Most uncaring government ever?

[hibby rae]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-welfare-bill-a-government-of-millionaires-just-made-the-poor-poorer--and-laughed-as-they-did-it-8443619.html

Thatcher may not have cared about the working class but I don't think even she openly mocked the people she was screwing. Utter ****.

[Judas Iscariot]

People only have themselves to blame by voting this shower of ****s into power

[hibsbollah]

Unfortunately, bashing the (largely imaginary) shirker class is probably going to be popular with a lot of voters that see themselves in the 'striver' class. A lot of the popular press have been drip feeding stories of welfare scrounging feckless families for years, and some of the mud will stick.

Classic divide and rule.

Meanwhile, prepare to see more normal families using food banks, turning off the heating to save money and no new jobs on the horizon as food prices and fuel bills go up 5-10% over the next 12 months while benefits are cut in real terms. Grim times for the unemployed.

[Beefster]

Anyone who takes Owen Jones seriously already hates the Government. I presume raising the income tax personal allowance and not cutting the NHS budget were uncaring too?

I think this government is pretty useless (not that I think Labour would be any better) but leave the hyperbole about "the most this and that" to the real politicians.

[hibby rae]

Unfortunately, bashing the (largely imaginary) shirker class is probably going to be popular with a lot of voters that see themselves in the 'striver' class. A lot of the popular press have been drip feeding stories of welfare scrounging feckless families for years, and some of the mud will stick.

Classic divide and rule.

Meanwhile, prepare to see more normal families using food banks, turning off the heating to save money and no new jobs on the horizon as food prices and fuel bills go up 5-10% over the next 12 months while benefits are cut in real terms. Grim times for the unemployed.


Completely agree with you.


“If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.”

― Malcolm X

[yeezus.]

I don't know what is worse to watch: the coalition's deficit reduction plan or the Labour oppositions silence on their plan for Government.

The Tories have won the argument on the deficit - and Ed Miliband is falling into the same trap that Brown did before him by trying to "out-right" the Tories on welfare and talking about the "squeezed middle". I find the whole House of Commons nauseating at the moment.

[degenerated]

I don't know what is worse to watch: the coalition's deficit reduction plan or the Labour oppositions silence on their plan for Government.

The Tories have won the argument on the deficit - and Ed Miliband is falling into the same trap that Brown did before him by trying to "out-right" the Tories on welfare and talking about the "squeezed middle". I find the whole House of Commons nauseating at the moment.

"At the moment"?
The only person that's set foot in that place with good intentions was Guy Fawkes :greengrin

[marinello59]

I seem them more as highly incompetent rather than uncaring. It's a pity we don't have an opposition that cares enough to properly hold them to account.

[Gatecrasher]

I have had a 2% pay rise in the last 5 years and BAM! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20978487 :rolleyes:

[McHibby]

I don't know what is worse to watch: the coalition's deficit reduction plan or the Labour oppositions silence on their plan for Government.

The Tories have won the argument on the deficit - and Ed Miliband is falling into the same trap that Brown did before him by trying to "out-right" the Tories on welfare and talking about the "squeezed middle". I find the whole House of Commons nauseating at the moment.

Exactly! A strong opposition could be tearing this Government to shreds. There is just nothing coming from Labour; either about what's happening right now, or what alternatives they have to offer in a future government. I actually don't think either side have much of a clue about how to deal with this economic issue. Admittedly I don't know the numbers involved, but I would hardly imagine slicing tiny percentages off benefits is going to make any noticeable dent in the debt. But it will contribute to making people in this country poorer.

[McHibby]

Anyone who takes Owen Jones seriously already hates the Government. I presume raising the income tax personal allowance and not cutting the NHS budget were uncaring too?

I think this government is pretty useless (not that I think Labour would be any better) but leave the hyperbole about "the most this and that" to the real politicians.

Although he puts it in a more dramatic fashion than was necessary, two MP's involved in the debate did chastise the front bench at different times for laughing. It's a pretty poor show when you can't even pretend ​to care that the legislation you are about to pass could have a very negative impact on the poorest in society.

[yeezus.]

Exactly! A strong opposition could be tearing this Government to shreds. There is just nothing coming from Labour; either about what's happening right now, or what alternatives they have to offer in a future government. I actually don't think either side have much of a clue about how to deal with this economic issue. Admittedly I don't know the numbers involved, but I would hardly imagine slicing tiny percentages off benefits is going to make any noticeable dent in the debt. But it will contribute to making people in this country poorer.

:agree: there is a real opportunity for Labour but Balls and Miliband are too interested in pleasing the right wing press. If Labour came out tomorrow and made the case for deficit reduction through spending cuts and tax rises OR came out and said they would go a completely different direction from the coalition (i.e No cuts at all) I would have more respect for them. Right now, they are trying to have it both ways.

And I agree that if people have less spending power, the economy will suffer - something the coalition should think about.

[Beefster]

:agree: there is a real opportunity for Labour but Balls and Miliband are too interested in pleasing the right wing press. If Labour came out tomorrow and made the case for deficit reduction through spending cuts and tax rises OR came out and said they would go a completely different direction from the coalition (i.e No cuts at all) I would have more respect for them. Right now, they are trying to have it both ways.

