Diane Abbott in fine form this morning...

[wellquickwoody]

Sorry, you've lost me there.

Speaks volumes.

 

[wellquickwoody]

I am close to believing that you are an idiot.
One more post should confirm it.

Ahh, good old Labour, just throwing insults around again.

 

[drew]

So there are no cuts? Just not the increases that many would like? So your school budget is not rising as quickly as the unionised teachers would like, in that case you have to tighten your belt, just like any individual would have to do if they were unable to get the wage they want.

I do not deny that times are tough in the public sector, but I object to the lies about CUTS peddled by the left time and time again. We were all told, for those that actually listened to the speeches and political commentators, that things would be at their worst about now after that Labour note about 'the money has all gone'.

FFS, you do understand what 'real terms' means!!!!

Your arguing for the sake of it. You are well aware of what every means.

So, in real terms, do you accept that schools have less money per pupil?

 

[vegster]

When would you like to pay the debt back? 2 years, 5 years, 10 years, next generation, year 2100? I do not deny times are tough, but overall education budgets are not being cut, they are under severe pressure, but Labour would rather lie to us all.

So when does the government owned RBS start making money then ? they have had loss after loss but the government has not cut them loose ? The banks got us in to the mess we are allegedly in yet the banks have mostly got away scot free.

Labour are not lying, there are cuts in real terms for just about every school in order to pay for Mrs May's vanity Grammar School project, real people, real jobs but I'll just tell the Mrs that she/we have to suffer for the good of the country.

 

[wellquickwoody]

FFS, you do understand what 'real terms' means!!!!

Your arguing for the sake of it. You are well aware of what every means.

So, in real terms, do you accept that schools have less money per pupil?

FFS, yes I do! (your needing to ask is rather sad). Doesn't change the fact that education funding has NOT been CUT, just not increased. But Labour try to peddle a different tune/lie.

 

[drew]

The additional national debt, adding to the one trillion left by Labour arose for because the Labour government handed over an annual budget deficit of £120b, that is annual Government expenditure and interest payments exceeded income by that sum. An analogy would be a business haemorrhaging that in cash each year, but beset by huge fixed costs (education, interest paid on the debt, defence, roads, nhs, etc). The Coalition and now just the Tories have managed to get the annual deficit to £50b, but that's still a deficit and so the national debt builds.

So whether it be Labour's £1 trillion handed over, of the additional £700b since, the £1.7t was never there to spend on additional projects, wages, etc. It's the exact opposite - the £1.7t including the £0.7t since 2010, was spent on public services, wages and infrastructure by UK PLC.

You're absolutely right, Labour caused a massive global meltdown and instead of pumping money into banks they should have let several of them fail and anyone who had funds with them well that would have been tough, collateral damage if you like. As for the NHS, who cares if labour voters can't afford healthcare, as long as your voters perceive they are better off then that's all that matters. As for pensioners, they won't be voting in too many more elections so what does it matter if you acquire a large proportion of their assets when they go a bit 'offline' towards the end of their life. As for education, again, you only need to ensure your voters get a decent school. If they can't afford independent schools then put a grammar near them and they'll think they are in heaven. Let the state schools accommodate the plebs.

That's the way to run a country.

 

[wellquickwoody]

So when does the government owned RBS start making money then ? they have had loss after loss but the government has not cut them loose ? The banks got us in to the mess we are allegedly in yet the banks have mostly got away scot free.

Labour are not lying, there are cuts in real terms for just about every school in order to pay for Mrs May's vanity Grammar School project, real people, real jobs but I'll just tell the Mrs that she/we have to suffer for the good of the country.

I don't WANT anybody to suffer (classic Labour claim for anyone that votes Tory) but we need to cut our cloth accordingly etc etc.. I wish you and your family well Sir, and hopefully the financial outlook will improve despite Brexit.

 

[Raleigh Chopper]

Ahh, good old Labour, just throwing insults around again.

And there it is!
You win anything from the top shelf.

