Friday, 22 October 2010

GEORGIE PORGIE PUDDING AND PIE, OPENED HIS MOUTH AND TOLD A LIE

According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies

Up till now the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has been the Tories’ friend. But following their assertion that George Osborne’s spending cuts are NOT fair and that they would hit the poorest harder than the richest, they must be off the Christmas Card list of the Prime Minister and the Chancellor.

The think tank concluded that, with the exception of the richest 2% of the population (the billionaires), the least well-off would be hit the hardest, and families with children would lose out the most.

They described the tax and benefit changes as regressive rather than progressive across the bulk of the population.

Nick Clegg, David’s poodle, hit back, loosing what little credibility he had left, accusing critics of “frightening people” with claims that they were doing unfair things “when we are not. So nah nah nah nah nah!”.

For goodness sake Nicky. We’re not the bunch of morons you clearly take us for. We may not have gone to Eton, Harrow or Westminster, like the bulk of the cabinet, but we know when the taxes are going up, prices are going up, jobs are being lost, benefits are coming down, and the services, which are appalling to begin with, are getting worse that that is a bad deal for us.

We also know that if you have 250,000 a year and the price of petrol goes up and VAT goes up and you lose your child benefit, and food goes up, you don’t actually miss it. However, if you used to earn £150 a week and now you’re now on £51 benefit and there are no jobs, and you can’t afford Mr Duncan-Smith’s bus fares (which are going up) to the nearest town where there are jobs, maybe 50 miles away, so that you can compete with the hundreds of thousands of people already there for these jobs..... it’s a bit of a damned bind don’t you know.

The think-tank also challenged Osborne’s claim that cuts to departments averaged 19%, which he had made a huge flourish of telling us at the end of his statement. It was better, he had said, than Labour’s request that reductions be kept to 20%.

Well no, it wasn’t actually. It pointed out Osborne’s calculations took no account the £6bn of cuts already announced in his emergency Budget which put it well over the 22%.

So wee Gideon’s a bit of a fibber and Nick is a patronising git who, hopefully, will lose the leadership as real Liberals, and Democrats, cross the floor, and then lose his seat when the people of Sheffield decide that they might as well have a proper Tory next time.

Instead of the Prime Minister’s tea boy

18 comments:

  1. Meanwhile his Boss is spending Xmas in Thailand to see his old chum Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1320616/David-Camerons-Thai-Christmas-getaway.html

    Strike while you can without a bullet proof vest as things can only get nastier as the UK goes into meltdown.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, it's nice that he can still afford to go to Thailand. He must be in a minority. What was all that he bleated on about spending your holidays in the UK again?

    Is Thailand a part of the UK?

    I expect Nick will be off to Spain again to his mother-in-law.

    Maybe George will trot off to the British Virgin Islands to check on his tax free investments?

    I'll just stay at home this year, I think.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Spending Review, and the conclusions announced are necessary after a decade of Labour-created UK structural deficits.

    The general thrust of much of the SR was defensible and justifiable. For example the move to take child tax credits off of the wealthiest 10% of individuals. Welfare is for the needy, not the rich.

    Further, the bankers levy coupled with the new code of practice shall make the financial sector accountable in the longer term.

    The fact is, despite facing the largest peacetime deficit UK plc has ever had to choke on, we Coalition parties still ringfenced health spending - maintaining that it must rise in real terms. Because the health of our children matter too much.

    The education budget has seen important particulars enjoy real terms rise, despite the need to restore confidence in UK sovereign debt.

    Progressive, the national interest. Let us see more of the same Mr Osborne.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It’s certainly "progressive" in as much as it "progresses" the Tories narrow minded ideological agenda. Not in the national interest at all! But solely in the interest of the Tory party and its voters, hit the poor and taxes won’t have to go up (or at least the ones that might affect the rich {i.e. not VAT}), lets now see how they avoid going after tax evaders, after all George only needs to look in a mirror to see one.

    This I expected from the Nasty Party so I don't blame them for being the bunch of self serving, conniving, thieving, tax cheating swine they are. But I expected the Lib Dems to act as some sort of brake on that odious political agenda, but it seems that they have thrown any idea of principle straight out the sun roof of their ministerial limos and are happy to let the Tories do exactly as they like. The spending review was the litmus test of their ability to check the Tories, it seems to me they did not even try. So I hope they are more than destroyed in the coming elections, because if there is one thing I can’t stand above all its canting hypocrites!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dean said..

