Are the Conservatives picking on Liverpool?

Discussion in 'Economics' started by morganist, Feb 21, 2011.

  1. Are the Conservatives picking on Liverpool?

    http://morganisteconomics.blogspot.com/2011/02/are-conservatives-picking-on-liverpool.html

    There has been quite a lot of news coverage recently about the spending cuts across England. In particular the way it has been broken down geographically or more importantly politically. It has been suggested that the Conservative led coalition government have been targeting labour councils for the bulk of the spending cuts.(link)

    It is estimated that the labour council areas are seeing a fifty percent higher number of job cuts than the Conservative councils. Although the figures might be true the government argues that the reason why the cuts are higher in the labour supporting regions is because they are more dependent on public services. This is a fair argument to make in terms of the requirements and the need for central government support in poorer areas, although it is lacking in the principal that the taxation generated by the government is taken to help the most vulnerable. After all this is the reason why people pay tax to provide public services and to make sure that social security is provided. I think that the Prime Minister has to remember that he is also a recipient of the income that taxation generates and that the same argument he is making against local councils could be made against him too. After all he is educated and able bodied and is or should be capable of making his own living, yet his income is generated from efforts of others, which he has decided he will entitle himself to.
    I guess the point I am making is that the only really justifiable reason for taking so much money from the private sector in taxes, which is about 48% of GDP, is that it is spent on people who cannot provide for themselves. As labour councils are where most of the relevant recipients reside surely that is where the money should be spent. I could understand the argument if the government did not continue to take such sums of money in taxes but by the looks of it the money has simply been spent in other areas, such as a personal photographer for the Prime Minister.(link)

    Yes there needs to be cuts but it has to be done systematically and in a way where whole regions do not collapse. I have personally made huge efforts to contact the government and the Prime Minister to offer suggestions which could cut as much as £8.4 billion per year in a way that would not impact on people’s lives. I have so far been ignored. I therefore do not think the government is making these decisions because they have to or because it is a last resort but because they have an agenda. I cannot figure out what they are trying to achieve with this agenda, which will in my opinion lead to up to 5 million people being unemployed and create a divided nation. I foresee an increase in rioting and general unrest if there is not an alternative suggestion to cut the deficit, which does not have such a regional divide. As the coalition is already in an unstable state I cannot understand why the Conservatives are trying to rock the boat on this issue.

    Regardless of the economic impact of the cuts and the social impact is not possible to ignore and this is where I think the Conservatives are being naive. There is no way people will put up with this level of divide without reacting violently so unless the Conservatives plan on a police state I doubt the cuts will work in the long term.