DJKillaQueen

OK a 1p raise in income tax would raise 4.75 billion a year (that was published in various newspapers before the election). So a 2p increase would raise 9.5 billion each year. The deficit is umm ?800 billion? A third of working age adults are not in work. And a third of those who are, earn less than ?7 an hour. Looking at a report by the Institute for fiscal studies we need to get our GDP up, reduce the gap between imports and exports and get umemployment down. It makes perfect sense. Pay people more, they pay more tax. Reduce unemployment we get more tax and the benefits of higher GDP and exports speak for themselves. So why on earth the government grant was cancelled to Sheffield Forge is beyond me. Cameron is expecting Banks and entrepreneurs to bring about recovery. He needs to get real and understand we need vast investment in industry, education and whatever it takes to get Britain producing again - ALL of it...not just London. I do think Vince Cable more than anyone understands this, but I think he'll struggle to convince Cameron.

Dang...can't argue with any of that...

So basically some cheese and crackers and a bit of fruit! :-$ Very abigail's party....

I think Loz is right....the NHS reshuffle has more to do with being seen to so something. As for the bus pass....well the Coalition will be gone in 4 years LM so it should be reinstated in time for you :) These kinds of cuts, like the bus pass, seem like trimming at the edges to me. Someone on the politics show made a point in which he said that there wasn't anything like the amount of inneficiency in the public sector that the government thinks there is - that a process of improved efficiency has already been going on for years, so the only thing that can be cut are jobs and even that was limited because if you cut all of the youth provision and local community funding and services, you still wouldn't get to anywhere near the level of cuts that the government wants. Ultimately essential services will have to be cut and that means the kind of services, like social services that make significant differences to people's lives. I wonder what the increase in income tax would need to be to cut the deficit. Why can't 2p be put on it. It's the simplest and fairest way to collect tax after all. Why are sucessive governemnts so scared of doing that? We keep getting told how bad things are, so why is income tax still like some holy grail?

I agree with you quids...creating wealth and prosperity is essential to a forward moving society. And we are not doing that as well as we could. What matters is then how the wealth is distributed or what it's used for and it's there that the clash comes because the idea that a free market economy could then have a regulated system of distribution seems to be anathema to some people. We need more jobs and better jobs....there's no question about that, and we need to invest in industry and the private sector to help create them. At the same time we need to make sure people are better rewarded in a more even fashion for the effort they put in. It's no good demonising the unemployed and then doing nothing to create jobs for them.

frierntastic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Also, check out the left-wing fanaticism > demonstrated by DJKQ. This is a person who ranted > about how the ConDems were about to reduce housing > benefit to ?400, complained that no-one could live > on that and had to be told that it was actually > ?400 a week. Actually I am neither a fanatic or left wing....and I did conceed the error. However anyone who thinks we should be topping up working people's rent with tax payers money while rents and house prices romp out of control needs their heads testing (but that's just my view). Fotunately the FSA are about to start to do something about it, and not before time. > Cue boring, predictable barrage of bile from DJKQ > and Brendan "you're a fascist etc etc" I never insult anyone and I'm sorry if you have nothing better to say about my views than to personally insult me....more a reflection on you than me. Anyone reading what I do write would see that I am more interested in arguing for a fair society, than getting riled by the stupid and derogatory comments of posts like your last one, with nothing more useful to say than to label those they disagree with as left wing and full of bile.

I think we can all agree here that not enough was done to get views from local cyclists. I'm sure Peckham Vision knew about the plans beforehand, they are usually pretty good on that side of things. I noticed today as well that the works to the junction at the Heaton Arms end has taken away the southbound cycle lane that was there before and the road narrowed at the lights. What is the thinking there?

OMG Tanglefoot.....haven't heard of that one in years. The prices are better too...a tenner will keep you in the pub all night!

lol....well I'm a cider kind of gal and they all like stout up there which I can't defend lol.

I'm from the North...and yes Thatcher's policies destroyed my father (a man who'd worked all his life never worked again) and it's not something to joke about or dismiss as Northern whinging. Were it not for Heseltine the North and Midlands would have been left to rot indefinitely by Thatcher and Tebbit. And yes northerners are genuinely friendly (indeed as are most towns and cities outside of London), but there are reasons for that - London is a fast moving transient capital city where neighbours don't often know each other. But all these things are generalisations of course. When I went to University, the commnets I heard privileged southern students saying about northerners shocked me. I found them rude, arrogant and ignorant (and as thick as planks - why on earth their parents bothered spending all that money to send them to public school mystified me lol). I never saw that at school and college in my home town. So unfortunately there is some truth in it. Obviously there are many lovely people in the South too but there's a certain attitude found amongst the privileged (and bearing mind many southerners are not privileged of course) that is peculiar to the South. Some of the vilest, most rudest people I've ever met have come from the upper classes and establishment and they don't grow up in the North most of them. So I would say the North/ South thing is a reflection of a certain class/ culture thing but it certainly doesn't apply to all southerners, or northerners equally.

