obvious to me that any action that would remove from Parliament 55+ seats that the Tories can NEVER ever win is an action DC would obviously pursue. That's why he allowed the referendum to take place in the first place, isn't it?

 

[edge]

Well, perhaps when you stop throwing around a view of where I live, just answer this 'what do the Tories get from Liverpool ?'. The answer of course is nothing, apart from grief........Manchester is going to grow and keep on growing, Leeds will ultimately do the same.....There is a once in a lifetime game being played in the North and NorthWest and at the moment Merseyside can't even get a team together........

joe anderson has said he will talk to the goverment about it, it the other councils that held it back, he has said he will go to osbourn on behalf of liverpool alone if need be

 

[Tubey]

How though? State spending per head seems alright. The city has two decent universities (and several more in relatively close proximity. What is missing?

Unemployment in the NW is 7.9%, yet it's 12.1% in Liverpool. What's behind that?

A lack of private job creation replacing cutback public services, both in terms of actual jobs and economic growth.

There's bound to be more state spending per head in areas where state spending is all but the sole economic rail to lean on. The problem is that a lot of it is going to prop up perpetual poverty and not into investing in growth.

 

[peteblue]

How though? State spending per head seems alright. The city has two decent universities (and several more in relatively close proximity. What is missing?

Unemployment in the NW is 7.9%, yet it's 12.1% in Liverpool. What's behind that?

I expect the answer will be the Tories......

 

[peteblue]

joe anderson has said he will talk to the goverment about it, it the other councils that held it back, he has said he will go to osbourn on behalf of liverpool alone if need be

He needs to, and he needs to do it as a partnership between Government and Liverpool City with no politics involved....

 

[Tubey]

So you've had Labour Governments and Tory Governments and Labour Governments and Tory Governments and still nothing has changed.......maybe if we had a Labour Government.........

I don't think Miliband would have done any different. It'd take a serious, sustained vision to do something about it; he didn't have it. What he wanted was to prop up poverty and not kick people when they're down, and given the alternative is the Tory £12bn massacre, in terms of the short term I would have reluctantly accepted Miliband.

But longer term, you need a progressive approach to lifting these areas of the country out of poverty and creating strong micro economies across the land to support London.

 

[Tubey]

I expect the answer will be the Tories......

You "expected" wrong then ...........................................................

 

[peteblue]

I don't think Miliband would have done any different. It'd take a serious, sustained vision to do something about it; he didn't have it. What he wanted was to prop up poverty and not kick people when they're down, and given the alternative is the Tory £12bn massacre, in terms of the short term I would have reluctantly accepted Miliband.

But longer term, you need a progressive approach to lifting these areas of the country out of poverty and creating strong micro economies across the land to support London.

Which is exactly what Osbourne is promoting.......