I really do struggle with why politicians won't say the "c-word". The papers are full of examples of profligate waste that get people exercised. And yet no-one wants to tackle our frightening government debt.
Labour have us on course for a £1.4trillion debt. The Tories have us on course for a £1.399999trillion debt. The SocDems probably have us on course for a £1.5trillion debt, but that's academic.
Are taxpayers really that well-trained as milch cows that we won't accept that we can cut the state's profligacy without any pain to ourselves?
Put me in charge. I'll fucking sort it all out.
16 comments:
£1million saved? Now that's fiscal conservatism I can believe in...
We can't CUT the debt without pain to a fucking big family of sponging bastards with a free house and cars and everything else yet still want more. Anyone got the address?
You're in charge, Obo.
And yes, they are CUNTS. There are no polite words left.
wv: obolash
Yes Uncle Marvo. I believe the address is 10 Downing Street, and there is another big pointy house just down the road from there which is full to the rowlocks with sponging filth.
I believe that if you start there, much of the national problem can be erradicated.
The best way to start is at the neck, because when you cut the head off the rest of the body stops moving, whereas if you are thinking of tidying up a few hangnails at the fingertips of the body politic, you'll find they just re-grow.
http://kingbingo.blogspot.com/2010/04/why-no-c-word.html
Will explain.
Obnoxio the Clown asks “I really do struggle with why politicians won't say the "c-word". The papers are full of examples of profligate waste that get people exercised. And yet no-one wants to tackle our frightening government debt.”
The answer is pretty straight forward. I’ll deal with Labour and Tories. Who cares about the Limp-dumps. For Labour they want to avoid talking about cuts because the recipients of public funds are their client state. This is true of the public sector and welfare claimants.
Labour, especially the Brown and Balls section are also masters of vilifying their enemies, both internal and external. They know that most of the population are not political anoraks, they might read a paper or watch the news, but not in any but in any detail. Labour knows that through a sympathetic media, and their friends in the BBC and others they can give the superficial impression that the Tories will take away people hospitals and schools, that they will privatise police and withdraw justice for all but the rich.
True enough about a third of the public sector is the sort of essential front line stuff like Nurses and firefighters etc, plus a handful of necessary operational managers. These people even most libertarians would keep, definitely Tory libertarians. Then you have maybe another third who are in support roles that while not strictly necessary serve some purpose and good arguments will be made to keep them. Then the final third are political appointees with no merit whatsoever.
But if you were a Tory strategist would you really want to bet the future of your party on the ability to nuance the above argument in a 15 second soundbite, which is about as much time as you get through the media with the average bored voter. Before you even get to that point you have to disabuse the public of the idea that you want to sack all the nurses in their local hospital because the Labour guy who had 15 seconds before you just told them that.
Its a hell of a lot easier just to keep your gob shut and win first. But if you want to get a feel for if the Tories really want to cut the size of government then read the Tory manifesto, it will leave no libertarian reader in any doubt.
http://www.publicservice.co.uk/blog_story.asp?id=212
The public sector doesn't even believe that we can save the initial £15bn!
Give me the reins of power (mwhaa haa haa haa) and I'll have us running a surplus within one year, with no pain (unless you sponge off the state).
"But if you were a Tory strategist would you really want to bet the future of your party on the ability to nuance the above argument in a 15 second soundbite, which is about as much time as you get through the media with the average bored voter. "
But if you have to (essentially) lie to the voters even if by omission, you are still on a hiding to nothing, because they'll remember that if nothing else.
Perhaps we need smarter voters?
And we aren't going to get them, with our current educational system...
"Perhaps we need smarter voters?"
If it were up top me I would make paying basic rate tax a requirement to vote. (or married to a taxpayer)
That won't solve the problem, but its a good step in the right direction.
I may even want to change tax to a net collection only, i.e. public sector get their wages net, without tax.
Oh Julia, 'smarter voters'? What a lovely thought.
Labour has been socially engineering this country for the past 13 years to ensure voters aren't smart. It'll take a few generations to reverse that at least.
@Rosie:
a few generations or a bloody decent war.
One simple piece of legislation.No government can into debt without triggering a new election.
Would Labscum have won any of their last 2 elections if they had to tax enough to pay for their costs as they put them on the books?
So no deferring taxation on the never never in the hope you lose office before it comes due.
Oh, and no representation without taxation, otherwise your letting the fat kid manage the tuckshop.