And I agree that if people have less spending power, the economy will suffer - something the coalition should think about.

If they came out and said that they wouldn't make any cuts and presumably would either leave the deficit as it is or have tax rates rocketing, they'd be as well announcing that they didn't want to win the next election.

[heretoday]

Labour are absolutely hopeless when they should be scoring big points. Voting Ed in as leader instead of his brother was a shot in the foot to start with.

The Tories will win the next election in a landslide unless Labour can inspire its natural supporters to stop worrying about celebs and engage with the issues.

[RyeSloan]

Labour are absolutely hopeless when they should be scoring big points. Voting Ed in as leader instead of his brother was a shot in the foot to start with.

The Tories will win the next election in a landslide unless Labour can inspire its natural supporters to stop worrying about celebs and engage with the issues.

You can only score big points if you have credible alternatives to what is being proposed...Labour don't have that.

Without an ability to tax more and spend more Labour seem bereft of ideas. They can't propose shrinking the sate as that would play into the Tories hands, they can't propose expanding the state as it's clear the money is not there, they did try and propose borrowing even more than were currently are (the too far too fast nonsense) but no one took that seriously.

Labour have been unable to fully admit their role in putting the UK in this position and they have been unable to articulate any sensible and cohesive plan to getting us out of this position.

Sure Lucky or someone else will be along shortly to point out how wrong I am but actually trying to find anything comprehensive on Labours economic policy is not easy (is it because they actually don't have one?) and Ed Balls now seems to be suggesting that they need a year in government before they can really say what they might do.....

[Big Ed]

The Tories will win the next election in a landslide unless Labour can inspire its natural supporters to stop worrying about celebs and engage with the issues.

A landslide Tory win at the next election: Seriously? they should have secured one at the last election and couldn't even manage a majority.

I'd also appreciate it if you could explain what you mean by "natural Labour supporters worrying about celebs" because I haven't a clue what you mean.

[heretoday]

A landslide Tory win at the next election: Seriously? they should have secured one at the last election and couldn't even manage a majority.

I'd also appreciate it if you could explain what you mean by "natural Labour supporters worrying about celebs" because I haven't a clue what you mean.

The people who used to vote for Labour in huge numbers are sitting on their backsides watching TV instead of going out to vote. And TV is full of crap involving celebs. Okay?

[Big Ed]

The people who used to vote for Labour in huge numbers are sitting on their backsides watching TV instead of going out to vote. And TV is full of crap involving celebs. Okay?

:applause:

Well, while we are on the subject of stereotyping large swathes of the population; I'll speculate that the reason that huge numbers of traditional Conservative voters didn't jump into their Chelsea Tractors and head on to the polling station last time, was because they were getting their celeb gossip from the Mail Online. Theres's screeds of the stuff on there.

No: that would be ridiculous, wouldn't it?

[gringojoe]

Scottish Goverment for Scottish population, a new start.

[marinello59]

Scottish Goverment for Scottish population, a new start.

Are Scottish politicians any less self serving hypocritical tosspots than UK politicians then?

[Hiber-nation]

Are Scottish politicians any less self serving hypocritical tosspots than UK politicians then?

Well there are less tories I suppose :wink:

[Jack]

You can only score big points if you have credible alternatives to what is being proposed...Labour don't have that.

Without an ability to tax more and spend more Labour seem bereft of ideas. They can't propose shrinking the sate as that would play into the Tories hands, they can't propose expanding the state as it's clear the money is not there, they did try and propose borrowing even more than were currently are (the too far too fast nonsense) but no one took that seriously.

Labour have been unable to fully admit their role in putting the UK in this position and they have been unable to articulate any sensible and cohesive plan to getting us out of this position.

Sure Lucky or someone else will be along shortly to point out how wrong I am but actually trying to find anything comprehensive on Labours economic policy is not easy (is it because they actually don't have one?) and Ed Balls now seems to be suggesting that they need a year in government before they can really say what they might do.....

Its difficult to imagine any party in Westminster being bigger failures than both Labour and the Tories.

While I'm proud to be British I really can't see any way that Westminster can be held up something the Scots would want to hold on to if there was a choice.

Their incompetence is absolutely staggering. And if its not incompetence then its downright criminal. And that's putting aside the sneering arrogance of the Tory front bench.

I'm not saying the SNP would be better but its almost inconceivable they, if they had the power in Scotland, could possibly be worse.

[Beefster]

I'm not saying the SNP would be better but its almost inconceivable they, if they had the power in Scotland, could possibly be worse.

The SNP have the power in Scotland now and they're not much better. There may not even be an SNP if Scotland becomes independent.

[Jack]

The SNP have the power in Scotland now and they're not much better. There may not even be an SNP if Scotland becomes independent.

I think Scotland is living within the means its given by Westminster, I think that's positive.

The Scottish Government have health and social care policies that are the envy of the English electorate, I think that's positive.

The Scottish Government tend to work together with the people that implement their policies, like in health and education, rather than implement without consultation, I think that's positive.

