Economic mess

THE Conservatives are mismanaging the economy. Interest rates are low (0.5 per cent), inflation is low, there is a shortage of money in supply. The national debt is not caused by poor and needy people, but by those who are better off with their mortgages, credit cards and bank loans. Inflation is caused by the counterfeit money of the banks (cheques, credit cards and loans). Every time the Chancellor puts up the UK duty on cigarettes, alcohol and fuel, it causes inflation. Surely there is a case for the injection of more money to improve and increase the money supply. There is plenty for all. Cutting and abolishing pay to poor and needy people who are disabled does not help the economy. The sooner this mean, pound-pinching, recession-causing government is gone, the better the economy will be.

Stephen Toomer, Chepstow Road, Newport

Comments (9)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:14pm Thu 27 Mar 14

blackandamber says...

Well perhaps we should abolish the Labour party so they can't get their hands on the countries finances and bankrupt us ever again.
Well perhaps we should abolish the Labour party so they can't get their hands on the countries finances and bankrupt us ever again. blackandamber
  • Score: 8

6:14pm Thu 27 Mar 14

Bobevans says...

You clearly have a poor understanding of economics. Mortgages & credit cards are not government debt and their is no money supply shortage
You clearly have a poor understanding of economics. Mortgages & credit cards are not government debt and their is no money supply shortage Bobevans
  • Score: 4

10:12pm Thu 27 Mar 14

scraptheWAG says...

Bobevans wrote:
You clearly have a poor understanding of economics. Mortgages & credit cards are not government debt and their is no money supply shortage
your wasting your time most labour votes are poorly educated
[quote][p][bold]Bobevans[/bold] wrote: You clearly have a poor understanding of economics. Mortgages & credit cards are not government debt and their is no money supply shortage[/p][/quote]your wasting your time most labour votes are poorly educated scraptheWAG
  • Score: 4

1:15am Fri 28 Mar 14

Banjalucka says...

Letter a bit disjointed i'm afraid, and Labour would be as bad as Cons anyway
Letter a bit disjointed i'm afraid, and Labour would be as bad as Cons anyway Banjalucka
  • Score: 1

9:44am Fri 28 Mar 14

Mervyn James says...

Their pursuance of rtying to evict tenants to give bigger family rooms was exposed as just another scam to get the poor to pay even more. On;y 6% of all tenants with extra rooms moved. Leaving the rest to pay extra taxes which was the point of the Tory policy, to squeeze the disabled the elderly and the poor. Disabled forced to move out cost the LA millions, because they had to re-adapt smaller buildings to make them viable or disabled could not move without intense suffering with unadapted housing. Then, they had to REMOVE adaptations from previous premises, so that able-bodied could utilize the extra bedrooms, it was a complete con and an attack on the most vulnerable people in our society, that some rabid daily wail readers here called chavs, and frauds, adding personal insult and assault to injury.
Their pursuance of rtying to evict tenants to give bigger family rooms was exposed as just another scam to get the poor to pay even more. On;y 6% of all tenants with extra rooms moved. Leaving the rest to pay extra taxes which was the point of the Tory policy, to squeeze the disabled the elderly and the poor. Disabled forced to move out cost the LA millions, because they had to re-adapt smaller buildings to make them viable or disabled could not move without intense suffering with unadapted housing. Then, they had to REMOVE adaptations from previous premises, so that able-bodied could utilize the extra bedrooms, it was a complete con and an attack on the most vulnerable people in our society, that some rabid daily wail readers here called chavs, and frauds, adding personal insult and assault to injury. Mervyn James
  • Score: -2

2:38pm Fri 28 Mar 14

Stevenboy says...

Mervyn James wrote:
Their pursuance of rtying to evict tenants to give bigger family rooms was exposed as just another scam to get the poor to pay even more. On;y 6% of all tenants with extra rooms moved. Leaving the rest to pay extra taxes which was the point of the Tory policy, to squeeze the disabled the elderly and the poor. Disabled forced to move out cost the LA millions, because they had to re-adapt smaller buildings to make them viable or disabled could not move without intense suffering with unadapted housing. Then, they had to REMOVE adaptations from previous premises, so that able-bodied could utilize the extra bedrooms, it was a complete con and an attack on the most vulnerable people in our society, that some rabid daily wail readers here called chavs, and frauds, adding personal insult and assault to injury.
I assumed a 'scam' was something where someone profited from an illegal activity. And they aren't paying a tax, they are receiving a smaller benefit. And the elderly are exempt. Apart from that, full of facts as per usual. 6% in a year isn't bad if you're a family living in cramped accommodation and who now have a suitable house, especially as a lot of Labour councils and the Scottish government are doing their level best to thwart the objective.
[quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Their pursuance of rtying to evict tenants to give bigger family rooms was exposed as just another scam to get the poor to pay even more. On;y 6% of all tenants with extra rooms moved. Leaving the rest to pay extra taxes which was the point of the Tory policy, to squeeze the disabled the elderly and the poor. Disabled forced to move out cost the LA millions, because they had to re-adapt smaller buildings to make them viable or disabled could not move without intense suffering with unadapted housing. Then, they had to REMOVE adaptations from previous premises, so that able-bodied could utilize the extra bedrooms, it was a complete con and an attack on the most vulnerable people in our society, that some rabid daily wail readers here called chavs, and frauds, adding personal insult and assault to injury.[/p][/quote]I assumed a 'scam' was something where someone profited from an illegal activity. And they aren't paying a tax, they are receiving a smaller benefit. And the elderly are exempt. Apart from that, full of facts as per usual. 6% in a year isn't bad if you're a family living in cramped accommodation and who now have a suitable house, especially as a lot of Labour councils and the Scottish government are doing their level best to thwart the objective. Stevenboy
  • Score: 4

3:52pm Wed 2 Apr 14

Good Job No Kids says...