Our own semi socalist fuckwit has run through hundreds of billions in setting houses on fire, building school buildings for 4 times their normal cost, and restarting the illegal immigrant trade.
Yet because he hasnt run out of money yet (but interest rates are rising...for some reason) hes on track to win the next election.
Were 15 years behind you, give out dickheads enough time and theyll catch up...
BER value rorted $6,000,000,000.00
School Halls over budget $1,700,000,000.00
School Computers over budget $1,200,000,000.00
Medicare overspend $1,400,000,000.00
Pharmaceutical overspend $1,800,000,000.00
Solar Panel Overspend $850,000,000.00
NBN Tender failure $17,000,000.00
Insulation $1,400,000,000.00
Stimulus Cheques wasted $40,000,000.00
TV Station handout $250,000,000.00
Grocery Watch $10,000,000.00
NT Housing program $45,000,000.00
2020 summit? $10,000,000.00
Copenhagen $1,500,000.00
Whaling Envoy $1,000,000.00
418 media advisors $50,000,000.00
Ambassador to Holy See $10,000,000.00
Fuel Watch $8,500,000.00
from here.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/how_many_billions_has_rudd_wasted/
You're in charge, I hereby decree it. Do your work, you cunt. That's right, I said cunt. I can, because I'm the motherfucking Queen, so fuck all y'all.
@ Kingbingo
"But if you were a Tory strategist would you really want to bet the future of your party on the ability to nuance the above argument in a 15 second soundbite"
They've had thirteen years.....
JuliaM: Let me get this straight. The problem facing government... is that voters aren't smart enough. And... just so I understand your criticism... government is involved how in education? If I remember correctly - and I do - government is ENTiRELY responsible for the education of those same voters! People aren't idiots by accident, that's the entire point.
The idea that we just need "smarter" voters, or voters who pay tax, or voters without vested interests, completely misses the point. Nobody can aim a gun and do good with it, stop giving people heroin for a pain and then pretending the cause of the pain is gone. Voting is a bad thing, violence is a bad thing, people being idiotic is a cause for concern about the nature of government, not the effect it might have on government.
Those poor people have been stripped of an education, had intelligence torn from it's natural state and been left in a state of idiotic servitude, and then there slightly more aware slave brothers come along and blame them for the problems! The problem is the violence, not the victim.
Ahh ... Mr Rob, they've had 13 years, but in those 13 years they've conceded the economic debate to the Gorgon's Brownshirts. They had been planning to go into this election out-social-democratting the Labour Party while maintaining the same ludicrous economic policies.
And that, my friends, tells you absolutely everything you need to know about the utter uselessness of the Great Cameron Project.
They've been caught on the hop on the one area that people count on the Tories for.
“Ahh ... Mr Rob, they've had 13 years, but in those 13 years they've conceded the economic debate to the Gorgon's Brownshirts.”
Please remember the context. For a long time everyone felt rich due to the increased monetisation of the economy. Brown steadily increased government borrowing/spending, that put more money in circulation. He attacked the incentives to save which put more money in circulation. He lowered the capital requirements for banks and regulated them as if he had abolished Boom & Bust, which put more money in circulation. In fact he made sure that everyone had loads of money providing they were happy to go into debt, which most of the electorate was more than happy to do so.
During a boom when everyone is rich, everyone feels generous enough to pay for extra services. I definitely recall the Tories banging away that improving public services and throwing money at them were not the same thing, they lost 3 general elections as a result. The public thought there was plenty of money to go around and if you ignore the debt half of the equation they were right.
Its not a question of conceding the debate, its a question of the public not giving a shit, and the news and entertainment media pandering to that myth of infinite money. Like the endless get rich quick through mismanaging property development programmes and the like.
The public decided to walk in hop step with the statist Labour party. Purists like you would have the Tories shouting from the rooftops a deeply unpopular view throughout the boom just to maintain their ideological creditability in the eyes of us libtards, and they would promptly have lost every seat, not just most of them.
Before you tell us that the public would have listened, take the time to go down to your local family pub at the weekend and look around, ask yourself if the people you see are really ready for being told everything the BBC has told them for 30 years is a complete misrepresentation, and that everything they think they know about the state is wrong. These people can’t understand libertarianism, because they have been getting their daily news delivered to them by arch statists all their lives.
Stop asking why the Tories do not preach libertarianism to you, but realise why they are softly-softly introducing it to the general public instead, have you read the manifesto?
Post a Comment