All in all, IMO. how Scotland is being run is so much better than our down trodden English cousins. Certainly in my area of 'expertise', health, how Scotland is being run is looked on very enviously by the English professionals and I know for sure were I'd rather be ill.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-welfare-bill-a-government-of-millionaires-just-made-the-poor-poorer--and-laughed-as-they-did-it-8443619.html

Thatcher may not have cared about the working class but I don't think even she openly mocked the people she was screwing. Utter ****.

I'm indifferent to Cameron and didn't vote for him however I'm not a Tory-hater on principle which sometimes seems the default view on here.

I think he's right to cut benefits under the circumstances. It's either that or take money form people that work, which he's done as well. If benefits go up by more than the average salary then what message does that send? Ideally he'd do neither but the countries finances are in the **** and he has to get the money from somewhere.

[yeezus.]

If they came out and said that they wouldn't make any cuts and presumably would either leave the deficit as it is or have tax rates rocketing, they'd be as well announcing that they didn't want to win the next election.

Absolutely - but Labour seem to be stuck somewhere between the ideals of the trade unionists/anti-cuts groups and the coalition's deficit reduction plan. I keep hearing Labour MP's complain about cuts and job losses which probably would have happened if they were in Government.

[Twiglet]

I have had a 2% pay rise in the last 5 years and BAM! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20978487 :rolleyes:

My company my sister works for, government run science sector, hasn't had a pay rise for years. Don't think it'd go down too well with them.

[McHibby]

Labour are absolutely hopeless when they should be scoring big points. Voting Ed in as leader instead of his brother was a shot in the foot to start with.

The Tories will win the next election in a landslide unless Labour can inspire its natural supporters to stop worrying about celebs and engage with the issues.

You're right about the leadership. David Milliband seemed to be the more capable politician. And I think because Ed's union links swung it for him, the rest of the party isn't 100% behind him; which meant he had a handicap from the start even among his own, never mind the public.

I would imagine we're more likely to end up with another coalition or minority government. To be honest the Lib Dems are probably going to be the biggest losers at the next election. Labour and Conservative will always have their core support, but a lot of those who put their faith in in the Lib Dems feel let down by them.

[yeezus.]

You're right about the leadership. David Milliband seemed to be the more capable politician. And I think because Ed's union links swung it for him, the rest of the party isn't 100% behind him; which meant he had a handicap from the start even among his own, never mind the public.

I would imagine we're more likely to end up with another coalition or minority government. To be honest the Lib Dems are probably going to be the biggest losers at the next election. Labour and Conservative will always have their core support, but a lot of those who put their faith in in the Lib Dems feel let down by them.

David would have divided the party further - he was a carbon copy of Tony Blair. I've had countless arguments with Labour members over what is more important: winning elections or being a Labour party.

[hibsbollah]

David would have divided the party further - he was a carbon copy of Tony Blair. I've had countless arguments with Labour members over what is more important: winning elections or being a Labour party.

Im not sure you're right about this. The shadow cabinet have been more aggressive last week than they've been for ages, and David Miliband with his 'rancid' speech was right at the centre of it.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/01/david-milibands-speech-against-welfare-uprating-bill-full-text

On the other hand, Liam Byrne as the shadow minister in charge of welfare, has been banging on about shirkers and skivers for well over a year like the most rabid Tory. That's Labour's problem, the focus groups and pollsters tell them that the public like being hard on the work shy, so they do it. Then they get wrong footed when events overtake them, and they're forced to rely on their principles instead.

[--------]

Im not sure you're right about this. The shadow cabinet have been more aggressive last week than they've been for ages, and David Miliband with his 'rancid' speech was right at the centre of it.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/01/david-milibands-speech-against-welfare-uprating-bill-full-text

On the other hand, Liam Byrne as the shadow minister in charge of welfare, has been banging on about shirkers and skivers for well over a year like the most rabid Tory. That's Labour's problem, the focus groups and pollsters tell them that the public like being hard on the work shy, so they do it. Then they get wrong footed when events overtake them, and they're forced to rely on their principles instead.


They have principles? :confused:

Labour would do a lot better standing by whatever principles are left to them after the Blair/Brown years than simply trying to ape the Libertories for the sake of points in the opinion polls.

[Betty Boop]

A great read from Mark Steel.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-poor-spend-all-the-money-isnt-it-obvious-8553643.html

[Jonnyboy]

A great read from Mark Steel.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-poor-spend-all-the-money-isnt-it-obvious-8553643.html

:aok:

[Phil D. Rolls]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-welfare-bill-a-government-of-millionaires-just-made-the-poor-poorer--and-laughed-as-they-did-it-8443619.html

Thatcher may not have cared about the working class but I don't think even she openly mocked the people she was screwing. Utter ****.

Oh, but she and her gang did. "Moaning Minnies" "Get on Your Bike" and "the ladies not for turning" spring to mind. Not to mention some of the most vindictive policies targeted at those who disagreed with her, that the country has seen.

The woman was a psychopath, hell bent on avenging the personal inustices she felt she had suffered whilst growing up. A nasty woman and a nasty time. Just look to the amount of protest against her and the way she crushed it using the police as storm troopers.