Mervyn James wrote:
Their pursuance of rtying to evict tenants to give bigger family rooms was exposed as just another scam to get the poor to pay even more. On;y 6% of all tenants with extra rooms moved. Leaving the rest to pay extra taxes which was the point of the Tory policy, to squeeze the disabled the elderly and the poor. Disabled forced to move out cost the LA millions, because they had to re-adapt smaller buildings to make them viable or disabled could not move without intense suffering with unadapted housing. Then, they had to REMOVE adaptations from previous premises, so that able-bodied could utilize the extra bedrooms, it was a complete con and an attack on the most vulnerable people in our society, that some rabid daily wail readers here called chavs, and frauds, adding personal insult and assault to injury.
If labour had built the required number of homes during the 13 year tenure, then tenants under occupying homes may have had smaller ones available to move into.

I'm not advocating that the policy is perfect in every way, but there is a need to restructure, a subsidised house should suit the needs of the occupier, it is not a house for life with that bloody whinger from Cwmbran being a prime example.

Whilst your rose tints appear to have filtered out the actual purpose of this policy, to which many families have benefited I'm sure you would rather just have a pop at the Tories than let facts get in the way, but then this has generally been labour for policy for some time.
[quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Their pursuance of rtying to evict tenants to give bigger family rooms was exposed as just another scam to get the poor to pay even more. On;y 6% of all tenants with extra rooms moved. Leaving the rest to pay extra taxes which was the point of the Tory policy, to squeeze the disabled the elderly and the poor. Disabled forced to move out cost the LA millions, because they had to re-adapt smaller buildings to make them viable or disabled could not move without intense suffering with unadapted housing. Then, they had to REMOVE adaptations from previous premises, so that able-bodied could utilize the extra bedrooms, it was a complete con and an attack on the most vulnerable people in our society, that some rabid daily wail readers here called chavs, and frauds, adding personal insult and assault to injury.[/p][/quote]If labour had built the required number of homes during the 13 year tenure, then tenants under occupying homes may have had smaller ones available to move into. I'm not advocating that the policy is perfect in every way, but there is a need to restructure, a subsidised house should suit the needs of the occupier, it is not a house for life with that bloody whinger from Cwmbran being a prime example. Whilst your rose tints appear to have filtered out the actual purpose of this policy, to which many families have benefited I'm sure you would rather just have a pop at the Tories than let facts get in the way, but then this has generally been labour for policy for some time. Good Job No Kids
  • Score: 0

3:56pm Wed 2 Apr 14

Good Job No Kids says...

"The sooner this mean, pound-pinching, recession-causing government is gone, the better the economy will be"

Recession causing? Think you'll find that horse had bolted sometime before the coalition got into power.

Please crawl back under your rock and leave the serious subjects to the educated adults. The above comment is just to highlight your ignorance, arrogance and general misunderstanding of the whole topic.
"The sooner this mean, pound-pinching, recession-causing government is gone, the better the economy will be" Recession causing? Think you'll find that horse had bolted sometime before the coalition got into power. Please crawl back under your rock and leave the serious subjects to the educated adults. The above comment is just to highlight your ignorance, arrogance and general misunderstanding of the whole topic. Good Job No Kids
  • Score: 0

9:56am Thu 3 Apr 14

Bobevans says...

Stevenboy wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
Their pursuance of rtying to evict tenants to give bigger family rooms was exposed as just another scam to get the poor to pay even more. On;y 6% of all tenants with extra rooms moved. Leaving the rest to pay extra taxes which was the point of the Tory policy, to squeeze the disabled the elderly and the poor. Disabled forced to move out cost the LA millions, because they had to re-adapt smaller buildings to make them viable or disabled could not move without intense suffering with unadapted housing. Then, they had to REMOVE adaptations from previous premises, so that able-bodied could utilize the extra bedrooms, it was a complete con and an attack on the most vulnerable people in our society, that some rabid daily wail readers here called chavs, and frauds, adding personal insult and assault to injury.
I assumed a 'scam' was something where someone profited from an illegal activity. And they aren't paying a tax, they are receiving a smaller benefit. And the elderly are exempt. Apart from that, full of facts as per usual. 6% in a year isn't bad if you're a family living in cramped accommodation and who now have a suitable house, especially as a lot of Labour councils and the Scottish government are doing their level best to thwart the objective.
The extra rent they pay is also being used to fund more social homes
[quote][p][bold]Stevenboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Their pursuance of rtying to evict tenants to give bigger family rooms was exposed as just another scam to get the poor to pay even more. On;y 6% of all tenants with extra rooms moved. Leaving the rest to pay extra taxes which was the point of the Tory policy, to squeeze the disabled the elderly and the poor. Disabled forced to move out cost the LA millions, because they had to re-adapt smaller buildings to make them viable or disabled could not move without intense suffering with unadapted housing. Then, they had to REMOVE adaptations from previous premises, so that able-bodied could utilize the extra bedrooms, it was a complete con and an attack on the most vulnerable people in our society, that some rabid daily wail readers here called chavs, and frauds, adding personal insult and assault to injury.[/p][/quote]I assumed a 'scam' was something where someone profited from an illegal activity. And they aren't paying a tax, they are receiving a smaller benefit. And the elderly are exempt. Apart from that, full of facts as per usual. 6% in a year isn't bad if you're a family living in cramped accommodation and who now have a suitable house, especially as a lot of Labour councils and the Scottish government are doing their level best to thwart the objective.[/p][/quote]The extra rent they pay is also being used to fund more social homes Bobevans
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree