The Prime Minister says that he wants to involve the public in deciding what should be cut to start reducing national debt. Personally I want to scream when they say they will ring fence the NHS and education. Why? I've worked in both and there's clearly lots of waster.
Anytime government does anything there is waste. What is their incentive to eliminate it? The government isn't concerned with controlling costs or maximizing profits, they measure success by how much they grow their budgets!
Britain, like Greece, the rest of Europe and the USA need to cut everything, particularly entitlement programs.
I think the first thing to cut would be the civil service. I have friends who work for the department of work and pensions (is that the name? can't remember!) anyway, their response to the current situation is yes, its bad, we are freezing what we offer jobseekers to save money, oh and our contractors will have to stop work at the end of their contract. Er yes, but what about permanent staff? Any cuts there? No. We'll just keep the same staff and find them other things to do. Ok thats probably a bit harsh, but it wouldn't be a bad place to start looking. I work for a council and we are already down to bare minimum - literally, so any cuts mean jobs-therefore services go. I don't know what the answer is, but I do know given half a chance I would remove the power of government to run/interfere/set targets for nhs or education. They should fund them, but they should be run independantly by people who know the business and can plan long term and without political agenda.
Sorry! What a rant! Didn't know I had it in me...lol
For some reason foreign aid has also been ring fenced. While it is good for prosperous countries to aid poorer countries, I don't see why the UK should keep on pumping out billions in foreign aid when our own economic situation is so parlous. Surely we need to cut this down a bit and get our own house in order and pay off our own debts. Then when we are economically heading in the right direction again, we can start upping the amount of foreign aid.
by Ralph Deeds3 years ago
Paul Krugman:" Back in 2010, self-styled deficit hawks — better described as deficit scolds — took over much of our political discourse. At a time of mass unemployment and record-low borrowing costs, a...
by Ralph Deeds3 years ago
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/31/opini … ef=opinionSocial Security, Present and FutureBy THE EDITORIAL BOARDPublished: March 30, 2013 6 Comments"In the fight over the federal budget deficit, Social Security...
by leeberttea6 years ago
How's that hope-y change-y thing working out for ya?3% growth is better than what we've had the past 2 years but will we actually be able to achieve it once the new taxes kick in? What about the debt crisis in Europe?...
by David4 years ago
I just discovered this report about the long term effects of some tax cuts almost ten years ago. Apparently these economists stated that by 2012 the deficit would be around 1 trillion dollars, not a bad job...
by Barbara Kay Badder5 years ago
I'm curious what everyone thinks of the cuts planned to lower the deficit. In my opinion they are aiming them all at the elderly and poor. What does everyone else think?
by Susan Reid5 years ago
Note: I only inserted (Stupid) in there to try to get a rise out of some folks. I will be the first to admit, I am no LaLo in this regard .So Obama delivered his speech. He chastised the right for wanting to balance the...
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.