[RyeSloan]

A great read from Mark Steel.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-poor-spend-all-the-money-isnt-it-obvious-8553643.html



A Wee bit of banker bashing

A wee bit of Tory bashing

A wee bit of The Rich bashing

Zero constructive to say

Aye a truly great read so it was. Yawn.

[Beefster]

A Wee bit of banker bashing

A wee bit of Tory bashing

A wee bit of The Rich bashing

Zero constructive to say

Aye a truly great read so it was. Yawn.

That's all it takes to be proclaimed as a 'Champion of the People' nowadays.

[Beefster]

Oh, but she and her gang did. "Moaning Minnies" "Get on Your Bike" and "the ladies not for turning" spring to mind. Not to mention some of the most vindictive policies targeted at those who disagreed with her, that the country has seen.

The woman was a psychopath, hell bent on avenging the personal inustices she felt she had suffered whilst growing up. A nasty woman and a nasty time. Just look to the amount of protest against her and the way she crushed it using the police as storm troopers.

As usual, the reality is in the middle. She got a lot right, she got a lot wrong. As I've said on here before, my old man hates her. Yet, our family's living standards increased out of all recognition in the 11 years that she was in power. Mainly because of her policies.

I think it's great that folk can still rally around a boogeyman twenty-odd years after the boogeyman became irrelevant though.

[Betty Boop]

A Wee bit of banker bashing

A wee bit of Tory bashing

A wee bit of The Rich bashing

Zero constructive to say

Aye a truly great read so it was. Yawn.
The truth hurts.

Makes a change from the sick, disabled and poor bashing, from the media with the Tory posh boys leading the way.

[Beefster]

The truth hurts.

Makes a change from the sick, disabled and poor bashing, from the media with the Tory posh boys leading the way.

I really wish folk would stop equating 'the disabled' (which in itself is mildly offensive) to folk who rely on the state for benefits. It's pretty offensive to someone whose parents are disabled but don't rely on the state.

I'm not sure who 'the sick' actually refers to either. My auntie has MS but works full-time and doesn't get any benefits as far as I know. Is she part of 'the sick'?

[hibsbollah]

I really wish folk would stop equating 'the disabled' (which in itself is mildly offensive) to folk who rely on the state for benefits. It's pretty offensive to someone whose parents are disabled but don't rely on the state.

I'm not sure who 'the sick' actually refers to either. My auntie has MS but works full-time and doesn't get any benefits as far as I know. Is she part of 'the sick'?

Its not 'offensive' to rely on the state. EVERYBODY relies on the state. Denying or hiding that reality seems to be the sole purpose of the 'austerity' agenda.

[Beefster]

Its not 'offensive' to rely on the state.

I'm fairly sure you accused me a while ago of using a straw man.

I don't actually believe that you think that was anywhere close to what I was saying.

The capitals were good fun though.

[RyeSloan]

The truth hurts.

Makes a change from the sick, disabled and poor bashing, from the media with the Tory posh boys leading the way.

What truth are you talking about?

The fact that the UK government borrowed over a £100bn last year and about £500bn in the last 5 years? If so yet right that does hurt.

[One Day Soon]

The worst of it is Steel's humourlessness. It is a dismal wee article and exactly the sort of thing he has managed to make a tidy living out of.

He and Independent readers make a good match.

[hibsbollah]

I'm fairly sure you accused me a while ago of using a straw man.

I don't actually believe that you think that was anywhere close to what I was saying.

The capitals were good fun though.

In what way is it offensive to 'equate' the disabled with state dependency then? Or maybe you could clarify what you mean.

[Beefster]

In what way is it offensive to 'equate' the disabled with state dependency then? Or maybe you could clarify what you mean.

It's mildly offensive to equate 'the disabled' with a dependency on benefits. As I said in my previous post.

[hibsbollah]

It's mildly offensive to equate 'the disabled' with a dependency on benefits. As I said in my previous post.

Why?

[Beefster]

Why?

Because it's just not true and pretty patronising to large swathes of 'the disabled' and 'the sick' who do earn a wage and don't claim benefits.

Is it any different to the type of stereotyping that we sometimes get on here about 'the gays' and 'the immigrants'?

[hibsbollah]

Well it might be untrue, but i dont think its offensive, or patronising. If anybody is stereotyping 'the disabled' for taking up things like the Disability Living Allowance thats just gross stupidity, because its an entitlement and what we all pay our National Insurance for.

[hibby rae]

https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/iain-duncan-smith-iain-duncan-smith-to-live-on-53-a-week

Won't be long till it gets 500,000 signatures

[yeezus.]

https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/iain-duncan-smith-iain-duncan-smith-to-live-on-53-a-week

Won't be long till it gets 500,000 signatures

Apparently the guy who challenged Iain Duncan Smith to live in £53 a week actually lives on £156 a week.

[hibby rae]

Apparently the guy who challenged Iain Duncan Smith to live in £53 a week actually lives on £156 a week.

If true, that's still not a massive amount really though once you take all your outgoings into account.

[Braids Hibby]

A free Scotland is the only way forward

[Beefster]

If true, that's still not a massive amount really though once you take all your outgoings into account.

