Jump to content

Goverment Savings


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 386
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

A bit of unpaid overtime then?

 

That would be a nice gesture from the bus drivers, it all helps.

 

The rest of the Public Sector might be shamed into following suit, if the Bus Drivers made that sacrifice for the good of the Nation.

 

 

What an unispired response! stop and look at the 100 plus CV's who are on salaries of in excess of 120k per year for a minute jurisdiction such as ours!

Edited by mannin1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I give up trying to reason with you, I think it all boils down to the fact that you are jealous of people making more money than you. My post about the overtime was in jest, you seem to let your socialist ideals get in the way of a light hearted debate.

 

At the end of the day what is said on here is not going to make a toss of difference to what happens in the real world, chill out man, Sit Down, Drink Tea and Be Cool!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I give up trying to reason with you, I think it all boils down to the fact that you are jealous of people making more money than you. My post about the overtime was in jest, you seem to let your socialist ideals get in the way of a light hearted debate.

 

At the end of the day what is said on here is not going to make a toss of difference to what happens in the real world, chill out man, Sit Down, Drink Tea and Be Cool!

 

 

Just give up altogether BR, money and earnings are relative only to personal needs and expectations and certainly not by your obvious Gov't biased mantra.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If only the government had demonstrated the foresight to squirrel a load of money away in the bank during the times of plenty, so that when the leaner times came along they didn't immediately have to slash and burn the entire nation to survive!

 

Oh I remember now, that's exactly what they did do.

 

LOL.

 

Relative to population, the IOM has amongst the healthiest cash reserves in the world, our economy functions in surplus, there is no structural debt, and yet according to the economic sages on here, what we should actually be doing is setting out to systematically destroy an entire generation as they are in Ireland at the moment.

 

 

A bit of unpaid overtime then?

 

Your comment has no relevance whatsoever.

 

My point is that the IOM Government, unlike pretty much every other government in the Western world, has avoided debt, has invested positively into societal infrastructure, has built up cash reserves to help through a global downturn, can still provide all essential services, and doesn't need to borrow a single penny off anyone, and yet still has the good sense to look to a long-term (i.e. 10 year plus) programme of reducing costs and liabilities without going down the route of mass redundancies, along with the impoverishment and plunging into usury of its entire population.

 

If you want to see how ugly things can get, and how quickly, look at how Ireland is faring at the moment, (you do know how to read newspapers, yes?), and watch the UK go the same way.

 

The IOM Government is not beyond reproach, but as we see major economies such as Iceland and Greece go genuinely bust, with Ireland, Portugal and Spain not far behind, and all the terrible consequences that carries for those countries' societies and social cohesion (because the poor and the vulnerable never do well at such times) - I don't believe it's out of place to suggest that here on the IOM, things have been prepared for and handled pretty well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We've had a surplus historically because the UK was duped into giving us a nine figure subsidy every year, but they've tumbled to it now. These clowns will have spent it all by the next Tynwald but one.

 

So is the IOM Government really good or really shit then?

 

Apparently it was good enough to 'dupe' the UK into giving us a 'nine figure subsidy' every year, but now it's shit enough to not have a blind clue what to have done with any of that cash, or indeed how to have achieved that state of affairs in the first place?

 

Is there any point at which Danny Doom and his Friends Of The Apocalypse might be prepared to admit that, all things considered, the IOM hasn't done too bad when it comes to weathering a global recession that's bordering on a serious depression?

 

The USA and UK have only escaped (for now) by printing shitloads of money, China's only survived by deliberately undermining its own currency on the global markets, India and suchlike only survive because they enslave 80%+ of their population (see also, China), Greece and Iceland have already gone pop, Ireland, Spain and Portugal might not be far behind, and as unthinkable as it may seem, Italy could go bang too.

 

So remind me again, who's really fucked it all up on the Isle of Man?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no doubt that the bankers who funded growth with spurious funding vehicles and risky lending, the general public who over-borrowed and governments who failed to properly control their economies because they were receiving huge boosts to income from construction, property inflation and oil price inflation all contributed to the present problems. But when it comes to the IOM are things that economically good? On the one hand we have comments that our books balance and on the other hand there have been estimates that revenues will fall by upwards of 20% or predictions of GBP100-200 million reduction in revenues of about GBP500 million. If even the reduction in revenue is at the lower end of the range this is dramatic stuff. Or are things actually OK and we can just manage on reserves? IMO that is a very short term strategy - maybe one that will get past an election but not much further.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If only the government had demonstrated the foresight to squirrel a load of money away in the bank during the times of plenty, so that when the leaner times came along they didn't immediately have to slash and burn the entire nation to survive!

 

Oh I remember now, that's exactly what they did do.

 

LOL.

 

Relative to population, the IOM has amongst the healthiest cash reserves in the world, our economy functions in surplus, there is no structural debt, and yet according to the economic sages on here, what we should actually be doing is setting out to systematically destroy an entire generation as they are in Ireland at the moment.

 

If by that you refer to the Manx gross debt and refer to the financial health of the Island on a per capita basis then the picture you’re painting doesn’t show the view that should be seen.