    " despite the need to restore confidence in UK sovereign debt."

    Yes I'm confident that we're totally bust. Not that you would know it with some of the ConDem spending.

    The aid budget rising to £12Bn. That will help India and China buy up more UK companies and keep their nuclear and space programmes on track.
    The extra £3Bn to the EUSSR each year will maintain Von Rumpey etc in the manner to which they don't deserve but aspire. And keep the funding for EU programmes in Universities and schools on track to ensure the brainwashing isn't impeded.
    The extra levy on our electricity bills of £800 a year will ensure the building of useless windmills continues apace.
    And meanwhile 0% interest rates rob savers and the upcoming QE ( printing money part 2) is in the offing to weaken the value of our currency further.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dean :

    One of the reasons that the rich get benefits is that the welfare state is for everyone, everyone has a stake in it....or it becomes a means tested sink for the poor, which, because the rich have no interest in is neglected.

    If welfare payments are not for the rich, why it is that anyone...anyone at all ...over 60 can get a free bus pass, regardless of whether they are a pensioner living on around £6000 a year, or a busy executive on £150,000 + bonuses.

    Why does that same executive still receive a £250 bonus from the state to help him pay his electricity in the winter, while a younger guy with a job that takes home £150 a week sits shivering with no aid?

    A pensioner over 80 now gets £400 even if they have two index linked pensions, a £500,000 house and a Bentley in the drive.

    If George believed in only the rich getting these things then why did he not tackle the pensioners?

    ReplyDelete
  7. The thing that sickened me was the jubilation that greeted the announcment that some people's lives were about to hit the tank.

    People who had been waiting for their retirement so that they can get the hell out of the misery that is target based work in the UK having to work longer; people who are ill only getting a year to be ill in (so enjoy it while it lasts) as if Osborne has found some magic cure for all illness.

    People being told that they will no longer be able to claim their rent on flats they have lived in, even as they hit middle age; council tax benefits being reduced on "hard working (but low paid) British families, so beloved of the politicians.

    And all to pay back money wasted by a pile of greedy fat cats who can invest their ill-gotten gains in the BVI when next they pass on their yachts.

    We're all in this together ... yes, of course we are Georgie dear. Now off you go and lie down and nanny will bring you a nice hot drink.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Tris

    Cleggy says we are looking through the wrong prism wonder where he got his from its probably like being drunk when everybody else is sober...

    you think you make a lot of sense they all realise you are completely off your head but you do sober up in Cleggy world he never does....



    Deano is a flat earther really no point in arguing with him

    ReplyDelete
  9. Ukipper…

    The reason that the International Development Secretary’s budget has not been reduced is two-fold.
    Firstly, membership of the G8 is nothing to do with being among the most successful, or larges economies in the world. Clearly China is the world’s second largest economy, but it doesn’t get to be a member. The club membership (where you get to strut around like you matter a lot) is based on how much money to give in foreign aid.

    If we reduced our Foreign Aid by the same amount as we have reduced some other budgets then Cameron wouldn’t get to be photographed with Obama, strutting around, flaunting his importance as if it were his birthright.

    The second reason of course is that the ID Secretary also has a packet in the British Virgin Islands.... so it’s a bit of an old school tie club thing.

    But i totally agree with you. Why we give money to China and India, both far more successful than we are, is quite beyond me.

    I’d have less of a problem if it were going to Burkina Faso, Mali, Mauritania or the likes.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Niko.

    Cleggy is toast... and burnt toast at that.

    We are looking the wrong way at paying back the bankers' greed and stupidity. If only we looked it at the other way we would see it was fun.

    I think that Cleggy should join Georgie in the nursery and nanny can get him a nice warm drink too.

    ReplyDelete
  11. tris said...

    The thing that sickened me was the jubilation that greeted the announcement that some people's lives were about to hit the tank.

    Tris it is a bloody game to these morons; Punch and Judy politics.

    Remember when RBS went down the WC and the members of the Labour at their conference were punching the air in delight.

    They don't give a Tinker's for us,for their voters.

    They just like scoring points, it is what rocks their smelly socks.