There was a guy on Five Live yesterday who earns in the low twenties per annum and works a 50-odd hour week. He gets hee-haw benefits and by the time he's paid mortgage, bills etc, he's left with about £40-50 a week to live on.

The reality is that lots of folk don't have much to live on, even if they're working ridiculously hard.

[easty]

There was a guy on Five Live yesterday who earns in the low twenties per annum and works a 50-odd hour week. He gets hee-haw benefits and by the time he's paid mortgage, bills etc, he's left with about £40-50 a week to live on.

The reality is that lots of folk don't have much to live on, even if they're working ridiculously hard.

I'm sure there are plenty of us who could relate to that! :agree:

[hibby rae]

There was a guy on Five Live yesterday who earns in the low twenties per annum and works a 50-odd hour week. He gets hee-haw benefits and by the time he's paid mortgage, bills etc, he's left with about £40-50 a week to live on.

The reality is that lots of folk don't have much to live on, even if they're working ridiculously hard.

Well everyone's financial situation will vary and be subject to different factors such as geography. Twenty grand a year would go further up here than in London for instance.

[Phil D. Rolls]

As usual, the reality is in the middle. She got a lot right, she got a lot wrong. As I've said on here before, my old man hates her. Yet, our family's living standards increased out of all recognition in the 11 years that she was in power. Mainly because of her policies.

I think it's great that folk can still rally around a boogeyman twenty-odd years after the boogeyman became irrelevant though.

Cause, effect relevance.

I suppose it comes down to how you measure a country's wealth. If you consider it best for all, that a section of the population are consigned to being an underclass, and that the rest of us pay for them with benefits, which are nothing more than social control, the woman was a success.

Wouldn't have been better that people were given meaningful existences through employment? To me, that would have done more for the nations well being. It would probably have cost less too.

The Thatcherite road was cowardly. Rather than look at how the combination of North Sea oil and the repayment of the war debt could be spent wisely for future generations, she decided to just throw a wad of cash on the floor and let the people scrap for it.

Cowardly, lazy and stupid. That's the reality I lived through, a wasted opportunity. She might have said Britain as a nation is redundant.

We are now left with a rudderless ship. Captained by politicians of both sides that don't know where they are sailing to. Meanwhile all the passengers want to do is go home.

[yeezus.]

If true, that's still not a massive amount really though once you take all your outgoings into account.

No it isn't but I find this attack on Iain Duncan Smith a bit predictable. Let's see an alternative to the coalition's plans please.

[marinello59]

No it isn't but I find this attack on Iain Duncan Smith a bit predictable. Let's see an alternative to the coalition's plans please.

Alternatives? Surely laughing at Mark Steel ( and I do find him funny) is more than enough. The Guardianistas won't be affected at all by these savage cuts but can smugly congratulate themselves on being against them.
At least the much maligned Tommy Sheridan is proposing taking positive action against the bed room tax to alleviate the worst of its effects at a local level.

[hibsbollah]

Alternatives? Surely laughing at Mark Steel ( and I do find him funny) is more than enough. The Guardianistas won't be affected at all by these savage cuts but can smugly congratulate themselves on being against them.
At least the much maligned Tommy Sheridan is proposing taking positive action against the bed room tax to alleviate the worst of its effects at a local level.

What is a guardianista, why are they smug, and why are they/he/she not affected by these cuts?

[Beefster]

Alternatives? Surely laughing at Mark Steel ( and I do find him funny) is more than enough. The Guardianistas won't be affected at all by these savage cuts but can smugly congratulate themselves on being against them.
At least the much maligned Tommy Sheridan is proposing taking positive action against the bed room tax to alleviate the worst of its effects at a local level.

There was a columnist on the Guardian website the other day claiming that raising the tax threshold to £10,000 patronises and disenfranchises those that it takes out of tax. Funnily enough, we didn't have anyone rushing to link to that!

[Hibs Class]

Alternatives? Surely laughing at Mark Steel ( and I do find him funny) is more than enough. The Guardianistas won't be affected at all by these savage cuts but can smugly congratulate themselves on being against them.
At least the much maligned Tommy Sheridan is proposing taking positive action against the bed room tax to alleviate the worst of its effects at a local level.

What is Sheridan proposing to do?

[Hibercelona]

The only power these halfwits have is the power of the people who abide by them.

If people would stop listening to them and refuse their way of things, then all the money in the world would be meaningless to them.

[yeezus.]

A free Scotland is the only way forward

What do you mean a "free" Scotland? We aren't under occupation. See the independence thread.

[allmodcons]

No it isn't but I find this attack on Iain Duncan Smith a bit predictable. Let's see an alternative to the coalition's plans please.

For a start, not reducing the top rate of income tax from 50% to 45% and not introducing the 'bedroom tax'.

[yeezus.]

For a start, not reducing the top rate of income tax from 50% to 45% and not introducing the 'bedroom tax'.

I agree with you on the top rate of tax but the bedroom tax isn't really a tax. However, Labour need to take their time and come up with a "better" way of reducing the deficit since the party hasn't come out in opposition to cuts as a whole.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

For a start, not reducing the top rate of income tax from 50% to 45% and not introducing the 'bedroom tax'.