Did the partygoers look like this? http://photos2.meetupstatic.com/photos/event/5/2/a/6/600_16461158.jpeg

HA HA...umm dunno..... We do have lots more snakes than people realise though. There are loads of grass snakes in the countryside.

Yep I agree Loz but what I would say is that politics without some ideological debate also means that nothing ever really changes....which is fine if everything is fine and dandy, but no help if something radical needs to happen. Hmm elasticated jugular LM....the facelift looks amazing too........what did you say the name of your plastic surgeon was again?

Surely the current system of student loans/fees is a bigger disincentive? Yes I personally think it is so some sort of reform for a better system is needed. We were heading for a tory government anyway and I?m glad that the libdems had the stomach to get into bed with the conservatives and at least force a few good things into the policies they were going to role out anyway. I agree they can rein in the Conservatives on some things but I think their power will become increasingly limited. If the Conservatives had been forced to rule as a minority government (which I think they would have rather than force another election), there would still have been a process of consensus but without Lib Dems having to toe a coalition line. But of course there would have been no role in cabinet for Lib Dem MPs. I think it's still too early to say if the coalition will survive. The real test will come later in the year when the coalition tries to get bills through parliament. And we also wait to see what the spending review has in store too.

The Financial Times also raises some interesting questions such as how will those that drop out of university be made to pay? Quite. There's lots to be worked out if it's going to work and of course not all Law and Medical graduates earn big salaries. Also how would we tax those that emigrate, if at all? That's not how taxation works. May as well ask how the unemployed should pay for the NHS. Yes a tax is a tax, there's no getting away from that. But we've been here before, paying tax on things only to see it not invested in the thing being taxed. So I would want to see some ringfencing on that tax so that any profit is guaranteed to go back into education and indeed profit leading to a reduction in the tax rate. Socialists see them as dupes of advertisers and victims of rapacious bosses You are not suggesting the Lib Dems sit between a conservative and a socialist party are you? There are no socialist parties anymore, just the odd socialist policy amongst predominently free market economics. If anything that's why the Lib Dems struggle in reality. Thee's no clear ground for them to occupy and no space between the two main parties. So, if people who voted LibDem feel their trust has been breached, it because they didn't really understand what they were voting for. Which is not terribly dissimilar to when New Labout was voted back in last time. That's rather insulting to the electorate and a complete assumption on your part. Voters read election material, they watch televised debates, read newspapers and many other plentiful sources of information about the policies of the party they might consider voting for. If anything, in this election, because so many voters were changing postion on their vote they paid MORE attention to what the campaigners were saying. They fully understood what they were voting for - and decided no one party was good enough to to govern.

No worries Sue, I'm sure it's gonna be a great day for all the parties... :)-D OK I think this is pretty much all of them in the forum area (apologies if I've missed anyone out) Bellenden Road Gowlett Road Crystal Palace Road Peckham Rye Apartments (formerly Kings on the Rye) Nunhead Green Lyndhurst Way Denman Road Ivanhoe Road Vestry Road Cornflower Terrace (off Dunstan?s Road) Beckwith Road Hollingbourne Road Ruskin Walk Fawnbrake Grove Brantwood Road Westwood Park Waveney Avenue

sophiesofa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Do you have to live on the street or just live > really near? Sounds fun. They are open to anyone sophie and you can drop by to more than one. I'll put up a list in a moment of all the ones locally. Go to them all if you want to :))

Yeah me too Steve.....I could offer them decks and blatently promote my own trumpet, after all there's nothing like a community event to hijack is there? Bit mean to say that I know but when within 11 posts someone posts TWICE to promote their event when the thread isnt even about them just pees me off a little.

Yeah we get the point sue - it's got it's own thread...but there are lots of other street parties going on locally so I think it's fair to encourage people to support their nearest one.