 

[vegster]

I don't WANT anybody to suffer (classic Labour claim for anyone that votes Tory) but we need to cut our cloth accordingly etc etc.. I wish you and your family well Sir, and hopefully the financial outlook will improve despite Brexit.

Thank you for that, however "and hopefully the financial outlook will improve despite Brexit" is another can of worms entirely. Remember Brexit was championed by many of the Tories and UKIP as a way to " Cut red tape for business and growth " in effect, help people already making money make more.

 

[Bakero]

Speaks volumes.

Not really. It's just that you failed to write a complete sentence.

 

[Weststander]

You're absolutely right, Labour caused a massive global meltdown and instead of pumping money into banks they should have let several of them fail and anyone who had funds with them well that would have been tough, collateral damage if you like. As for the NHS, who cares if labour voters can't afford healthcare, as long as your voters perceive they are better off then that's all that matters. As for pensioners, they won't be voting in too many more elections so what does it matter if you acquire a large proportion of their assets when they go a bit 'offline' towards the end of their life. As for education, again, you only need to ensure your voters get a decent school. If they can't afford independent schools then put a grammar near them and they'll think they are in heaven. Let the state schools accommodate the plebs.

That's the way to run a country.

Who said Labour shouldn't have started QE? Or as you put it pumping money into banks.

Rushing into assumptions there. Calm down from the rants and you'll be able to read the comments of others properly.

Incidentally, the only opponents of QE came from the left, who said that it got rich bankers off the hook and then made them richer still.

No need to be so depressingly defeatist. The latest polls show the gap is closing fast, two weeks is a long time in politics and in fitteen days time you could well be looking at Corbyn and Abbott forming a government.

 

[beorhthelm]

As a teacher I probably know rather a bit about education cuts. My school for instance is having our budget cut by £200,000 (the equivalent of 8 teachers) next year. Trust me when I tell you the cuts are very real. Whilst the amount of money in the pot for schools in England is at record levels but once you factor in rising pupil numbers, inflation and running costs, schools will have to cut approximately 8% from budgets by 2020. Spending per-pupil is massively down (the lowest it's been in 30 years) but I'm sure that's just the union spreading nasty lies...

not going to dispute your numbers, but you recognise that the education budget is larger than ever. you've higlighted a number of factors why comparing national budget to spend per pupil isnt such a great idea. doesnt really account for the supposed drop in spending per pupil though, so what else is going on that explains it? instead of debate and understanding, there's just politics and a knee jerk reaction "spend more", when we dont appear to fully understand where the current spending is going.

Yeah, I listened in 2010, Osbourne said he'd have the deficit to zero by 2015 through austerity, but didn't get anywhere near it - it grew! In 2014 they said it would be in surplus by 2020, it continued to grow. Now they're saying not any surplus until 2025 just a decade off their original promise. At the same time they say they are growing the economy at a really strong rate, that economic growth is strong - so if it's strong, why do their targets continue to be missed? Or is this all just BS you are prepared to swallow?

im no fan of Osborne, he failed his target as he was neither agressive enough in cuts nor done anything substantial to help the economy grow. he's strategy after first budget was to sit back let the economy right itself and tinker round the edges looking busy. but eventually the economy did right itself and has grown 2.4-2.7%, which beats or around same as most western nations. so that said, why do the targets continue to get missed? because one, inflation is higher, two every time theres any real attempt to reduce expediture everyone pipes up thats a bad idea and it gets u-turned. some else asked where has the 700Bn debt gone - well its all gone the state, the health, pensions, welfare, education etc that we insist we must have, but dont want anyone to pay for. even Labour cant bring themselves to say we need to increase income tax 5% to really deal with keeping real terms spending and reducing deficit, they mince around with rolling back a tax that is projected to bring in 19bn in 3-4 years time, or hopeful tax avoidance capture. not so much BS as the difficulties of economic managment that our politicans dont even try to explain.

oh, and the new target of 2025 is interesting because they were very much on track for hitting 2020. not only is there no more austerity but they probably will be increasing spending somewhere, or maybe keeping back something to adjust to Brexit or global shocks.