What don't you like about the bedroom tax (I acknowledge that this isn't a tax btw)? We have a lot of people waiting for housing and other people with too many rooms. Seems pretty reasonable to me.

The 45p tax rate doesn't bother me much either. IMO, anyone giving 45% of their income (over £150k) to the government is contributing their fair share. I think clamping down on tax avoidance would be a much fairer (as that seems to be the word of the week in politics) way of raising money.

[lord bunberry]

What don't you like about the bedroom tax (I acknowledge that this isn't a tax btw)? We have a lot of people waiting for housing and other people with too many rooms. Seems pretty reasonable to me.

The 45p tax rate doesn't bother me much either. IMO, anyone giving 45% of their income (over £150k) to the government is contributing their fair share. I think clamping down on tax avoidance would be a much fairer (as that seems to be the word of the week in politics) way of raising money.

Penalising people who's children may have moved out of the family home is not the answer to the housing crisis, we need to be building more social housing. I realise the benefits system needs to be reformed but the bedroom tax is the wrong way to go about it

[HKhibby]

Exactly! A strong opposition could be tearing this Government to shreds. There is just nothing coming from Labour; either about what's happening right now, or what alternatives they have to offer in a future government. I actually don't think either side have much of a clue about how to deal with this economic issue. Admittedly I don't know the numbers involved, but I would hardly imagine slicing tiny percentages off benefits is going to make any noticeable dent in the debt. But it will contribute to making people in this country poorer.

well you only have one government to thank for that!...the last Labour govt, that were so popular at one time i can remember...but they more or less bankrupt the country...not to mention selling off the gold reserves and a knock down price!
Same old Labour always fails

[HKhibby]

Although he puts it in a more dramatic fashion than was necessary, two MP's involved in the debate did chastise the front bench at different times for laughing. It's a pretty poor show when you can't even pretend ​to care that the legislation you are about to pass could have a very negative impact on the poorest in society.

He is not the best PM but far from the worst!...the last 2 were the worst as far as im concerned, and i have not lived in the UK for many years now!, but the party in Red has done to the UK is make a complete shambolic mess of it, and i can remember 1979 the last time they got booted out!...it was a shambles then too!, they cannot manage economies, and its high time people over there forgot about this welfare thing oweing them this that and the next thing in life...and the government certainly does not owe anyone a job!

[Twa Cairpets]

He is not the best PM but far from the worst!...the last 2 were the worst as far as im concerned, and i have not lived in the UK for many years now!, but the party in Red has done to the UK is make a complete shambolic mess of it, and i can remember 1979 the last time they got booted out!...it was a shambles then too!, they cannot manage economies, and its high time people over there forgot about this welfare thing oweing them this that and the next thing in life...and the government certainly does not owe anyone a job!

No but the government is there to maximise opportunity within the economy for employment and wealth.

[RyeSloan]

Penalising people who's children may have moved out of the family home is not the answer to the housing crisis, we need to be building more social housing. I realise the benefits system needs to be reformed but the bedroom tax is the wrong way to go about it

Yet it's not a tax and will save very little.

I think this shows just how hard it is to reform this type of spending no matter how far out of control it is or how unaffordable it may be.

Even IDS who to his credit is proposing the most 'radical' of change to the benefit system has admitted that he is simply trying to manage the rate of growth.

We find ourself with a set of promises and entitlements that even the allegedly most uncaring government ever to exist cant even reduce......what a mess.

[Killiehibbie]

I agree with you on the top rate of tax but the bedroom tax isn't really a tax. However, Labour need to take their time and come up with a "better" way of reducing the deficit since the party hasn't come out in opposition to cuts as a whole.It amounts to a tax when it's impossible to avoid paying it. Where are all these one bedroom council flats that people might move to and not get their housing benefit cut?

[yeezus.]

It amounts to a tax when it's impossible to avoid paying it. Where are all these one bedroom council flats that people might move to and not get their housing benefit cut?

My dictionary: "a compulsory contribution to state revenue levied by Government on personal income and business profits or added to the cost of some goods, service and transactions"

It is a benefit reduction but it isn't a tax.

I didn't try to make any other point other than we should stop calling something a tax when it isn't!

[allmodcons]

I agree with you on the top rate of tax but the bedroom tax isn't really a tax. However, Labour need to take their time and come up with a "better" way of reducing the deficit since the party hasn't come out in opposition to cuts as a whole.


Hence the reason I highlighted it!

[Killiehibbie]

My dictionary: "a compulsory contribution to state revenue levied by Government on personal income and business profits or added to the cost of some goods, service and transactions"

It is a benefit reduction but it isn't a tax.

I didn't try to make any other point other than we should stop calling something a tax when it isn't!Next you'll be telling me National Insurance isn't a tax.

[CropleyWasGod]

Next you'll be telling me National Insurance isn't a tax.

According to the HMRC website, You pay National Insurance contributions to build up your entitlement to certain state benefits, including the State Pension

According to Black's Law Dictionary, a tax is a "pecuniary burden laid upon individuals or property owners to support the government [...] a payment exacted by legislative authority." It "is not a voluntary payment or donation, but an enforced contribution, exacted pursuant to legislative authority" and is "any contribution imposed by government [...] whether under the name of toll, tribute, tallage, gabel, impost, duty, custom, excise, subsidy, aid, supply, or other name."[1]


Sort that out between you. :greengrin

[yeezus.]

