Government borrowing

Ig you imagine that vast sums of taxpayers money goes on that you really do need to get out more.

He did indeed derail an intelligent thread with his silly assertion that tax cuts are free and do not have to be funded by cuts elsewhere or increased borrowing to replace the lostrevenue.

I also note that he did it in direct response to my first post in this thread so I suspect the intention was to shut me personally down and prevent all the other valid points I made from being discussed. Rather than debate openly and  reasonably. It was an attempt to shut down the debate and my part in it rather than let it continue as an intelligent discussion which he feared would not go in his preferred political direction. That a mod has behaved in such a way is a disgrace. And you can see who his cheerleaders are and whose agenda he is serving by this derailment, by who is liking his efforts. Such intellectual giants as Jonksy no less, to name but one.

The reason the left use this bizarre distorted language -

If every mismatch between funding and spending is described as 'an unfunded absence of taxation', then all such mismatches are framed as a failure to tax heavily enough. It's psychology. That's why they go to such lengths to preserve the clumsy phrasing. Clearly Tax cuts don't need to be funded and reducing spending is not the same thing as funding.

You could have easily argued that taxing more has become an easy option or a mantra for some, without wasting pages of peoples time on word semantics. 

So here is the reason for your thread derailment, a politically motivated anti-left agenda, so no wonder it is aimed at me. Tax cuts do not come for free. Every sensible person knows this. Every tax cut is a reduction in revenue which has to be funded by a spending cut of a commensurate amount, otherwise it is unfunded other than simply by borrowing. The entire media understands this. You refuse to for dubious politically motivated reasons, a kind of politically motivated ignorance. Never before have I seen such a brazen campaign of thread derailment by an actual mod. 

Regardless of your distortions, any tax cuts need to be made affordable by commensurate spending cuts, otherwise they are unaffordable. Thus, in a very real de facto sense no matter how much you try and pretend otherwise, tax cuts do need to be funded by spending cuts or tax rises elsewhere, otherwise they are unfunded.

If in your world of fantasy economics tax cuts are entirely free and have no cost whatsoever, why not cut all taxes to zero? And surely even you know that that would be utterly unaffordable, thereby slaying the lie that they are free. Nothing is for free, not even tax cuts.

Now can you not just bore off and stop derailing the thread with this shit? Maybe next time the BBC or ITN talk about unfunded tax cuts - because they understand the concept even if your wilful ignorance makes you refuse to do so - you should write a stiffly worded letter of complaint to the powers that be and see how far you get with your rubbish. Instead of trying to silence me because you don't like my politics and refuse to debate reasonably.

How are parts of the community missing out on things others get when we we have reams of equality legislation and thousands of Equality and Diversity managers in every department in the Public Sector?.

the fact is that even you cannot point to a 'cost' if spending was reigned in on areas like that.