 

To begin with just how much does the Island have in its coffers? Secondly just how much our balance of trade and what direction is that taking?

 

As for investing in social infrastructure such investment in many if not most cases isn’t investment, it’s gross waste on overpriced projects that in far too many cases are simply a load of unnecessary or worse useless junk.

 

Take IRIS to start with.

 

On the whole we Manx are not stupid. Lazy perhapse, honest mostly and expect others to be, but stupid no.

 

Don’t try sleight of hand by presenting a story that says “we’re nowhere near as bad as others” and expect that to be read as “we’re OK because we’ve had good government. We haven’t, and we’re actually in deeper trouble than the UK for the simple reason that the UK can sell bonds on the basis of its perceived ability to service those bonds.

 

We can’t.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no doubt that the bankers who funded growth with spurious funding vehicles and risky lending, the general public who over-borrowed and governments who failed to properly control their economies because they were receiving huge boosts to income from construction, property inflation and oil price inflation all contributed to the present problems. But when it comes to the IOM are things that economically good? On the one hand we have comments that our books balance and on the other hand there have been estimates that revenues will fall by upwards of 20% or predictions of GBP100-200 million reduction in revenues of about GBP500 million. If even the reduction in revenue is at the lower end of the range this is dramatic stuff. Or are things actually OK and we can just manage on reserves? IMO that is a very short term strategy - maybe one that will get past an election but not much further.

 

Exactly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But when it comes to the IOM are things that economically good? On the one hand we have comments that our books balance and on the other hand there have been estimates that revenues will fall by upwards of 20% or predictions of GBP100-200 million reduction in revenues of about GBP500 million. If even the reduction in revenue is at the lower end of the range this is dramatic stuff. Or are things actually OK and we can just manage on reserves? IMO that is a very short term strategy - maybe one that will get past an election but not much further.

 

And that to my mind is the current strategy from our trough feeders, pretend that thing aren't really as bad, get elected again - allowing access for another few years of trough feeding then 'reluctantly step aside for the new generation' who will have to clear the mess up.

In the meantime other external forces may well also come into play.

I'll wager a decision on them actually contributing to their own pensions is delayed as long as they can as well. Loot the piggy bank as long as possible then walk away with a nice pocketful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no doubt that the bankers who funded growth with spurious funding vehicles and risky lending, the general public who over-borrowed and governments who failed to properly control their economies because they were receiving huge boosts to income from construction, property inflation and oil price inflation all contributed to the present problems. But when it comes to the IOM are things that economically good? On the one hand we have comments that our books balance and on the other hand there have been estimates that revenues will fall by upwards of 20% or predictions of GBP100-200 million reduction in revenues of about GBP500 million. If even the reduction in revenue is at the lower end of the range this is dramatic stuff. Or are things actually OK and we can just manage on reserves? IMO that is a very short term strategy - maybe one that will get past an election but not much further.

 

Exactly.

Dead right! I think the really unpopular cuts will be held off until after the election.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My point is that the IOM Government, unlike pretty much every other government in the Western world, has avoided debt, has invested positively into societal infrastructure, has built up cash reserves to help through a global downturn, can still provide all essential services, and doesn't need to borrow a single penny off anyone, and yet still has the good sense to look to a long-term (i.e. 10 year plus) programme of reducing costs and liabilities without going down the route of mass redundancies, along with the impoverishment and plunging into usury of its entire population.

 

Bollocks. The IOMG has amortised all its recent capital spending over at least the next tax paying generation through all the build and lease back deals its done on most of its big capital projects. It might have a surplus BUT only because various banks have bought tens of millions of pounds of assets off us and leased them back to the government over the next 25 years or more.

 

The incinerator alone was forty five million spent then sold and leased back over 25 years with interest and most other capital projects have been funded in the same way. We've actually converted capital spent into debt which will come out of general revenue for at least another generation or more. That and the unfunded pension bill of one billion pounds that we'll be paying forever. This alone is many many times the current 'surplus'.

 

The fact is that we are like anyone in debt now; struggling to keep up the payments when our income is taking a massive battering. What we actually have in the bank for a rainy day is irrelevant really.

Edited by oldmanxfella
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bollocks. The IOMG has amortised all its recent capital spending over at least the next tax paying generation through all the build and lease back deals its done on most of its big capital projects. It might have a surplus BUT only because various banks have bought tens of millions of pounds of assets off us and leased them back to the government over the next 25 years or more.

 

The incinerator alone was forty five million spent then sold and leased back over 25 years with interest and most other capital projects have been funded in the same way. We've actually converted capital spent into debt which will come out of general revenue for at least another generation or more. That and the unfunded pension bill of one billion pounds that we'll be paying forever. This alone is many many times the current 'surplus'.

 

The fact is that we are like anyone in debt now; struggling to keep up the payments when our income is taking a massive battering. What we actually have in the bank for a rainy day is irrelevant really.

 

Where did you get that info from? Sounds similar to PFI in the UK and is not good if it is true?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...