Next you'll be telling me National Insurance isn't a tax.

Please explain to me how a reduction in this benefit is a tax?

Short answer - it isn't.

[allmodcons]

What don't you like about the bedroom tax (I acknowledge that this isn't a tax btw)? We have a lot of people waiting for housing and other people with too many rooms. Seems pretty reasonable to me.

The 45p tax rate doesn't bother me much either. IMO, anyone giving 45% of their income (over £150k) to the government is contributing their fair share. I think clamping down on tax avoidance would be a much fairer (as that seems to be the word of the week in politics) way of raising money.


Penalising people who's children may have moved out of the family home is not the answer to the housing crisis, we need to be building more social housing. I realise the benefits system needs to be reformed but the bedroom tax is the wrong way to go about it

The summary in bold below is why I don't like the 'bedroom tax' (for the benefit of SH, I'll call it what I like). It's just another ill conceived policy by a Government happy to hit on the poorest and weakest in our country. With regard to the top rate of tax, I don't doubt these people are contributing their fair share but, in times of austerity, think they should be asked to contribute more. They're having to decide where to go on holiday or how often they should eat out each week whilst low wage earners and those receiving welfare payments (for legitimate reasons) don't know where their next meal is coming from.



Research by the NHF says that while there are currently 180,000 households that are "underoccupying two-bedroom homes", there are far fewer smaller properties in the social housing sector available to move into. Last year only 85,000 one-bedroom homes became available. The federation has calculated that if all those available places were taken up by people moving as a result of the "bedroom tax", the remaining 95,000 households would be faced with the choice of staying put and taking a cut in income, or renting a home in the private sector.
If all 95,000 moved into the private sector, it says the cost of housing benefit would increase by £143m, and by millions more if others among the remaining 480,000 affected chose to rent privately.
As well as the move on spare bedrooms, council tax benefit will be replaced from this week by a new system that will be run by English local authorities but on 10% less funding. Pensioners will be protected under the changes but, as a result, it is feared there will be a bigger burden on poor working-age adults. Restrictions on the uprating of a number of welfare payments will also hit millions of households, homelessness charity Crisis has warned.
Chief executive Leslie Morphy said: "Our poorest households face a bleak April as they struggle to budget for all these cuts coming at once. People are already cutting back on the essentials of food and heating but there is only so much they can do.
"The result will be misery – cold rooms, longer queues at food banks, broken families, missed rent payments and yet more people facing homelessness – devastating for those directly affected, but bad for us all."

[Killiehibbie]

Please explain to me how a reduction in this benefit is a tax?

Short answer - it isn't.Ok you'll be right.

[yeezus.]

Ok you'll be right.

That makes a nice change :greengrin

[heretoday]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-welfare-bill-a-government-of-millionaires-just-made-the-poor-poorer--and-laughed-as-they-did-it-8443619.html

Thatcher may not have cared about the working class but I don't think even she openly mocked the people she was screwing. Utter ****.

You're right but she paved the way for the likes of this lot.

[Beefster]

You're right but she paved the way for the likes of this lot.

She paved the way for every government since her, irrespective of political persuasion.

[marinello59]

She paved the way for every government since her, irrespective of political persuasion.

Exactly. I think she joked herself that the Blair Government was her greatest legacy. It would be funny if it didn't contain a massive dollop of truth.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

Penalising people who's children may have moved out of the family home is not the answer to the housing crisis, we need to be building more social housing. I realise the benefits system needs to be reformed but the bedroom tax is the wrong way to go about it

If we didn't have an unsustainable level of debt, I agree building more house would be the best solution. But IMO, funding empty bedrooms is a luxury we simply can't afford. There are some exceptions to this, foster parents is one and I'm sure there are others, but we shouldn't be funding free rooms as standard.

[lord bunberry]

If we didn't have an unsustainable level of debt, I agree building more house would be the best solution. But IMO, funding empty bedrooms is a luxury we simply can't afford. There are some exceptions to this, foster parents is one and I'm sure there are others, but we shouldn't be funding free rooms as standard.

I don't see how punishing people who have a spare room is fair. Are the local authorities going to offer them smaller houses. There's plenty wrong with the benefits system in this country and I agree with people who say that living on benefits has become a lifestyle choice for some but for the life of me I can't see the sense of the bedroom tax. As for not having the money to build new houses I think the time has come for a change in policy from osbourne, we are still borrowing billions of pounds every year and the economy is stagnant, clearly austerity isn't working

[Holmesdale Hibs]

The summary in bold below is why I don't like the 'bedroom tax' (for the benefit of SH, I'll call it what I like). It's just another ill conceived policy by a Government happy to hit on the poorest and weakest in our country. With regard to the top rate of tax, I don't doubt these people are contributing their fair share but, in times of austerity, think they should be asked to contribute more. They're having to decide where to go on holiday or how often they should eat out each week whilst low wage earners and those receiving welfare payments (for legitimate reasons) don't know where their next meal is coming from.