    Politicians should be culled at birth. There must be a DNA marker somewhere.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "The extra £3Bn to the EUSSR each year will maintain Von Rumpey etc in the manner to which they don't deserve but aspire. And keep the funding for EU programmes in Universities and schools on track to ensure the brainwashing isn't impeded"

    EU university programmes? They by and large are conducted by independent organisations seeking to promote understanding, so we can have less 'little Englander' attitudes [like yours] crippling our future generations mindsets.

    It isn't brainwashing to open up someones mind and show that the 'Froggies' aren't a nation of 'little Napoleons' after all - sorry, but we shall not just role over for your bigotries, narrow mindedness and dislike for foreigners.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Tris

    "If welfare payments are not for the rich, why it is that anyone...anyone at all ...over 60 can get a free bus pass, regardless of whether they are a pensioner living on around £6000 a year, or a busy executive on £150,000 + bonuses."

    Good question! And why is it that the SNP are making sure that people like Annable Goldie can have free prescriptions - when they are able to pay for it!

    Universal benefits are fundamentally flawed, and you will forgive me for thinking that the rich should pay - part in parcel of success is that you no longer need state help...

    ReplyDelete
  14. Dean said...

    "EU university programmes? They by and large are conducted by independent organisations seeking to promote understanding, so we can have less 'little Englander' attitudes [like yours] crippling our future generations mindsets."

    " It isn't brainwashing to open up someones mind and show that the 'Froggies' aren't a nation of 'little Napoleons' after all - sorry, but we shall not just role over for your bigotries, narrow mindedness and dislike for foreigners. "

    You guys from the EUSSR are like a stuck record. Nothing original to say. You think nothing but evil of people who love all countries in the world and want to live as equal but independent of each other. You're similar to the cultural marxists that you find in the green movement and on BBC 'cultural' programmes.

    ReplyDelete
  15. He he bugger. I'll volunteer to do the shooting... or drowning maybe for a change.

    Yes, they don't really give a stuff. it's about thier careers, their future, thier legacy.

    Strange when almost all of them end up being hated.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Well, I know it is a thorny question Dean, and I don't pretend to have the answer to it.

    I can see what you are saying. It is annoying that Annabel gets her free [prescriptions (nothing personal Annabel old thing), or indeed her pension, or then you can take it a stage further....can be treated for free in hospital... or have her kids taught free in our schools.

    You see where I'm going?

    I just worry that if you allow all social security to be only for the poor, the rich have no stake in it and it becomes like the bus service .... awful, underfunded, dirsy, rude, unpleasant.... because no one rich, powerful, influential ever goes anywhere near it.

    ReplyDelete
  17. tris said..

    " Ukipper…

    The reason that the International Development Secretary’s budget has not been reduced is two-fold.
    Firstly, membership of the G8 is nothing to do with being among the most successful, or larges economies in the world. Clearly China is the world’s second largest economy, but it doesn’t get to be a member. The club membership (where you get to strut around like you matter a lot) is based on how much money to give in foreign aid.

    If we reduced our Foreign Aid by the same amount as we have reduced some other budgets then Cameron wouldn’t get to be photographed with Obama, strutting around, flaunting his importance as if it were his birthright.

    The second reason of course is that the ID Secretary also has a packet in the British Virgin Islands.... so it’s a bit of an old school tie club thing.

    But i totally agree with you. Why we give money to China and India, both far more successful than we are, is quite beyond me.

    I’d have less of a problem if it were going to Burkina Faso, Mali, Mauritania or the likes.
    October 23, 2010 1:07 PM


    sorry tris. That's all nonsense. But thanks for the reply.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Well, it's not actually Cynical...

    G8 countries are obliged to give a certain amount of money in aid.

    Clearly it is also true that many countries have bigger economies than the Current G8 membership.

    China, India, Brazil, Saudi.... must ahve bigger economies than italy, Canada and Britain.

    But we're in and they aren't.

    As i said, both Andrew whatever he's called and George Osborne have money in teh BVI. I imagine that George wouldn't want to cut his budget because they are all in "that" together. That part is my speculation.

    What the hell other reasons could there be for a country that cuts its own welgfare budget by billions, and maintains a welfare budget for other countries' poor as if it was still a rich country, instead of the most broke in Europe?

    ReplyDelete