[rachie22]

Quite simple this one..how do you suggest we recover the UK Govt Deficit of £178bn?

[thunder_chunky]

(Original post by rachie22)
Quite simple this one..how do you suggest we recover the UK Govt Deficit of £178bn?

I suggest we wall off Scotland and sell it to North Korea.

[toronto353]

(Original post by thunder_chunky)
I suggest we wall off Scotland and sell it to North Korea.

We'd suggest doing the same with Wales, but it would bug Adorno slightly.

[rachie22]

So are you suggesting Scotland become independent then? Are you suggesting that it would be better for the British economy if Scotland were no longer a part of it?

[thunder_chunky]

(Original post by toronto353)
We'd suggest doing the same with Wales, but it would bug Adorno slightly.

Heavens forbid..

[thunder_chunky]

(Original post by rachie22)
So are you suggesting Scotland become independent then? Are you suggesting that it would be better for the British economy if Scotland were no longer a part of it?

Selling off Scotland would certainly lower our statistics for obesity

[rachie22]

(Original post by thunder_chunky)
Selling off Scotland would certainly lower our statistics for obesity

haha! I don't know how it would affect our economy, but Scotland's would certainly fail without us. they have no strong industry, they have a bit of farming, a bit of fishing, but the fishing industry has declined so much over the past few years. and even the whiskey industry is starting to decline.

in terms of recovering the deficit, one strategy would be to encourage people to do more sport, because then you would have less obese, inactive people (they are a burden on the economy and a burden on the health system because of the unnecessary treatment they need, which they wouldn't be having if they were more active).

another one is to make sure rich people don't avoid paying their tax, everyone else pays it, so why shouldn't they? its disloyal to the country that they don't!

furthermore, less money should be spent on war, and better spent else where.

[thunder_chunky]

(Original post by rachie22)

furthermore, less money should be spent on war, and better spent else where.

Someone wrote a letter into a newspaper the other day saying that. They used Germany as an example, saying that in the last couple of decades (or even in the last half century) less money has been spent on the armed forces in Germany (partly because they have been not been involved in as many conflicts I suppose) which has freed up more money for other things. Which is why their economy is supposedly still got some umph.

[JPKC]

(Original post by thunder_chunky)
I suggest we wall off Scotland and sell it to North Korea.

The funny thing is they'd probably buy it.

[rachie22]

(Original post by thunder_chunky)
Someone wrote a letter into a newspaper the other day saying that. They used Germany as an example, saying that in the last couple of decades (or even in the last half century) less money has been spent on the armed forces in Germany (partly because they have been not been involved in as many conflicts I suppose) which has freed up more money for other things. Which is why their economy is supposedly still got some umph.

exactly! also not getting involved in wars improves our international relationships with other countries. it is sometimes best to be a pacifist. wars are expensive both financially and in terms of the number of lives lost, area of land destroyed. Gemany has a strong economy compared to other countries and the fact that they have participated in less wars is probably a contributing factor. and what gives us the right to go to another country and go and impose our morals and our values (westernisation) upon them, we should just leave them to get on with their traditional ways of going about things. and focus our concerns on our own country and work on improving it.

[rachie22]

(Original post by JPKC)
The funny thing is they'd probably buy it.

Why would N.Korea want to buy Scotland?

[callum9999]

(Original post by thunder_chunky)
Someone wrote a letter into a newspaper the other day saying that. They used Germany as an example, saying that in the last couple of decades (or even in the last half century) less money has been spent on the armed forces in Germany (partly because they have been not been involved in as many conflicts I suppose) which has freed up more money for other things. Which is why their economy is supposedly still got some umph.

I'd imagine it's more down to a strong military still being highly taboo in Germany, being the country responsible for both World Wars would do that I guess!

[callum9999]

(Original post by rachie22)
exactly! also not getting involved in wars improves our international relationships with other countries. it is sometimes best to be a pacifist. wars are expensive both financially and in terms of the number of lives lost, area of land destroyed. Gemany has a strong economy compared to other countries and the fact that they have participated in less wars is probably a contributing factor. and what gives us the right to go to another country and go and impose our morals and our values (westernisation) upon them, we should just leave them to get on with their traditional ways of going about things. and focus our concerns on our own country and work on improving it.

Many people would conversely argue that war stimulates the economy though. I think Germany "not participating in as many wars" is a non-issue here - they were (and maybe still are?) involved in Afghanistan for example.

I can't think of a war we've been in recently where we've gone to impose Western values on people against their will? Believe it or not, most Iraqis and Afghans aren't major fans of the "traditional" human rights abuses and large swathes of them have had to suffer - particularly women, for daring to do things like give girls an education (the Taliban have been known to execute teachers in front of their class for such reprehensible behaviour).

(Though this sounds rather pro-war - I'm not, just putting across the other side!).

[rachie22]

(Original post by callum9999)
Many people would conversely argue that war stimulates the economy though. I think Germany "not participating in as many wars" is a non-issue here - they were (and maybe still are?) involved in Afghanistan for example.

I can't think of a war we've been in recently where we've gone to impose Western values on people against their will? Believe it or not, most Iraqis and Afghans aren't major fans of the "traditional" human rights abuses and large swathes of them have had to suffer - particularly women, for daring to do things like give girls an education (the Taliban have been known to execute teachers in front of their class for such reprehensible behaviour).

(Though this sounds rather pro-war - I'm not, just putting across the other side!).

I think I remember discussing the matter of imposing western morals on another country in Ethics class. I'm glad you're putting across the other side, after all this is a debate, and it is important that both sides of the argument are raised. I suppose you could say yes, it is wrong and we shouldn't do it because who are we to go about changing traditions just because we believe the more developed a society the better the quality of life.

but then as you pointed out when it comes to the abusing of human rights, you would have to consider how much pleasure/pain is being experienced, and in the case of women's rights and women suffering, it is evident that under the current laws and morals of society in the country, such as Afghanistan, it isn't fair to allow the pain being experienced by the women to continue, seeing as they are fighting for equality in their respective society, therefore one could argue that it is our moral duty to intervene and try to sort it out to make people's lives of a better quality, after all one of the good traits of humanity is love for others than ourselves. and by intervening we will work towards achieving sunnum bonum, the greater good (Kantian ethics).

[chefdave]

Slash the foreign aid budget to £0, that would save £9bn immediately.

[Sdiff]

178 billion? no, Labour aren't in power anymore and hence the deficit is lower. Forecast to be 90 billion his year.

[rachie22]

(Original post by chefdave)
Slash the foreign aid budget to £0, that would save £9bn immediately.

what are your reasons for 'slashing' the foreign aid?

in doing so that would be 0.05% recovered. what now?

[rachie22]

(Original post by Sdiff)
178 billion? no, Labour aren't in power anymore and hence the deficit is lower. Forecast to be 90 billion his year.

so i've just been told well that's a huge improvement, seeing as I am new to politics, could you possibly tell me how did the govt cut 88bn? thanks

[chefdave]

(Original post by rachie22)
what are your reasons for 'slashing' the foreign aid?

in doing so that would be 0.05% recovered. what now?

Actually it's 5%, and I'd slash it because it represents very poor value for money from the taxpayers' point of view.

[chefdave]

(Original post by rachie22)
what are your reasons for 'slashing' the foreign aid?

in doing so that would be 0.05% recovered. what now?

I'd save another £10bn by leaving the EU.