Fair enough, I can see why the 45p tax rates grates with people. But it would be boring if we all agreed on everything... I just think taking half of what someone earns, over a threshold granted, is too much. And re your post, high earners deciding going out for meals is a good thing - they pay tax on the meal and the restaurant owner can employ more people and spend the money somewhere else, and so on. Thinking about where they go on holiday is less ideal I suppose. I also think low earners and unemployed not knowing where their next meal coming from is an exaggeration.

Re your bedroom tax piece, some interesting points and the practicalities need to be closely looked at. IMO, the principle is a fair one and we should try and make it work, fairly of course.

[allmodcons]

Fair enough, I can see why the 45p tax rates grates with people. But it would be boring if we all agreed on everything... I just think taking half of what someone earns, over a threshold granted, is too much. And re your post, high earners deciding going out for meals is a good thing - they pay tax on the meal and the restaurant owner can employ more people and spend the money somewhere else, and so on. Thinking about where they go on holiday is less ideal I suppose. I also think low earners and unemployed not knowing where their next meal coming from is an exaggeration.

Re your bedroom tax piece, some interesting points and the practicalities need to be closely looked at. IMO, the principle is a fair one and we should try and make it work, fairly of course.

I know people spending money on meals is good for the local (and wider) economy! The point is if you're lucky enough to be earning more than a £150K you're not having to take 'big' decisions on where you spend your cash. If you think it's an exaggeration to say that low earners and the unemployed are not sure where their next meal is coming from can you explain the upsurge in the use of food banks like this one in Edinburgh http://edinburghnw.foodbank.org.uk/

[Holmesdale Hibs]

I know people spending money on meals is good for the local (and wider) economy! The point is if you're lucky enough to be earning more than a £150K you're not having to take 'big' decisions on where you spend your cash. If you think it's an exaggeration to say that low earners and the unemployed are not sure where their next meal is coming from can you explain the upsurge in the use of food banks like this one in Edinburgh http://edinburghnw.foodbank.org.uk/

Just re-read the quote on your last post. My first reply sounded pretty condescending, apologies I never meant it to be when I wrote it.

The link you sent looks like a good idea and I'm not suggesting that living on benefits is easy. But I think it's as generous as it needs to be (and the country can afford it to be) and is enough for people to afford a basic standard of living. It would also send out a terrible message to raise benefits by more than the average working salary.

I'd rather spend money doinf things like increasing the tax free threshold which will reward people that work. But thats something different and its getting late.

[Phil D. Rolls]

What don't you like about the bedroom tax (I acknowledge that this isn't a tax btw)? We have a lot of people waiting for housing and other people with too many rooms. Seems pretty reasonable to me.

The 45p tax rate doesn't bother me much either. IMO, anyone giving 45% of their income (over £150k) to the government is contributing their fair share. I think clamping down on tax avoidance would be a much fairer (as that seems to be the word of the week in politics) way of raising money.

I've been wondering where this idea that your rented social housing is yours for life came from. In the old days, the council used to move people to more suitable housing as their circumstances changed.

[marinello59]

I've been wondering where this idea that your rented social housing is yours for life came from. In the old days, the council used to move people to more suitable housing as their circumstances changed.

In the old days we had a decent public housing stock to move people around in. And I don't remember the term Social Housing being used. It's a term that jars with me, as if to reside in a council house is a form of living off the state. Probably just me though.

[--------]

Most uncaring government ever?


Naw. Try the German Government 1933-45, or any Russian or Soviet Government in history.

And speaking of Russian governments, shouldn't she be a "crime czarina"? Or even a "criminal czarina"?

Plenty of those down the years.

[Betty Boop]

Deary me, an incontinent woman with Crohns disease, told to go to work with a nappy on.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/atos-told-incontinent-woman-to-wear-nappy-firm-condemned-by-mps-for-pressuring-sick-and-disabled-into-returning-to-work-8456447.html

[CropleyWasGod]

Deary me, an incontinent woman with Crohns disease, told to go to work with a nappy on.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/atos-told-incontinent-woman-to-wear-nappy-firm-condemned-by-mps-for-pressuring-sick-and-disabled-into-returning-to-work-8456447.html

I hope she paid for the nappies herself.

[Sylar]

Deary me, an incontinent woman with Crohns disease, told to go to work with a nappy on.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/atos-told-incontinent-woman-to-wear-nappy-firm-condemned-by-mps-for-pressuring-sick-and-disabled-into-returning-to-work-8456447.html

Incontinence with Crohn's is quite rare. Having said that, Crohn's itself wouldn't stop you being able to work. It's unpleasant and can impact on quality of life without a doubt but I'd agree that it shouldn't class as eligible for disability.

The nappy suggestion is a bit ridiculous, sure, but the condition is manageable with the right diet, medication and practices.

[Beefster]

Deary me, an incontinent woman with Crohns disease, told to go to work with a nappy on.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/atos-told-incontinent-woman-to-wear-nappy-firm-condemned-by-mps-for-pressuring-sick-and-disabled-into-returning-to-work-8456447.html

While the advice, if true, is appalling, Crohn's is not a reason to never work.