General ED Issues / Gossip
Discuss life in London's East Dulwich
17,300 topics in this forum
-
- 12 replies
- 3.2k views
-
- 0 replies
- 971 views
-
- 1 reply
- 859 views
-
- 1 reply
- 915 views
-
- 1 reply
- 839 views
-
- 0 replies
- 3.5k views
-
- 6 replies
- 1k views
-
- 0 replies
- 352 views
-
- 0 replies
- 333 views
-
- 9 replies
- 1.8k views
-
- 2 replies
- 667 views
-
- 0 replies
- 282 views
-
- 5 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 6 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 0 replies
- 664 views
-
- 3 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 2 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 0 replies
- 745 views
-
- 2 replies
- 860 views
-
- 14 replies
- 2.5k views
-
- 0 replies
- 749 views
-
- 0 replies
- 764 views
-
- 4 replies
- 2k views
-
- 12 replies
- 2.6k views
-
- 0 replies
- 1.2k views
-
-
Latest Discussions
-
By Earl Aelfheah · Posted
I think one could argue that degrading public services / infrastructure is what's led to our current, slow economic decline. We've spent 14 years trying austerity, and it's proven counter productive to growth and productivity. A successful economy and society needs good transport, education and early intervention health care. On taxes, it depends how you target them. Tax funded spending may be a positive fiscal multiplier. Taxes on work aren't great, or when they hit the poorest (who tend to spend most of what they earn, boosting economic activity). We need a well designed wealth tax (on idle assets), and stronger measures to target avoidance. -
-
There is a vast difference between cutting costs and not being wasteful. We cannot have the equivalent of not having the money to insure your car, while buying lunches in Waitrose everyday. You can have all the money in the world, and be a fool with how you spend it. Now, it's completely out of control. It has been for a long time. -
After 14 years of austerity I’m not sure where you would find costs to cut I mean it’s been 15 years - “short term” isn’t the word I would use
-