 

[Weststander]

Thank you for that, however "and hopefully the financial outlook will improve despite Brexit" is another can of worms entirely. Remember Brexit was championed by many of the Tories and UKIP as a way to " Cut red tape for business and growth " in effect, help people already making money make more.

Red tape affecting a small minority of the electorate running businesses was not the driver of the Brexit vote. Many businessmen and business leaders were pro EU for obvious commercial reasons.

Independent political analysts in all their reviews have made it as clear that immigration, the effects of that on communities, and the seemingly never ending move towards to further EU integration run from an elite/aloof Brussels, were the causes of the leave vote winning.

 

[wellquickwoody]

Who said Labour shouldn't have started QE? Or as you put it pumping money into banks.

Rushing into assumptions there. Calm down from the rants and you'll be able to read the comments of others properly.

Incidentally, the only opponents of QE came from the left, who said that it got rich bankers off the hook and then made them richer still.

No need to be so depressingly defeatist. The latest polls show the gap is closing fast, two weeks is a long time in politics and in fitteen days time you could well be looking at Corbyn and Abbott forming a government.

The net immigration figures will finally drop to the tens of thousands!

 

[beorhthelm]

Labour are not lying, there are cuts in real terms for just about every school in order to pay for Mrs May's vanity Grammar School project, real people, real jobs but I'll just tell the Mrs that she/we have to suffer for the good of the country.

think you're overlooking grammar schools are state schools.

 

[cunning fergus]

So when does the government owned RBS start making money then ? they have had loss after loss but the government has not cut them loose ? The banks got us in to the mess we are allegedly in yet the banks have mostly got away scot free.

Labour are not lying, there are cuts in real terms for just about every school in order to pay for Mrs May's vanity Grammar School project, real people, real jobs but I'll just tell the Mrs that she/we have to suffer for the good of the country.

In an election everyone lies.

Er indoors is a teacher, has been so for 20 years. On understanding that the secondary school she works in was going to have to make cuts she spoke to Head to understand if there would be redundancies, as this could be in her interest (she is top of her pay scale). Head was clear that no staff were to loose their jobs.

Two weeks later the same Head was on the local radio saying how Tory cuts would force school into redundancies.

Everyone lies.

 

[vegster]

think you're overlooking grammar schools are state schools.

Er no, I think I said that there are cuts in real terms for just about every school in order to pay for May's Grammar school project....ergo, current schools get cuts in order to fund new Grammars.

Theresa May 09/01/2017 " However, the mission I have laid out for the government – to make Britain a country that works for everyone and not just the privileged few – goes further "

 

[pastafarian]

I honestly don't think I can be a)bothered to watch it, b) argue with someone who is happy to be so blatantly hypocritical.

I expect nothing else from people like you.
You refuse to listen to other opinions, you live in your own little echo chamber where all your information comes only from sources on your tick list. Everything else is dismissed and refused out of hand before even viewing and assessing.
It’s a very simplistic form of brainwashing.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I expect nothing else from people like you.
You refuse to listen to other opinions, you live in your own little echo chamber where all your information comes only from sources on your tick list. Everything else is dismissed and refused out of hand before even viewing and assessing.
It’s a very simplistic form of brainwashing.

Yeah, rightho

 

[Bold Seagull]

In an election everyone lies.

Er indoors is a teacher, has been so for 20 years. On understanding that the secondary school she works in was going to have to make cuts she spoke to Head to understand if there would be redundancies, as this could be in her interest (she is top of her pay scale). Head was clear that no staff were to loose their jobs.

Two weeks later the same Head was on the local radio saying how Tory cuts would force school into redundancies.

Everyone lies.

Might not be lies. Might be voluntary redundancy or staff taking early retirement - still a position at the school that is being made redundant but no one is losing their jobs. There is also a distinction between teaching staff and support staff, so may have said no teaching staff we're losing their jobs, but could be other roles. Benefit of the doubt before you start calling people outright liars.