1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

What would you cut?

Discussion in 'Personal' started by lanokia, Mar 13, 2016.

  1. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    The Chancellor has promised more spending cuts ... 50p in every £100.

    So what'd you cut?

    Personally... scrap Ofsted and all the SLT bumf that goes towards feeding the Ofsted beast... £200 million a year saved.

    But that won't happen...

    Or do you think cuts aren't necessary?...
  2. grumpydogwoman

    grumpydogwoman Star commenter

    I have no idea but cutting OFSTED would be my first act as Chancellor regardless of the bank balance.
  3. emilystrange

    emilystrange Star commenter

    subsidies to MPs bars. Lords' attendance unless proved they'd actually done some work. cuts to what expenses can be claimed and limit the amount that can be claimed for some items.
  4. Didactylos4

    Didactylos4 Star commenter

    whatever I'd cut or you'd cut we already know where the axe will fall first
    Middlemarch likes this.
  5. Flere-Imsaho

    Flere-Imsaho Star commenter

    The House of Lords
    The Civil List
    The EU referendum
  6. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    Benefits? [which either mostly go to working people who pay taxes or old people who've paid into the system all their lives and are only receiving what they've earned]...

  7. Dragonlady30

    Dragonlady30 Star commenter

    However, Ofsted is my friend at present as. I am sure, inadvertently, it has done me an enormous favour and brought a person I know crashing to earth and off her self-created pedestal.

    Now that they have done this, they can be abolished!! :)
  8. Yoda-

    Yoda- Lead commenter

    6a00d8341d417153ef0192ab7fe382970d-800wi.jpg I would reverse the tax cut to the wealthy. Put the top rate of tax back up to 50%. Then you can cancel the new points system that targets the disabled. Shame on you George Osborne.
  9. Didactylos4

    Didactylos4 Star commenter

    "'It's the same the whole world over;
    It's the poor that gets the blame,
    It's the rich that get the pleasure.
    Ain't it all a bleeding shame"
    grumpydogwoman likes this.
  10. peakster

    peakster Star commenter

    Donald Trump's throat.
  11. Lascarina

    Lascarina Star commenter

    It's a total disgrace that £1bn is being taken away from disability benefits in order to cut tax for the higher paid.
  12. artboyusa

    artboyusa Star commenter

    As a committed social justice warrior I deplore your moderate position.
    lanokia and Dragonlady30 like this.
  13. Didactylos4

    Didactylos4 Star commenter

    I think possibly you are aiming too high :D
  14. NaughtyRudolph

    NaughtyRudolph New commenter

    Whilst I am in favour of helping the genuinely needy, I ask you this. My friend's husband has slogged his guts out since he was 18, working hard, training , working long hours and weekends to get to the top of his profession. He is comfortably off, but not rich , rich ,rich. He does not live in a huge posh house, he does not have an expensive car and he does not take his family away on expensive exotic holidays. He just falls into the higher tax bracket. Another friend's husband does not work. He has never made any effort to work, because he knows he can claim benefits. He is a lazy, idle wotsit. Why should husband number 1 give up half of his very hard earned cash to pay for husband no, 2? That is also not fair. What is the point of being a good, moral citizen , working hard all your life, trying to save for your retirement, only to have it taken away from you?
    sabrinakat and Dragonlady30 like this.
  15. Lascarina

    Lascarina Star commenter

    No one has to give up half of their income to finance benefits. This is complete exaggeration and nonsense. And most people on benefits are not 'lazy' idle wotsits', particularly not the disabled.
  16. Flere-Imsaho

    Flere-Imsaho Star commenter

    Then it'll only be a tiny part of his income he's paying the higher rate on.
    bonkers 704 and racroesus like this.
  17. HelenREMfan

    HelenREMfan Star commenter

    I would add that in this day and age he has been jolly lucky to have security and continuity of employment.
    I feel it is unfair to criticise someone who may well not have been given the chance to work in a reasonably paid job over the past few years. We older folk on here will probably be the last generation to remain in one job/area of employment.
    How easily we fall into the Tory and their ilk's penchant for pillorying the unemployed and disadvantaged. Do we all really believe that people really wish to remain unemployed, on benefits, often in poor housing, and majorly disadvantaged in most areas of their lives?
    I count my blessings because in many many ways I have been extremely fortunate.
  18. HelenREMfan

    HelenREMfan Star commenter

    Regarding what would I cut. Well ex prime minster's pensions for a start! It really bugs me what Tony Blair will be receiving. I would only have MPs paid based on their attendance record in the house and I would also prevent them employing members of their families in any role relating to their jobs. I would also tax at 75% any salary or payment they received from any other job/consultancy or whatever they wish to try and call it.
    I would create a national minimum wage for all whether employed or not and pay for it from higher salary earners. I would re nationalise railways , invest heavily in it and find ways to get as much freight off the roads as possible. Foreign trucks would also pay a surcharge for using Uk roads and so fund road repair and development. Scrap Trident but invest in an increase in armed forces, whilst examining upper pay scales in many spheres such as the services. civil service etc. and all those highly paid positions would find those salaries in excess of £100K severely cut. if those "essential we attract them" folk don't like it - then they can F*** off and go and find some other numpty willing to pay them those figures. (I include charity boss int that too!)
    Whistle blowing would be positively encouraged and bonuses paid where people employed in industry/services etc suggest cost saving, workable ideas.No one would receive a"bonus" that amounted to more than the living wage I proposed.
    I would encourage a huge increase in social house building programme focussing on "brown field' sites.
    I would not be seeing that the old and disabled suffer to fund the well off.
    monicabilongame likes this.
  19. magic surf bus

    magic surf bus Star commenter


    Around 75% of public spending goes on Social Protection, Social services, Health, Transport, Education and Defence.

    A closer look at 'Other' might be interesting.
  20. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    So that's £732 billion annually... which means my Ofsted proposal saves 0.027%... and the chancellor wants to save 0.5%... a tenth of his total. £3.4 billion more needed.

Share This Page