Winter fuel payment

[david63]

In Government terms - what is growth?

Let's be realistic in that there is only so much money in the country and the question is how to distribute that money - does it go to the individual? Does it go to business? Does it go to the Government?

Yes the Government of the day can increase the amount of money that is available by "fudging" the figures but there is no more real money. The country can increase the amount of money it has by exporting more goods than it imports, but that is then at the expense of some other country being less well off. The point then comes down to there only being so much money in the world - and so the merry go round goes round. If all countries in world had a zero balance of trade deficit then no country would be better off.

The country would be better off if the Government of the day concentrated on reducing, or better still eliminating, the national debt as it would then have the £billions paid in interest to invest in the country, but what is happening is the opposite - borrow more. At some point, probably not in my lifetime, that debt will need repaying.

There is no easy answer to this as we (being the Government on our behalf) have to keep spending on NHS, defence and the other 101 other things needed to keep the country running and effectively no Government has any money without taking it (it's called taxation) from the general population.

[towny44]

You keep living in your fantasy land Onelife, no post war govt has been able to sustain growth, so why not stop trying and try to reduce the demand on govt services instead.

[Onelife]

You keep living in your fantasy land Onelife, no post war govt has been able to sustain growth, so why not stop trying and try to reduce the demand on govt services instead.

I always know when you are losing the argument as you always resort to defamatory remarks as a way of trying to divert opinion to that of your opinion…

But to answer your question…by all means make the administration of services more efficient, but to my knowledge, no post war Government has been able to do this without placing the bigger burden on the less well off, which, correct me if I am wrong, is what you are suggesting.

[towny44]

You keep living in your fantasy land Onelife, no post war govt has been able to sustain growth, so why not stop trying and try to reduce the demand on govt services instead.

I always know when you are losing the argument as you always resort to defamatory remarks as a way of trying to divert opinion to that of your opinion…

But to answer your question…by all means make the administration of services more efficient, but to my knowledge, no post war Government has been able to do this without placing the bigger burden on the less well off, which, correct me if I am wrong, is what you are suggesting.

I don't think my comments are in any way defamatory, and I am not advocating any reduction in the services provided by govt, unlike Rachel who is aiming to reduce the benefit payments. My aim is to put in place policies aimed at discouraging immigration, and encouraging emigration instead.