Work? Instead of ripping out Ladymucks jugular? Are you mad! :)

I think it's the right way to go although don't students at present only have to pay back once they start earning?. How long do you pay the tax for? It worries me that if it's for life, then the real term costs when added up for the degree will make it far cheaper, if you have parents who can afford it, to go abroad to do a degree. Just as indeed many foreign students come here too (we can't tax them afterwards). The details need to be worked out. They need to base any tax on real work earnings and not projections. I'm all for anything that increases access to and the affordability of education though and of course, I was able to get my degree without having to pay a penny, when education really was free for those whose didn't have parents to pay for it. The Lib Dems as a campaign policy said they would phase out tuition fees within six years. They also said they would oppose any moves to raise tuition fees (widely expected as part of the spending review) and have given their MPs permission to abstain on the issue. How kind of Clegg to allow them to abstain but not oppose.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- >in return I was told that > my "views are offensive". That kind of attitude > spoils it for everyone. It does, but why let it get to you?

Well there will always be those who can't live with different viewpoints and those who will stick by what they believe rather than conceeding they might be wrong. What Dave is saying is that he dislikes Brendan's views and that whilst I may seem different to Brendan on the surface (I assume that means because I don't lose my temper when debating) underneath I'm of the same views. So instead of saying let's agree to disagree, he's dismissed anything any who disagrees with him has to say and has effectively suggested we've driven him out of the drawing room. I think that says far more about him than it does Brendan and I. After all it's just debate. None of us has any real power to change anything out there (apart from on a local level). The whole point of debate is to inform and become informed surely, and to have the grace to agree that sometimes there are better ways to do things even if we don't dream them up ourselves. Similarly we can agree to disagree. It's not always about winning some war of words B)

I think anything that is a disincentive to education Mitch is a bad idea. The brain drain point you make is an important one because there is no doubt we produce some of the world's best engineers, designers, doctors and so on but we struggle to keep many of them. And it's no coincidence that in Labour's drive to keep young people off the unemployed register, higher education places quadrupled, to a point that the bill for tuition fees to the tax payer became too high...hence the introduction of tuition fees. The knock on from that is that older graduates like myself have now found that we now need MA's and even higher education for many professions, where a degree was sufficient before. Suddenly the first class degree isn't good enough whereas 15 years ago it was! We all know that there are many degree courses that are not worthy (like the degree in Airline Management that one university is running!) and that many graduates have no hope of earning enough to repay the loans within a reasonable period of time (let alone going on to become homeowners or fulfill any other apsirations they have). I still don't understand what was so wrong with the former Uni/ Polytechnic system and the intermediate BTEC and HND two year courses (many courses currently running as four year degree courses could be easily done in two years with less debt to the student). They seemed to serve the countries employment needs far better than the cuurrent one size fits all system, which has changed nothing for the better. The ten top Universities are still the top ten Universities and some employers won't accept a degree from anywhere else....so competition is as fierce as ever. It's not just as you say, taxing those who go and get that education (many of whom will be from ordinary backgrounds) it's the gross lack of investment we put into talented people once they are qualified, through investment in industry and the sectors where they should be able to flourish and untimately regenerate those industries with their talents. The Lib Dems got a lot of student votes because they campaigned for reform of tuition and student fees. Needless to say that Clegg gets booed everytime he goes near a university now. Places will be cut in line with cuts in University funding....so expect to see youth unemployment rise over the next five years too.

DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- DJKQ is > superficially different but substantially the > same. So I'm out. Which is another way of saying you have neither the ability or debating skills to argue your points effectively. Believe me I am never superficial. I care deeply about what's going wrong in this country, the rising gaps between rich and poor, the alarmingly growing rates of illiteracy and a culture that thinks it's acceptable to keep people low paid whilst using tax payers money to subsidise their wages. I want a productive, balanced and fair society where hard work and talent are rewarded in equal measure instead of the current society of privilege and self interest that favours the few. So of course you will kop out Dave because you don't what to change anything to make the country a better place if it means you have to sacrifice one once of anything. Therein lies the problem. We all want our own kids to go to the best school but don't care about anyone else's kids. I on the other hand think we can become a prosperous country again where the majority can claim they have a decent quality of life as opposed to the few. There will always be people at the top and bottom equally in any society but there is something going very fundamentally wrong in the UK. It requires an overhual of education, training and industry and will take maybe two decades to achieve but it won't happen as long as parliament is dominated by pseudo economists and lawyers, who don't listen to industrialists, entrepreneurs, teachers and have no experience of how the vast majority of people live outside of their little cocoons of privelege and wealth, and outside of London and the home counties.