Darling to cut Deeper than MrsT.......

[R1Geezer]

Well this admission seems to be on several front pages, said proudly, great public sector costs do need cutting. So given that all the lefties hate MrsT will they now hate Darling even more and vote Tory? What about the feared recession re entry so predicted by our learned liberal elite? Is Darling proposing to ignore that advice? Will Gromit and Jake and co now be voting Tory as clearly Labour are getting too extreme and will now "tip us into recesssion"?

[youngmafbog]

It appears Darling has seen sense. As I have posted before it is my beleive there can be little difference between what any party can do.

Lets hope off the back of this we can get a three party unite (not the crappy Union).on the cuts requered If that did happen then GB PLC would be back up for business with a vengence.

Yes be very interesting to see the liberal 'elite' view on this.

[Gromit]

Labour have said they will have a spending review in the Autumn, and cuts will not happen for a year to give the green shoots of the recovery time to take hold. The Tories will make the cuts rightaway, which risks a return to dip.

You have my assurance that I will not be voting Labour, I haven't done since 1982.

[jake-the-peg]

Well we all know I'm voting Tory because I don't have a choice (UKIP is not a choice!)

Bur seriously it is well known that severe cuts are going to be needed - this is no shock.

It is not that but the timing of the cuts that divides the parties.

Labour will delay to minimise the risk of returning to a recession

The Tories will cut regardless of whether it puts the country back in the red or not

Unless you're going to tell me otherwise -

I still wan't to hear you Tories say whether or not returning to recession is a price worth paying for early deep cuts in the defecit.

Someone answer - please!

[R1Geezer]

I'll answer, jake, yes 100% of public sector is a waste, some is necessary cut what isn't now put the useless showers of sh1te on the dole. Day 2. We stop paying benefits in cash. No one will starve, we just don't give them actual money, hopefully they'll find a better way, like perhaps getting a job, horror of horrors! you know the rest jake....

[Quizmonster]

You couldn't make it up, could you?
Quote: "We stop paying benefits in cash. No one will starve, we just don't give them actual money."
So, what do you have in mind? A vast army of people buying and delivering food, clothing and other necessities to the genuinely poor and genuinely unemployed, as well as handling their bills for utilities etc? And what would these delivery-folk/bill-payers be, if not "public sector" employees who would have to be paid from the public purse?

Oh, and you STILL haven't answered Jake's question. "IS a return to recession a price worth paying or not?"

[R1Geezer]

They don't live in housing supplied by those who earn and pay for themselves they live in centers where thay have bed and food, they don't have tax payers money to spend on white lightnening and cigarettes. It will be grimm, so grim in fact that the children that live in these places will get themelves out of it instead of being trapped by their useless "world owes us a living parents", it'll take a generation perhaps. The basic problem is that we have bred a generation who think it's a career move to get up the trumpet and get a flat! Unfortunately it's been cause by liberal J'Arthurs without a scooby doo. Welcome to modern Britain

[ludwig]

A strange outburst of off message honesty from a politician there. He'll obviously be for the chop now whether Labour win or not.

[Quizmonster]

I presume you know how the phrase, 'concentration camp', came about, R1G. The idea was that you put all your perceived 'enemies' in central places...ie 'concentrated' them...so that you could keep an eye on them more easily and prevent their harming you. This is what your so-called 'centres' would appear to be...concentration camps.
How many of them would you imagine we need? Would they be encircled by barbed wire and patrolling Alsatians? Would they have watch-towers manned by machine-gun-toting guards? Would the 'inmates' be allowed out to look for work?
So many unanswered questions that - when I read your response this morning - I couldn't avoid thinking of the Churchill insurance adverts..."'e's 'avin' a laff!"

As ever, you fail to answer one of my key points. What do you have in mind for (quote) "the genuinely poor and genuinely unemployed"? We already have multitudes of these on benefits and your hoped-for recession would only multiply their numbers exponentially.

Nah, ye've gotta be 'avin' a laff, mate!