Benefits for the poor are spent on drugs and gambling

[Mancie]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

And why did the governemnt have to borrow this money? Might it have been because the last government(sorry about bringing this up) left nothing in the country's coffers because of their profligate spending.
Do you think that if the last government had been elected things would have been aby different, because if you do, you seriously need a reality check.

I think this government decided from day one they would cut the income of the poorest people in this country because that is what a tory government will always do because it is the simple way to bring down borrowing..but it is not working..sacking tens of thousands of working people and then targeting them as scroungers is not a good policy..maybe you need to get the reality check.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Oh, and by the way I didn't say anywhere that the people without a work ethic are the cause of all our woes......but they are part of it......but it is much more complicated than that and you know that.

[Less]

If 'the system', (under whatever political flag), makes it possible for this to exist, surely the fault lies with the rule makers?
These so called bligjhs on society are being given benefits because for whatever reason the law says they are entitled to it.
If this law is wrong then it should be changed, but not if the changing of it adds to extra hardship for the innocent that you seem keen to lump in with the scourge of the nation.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Originally Posted by Mancie

I think this government decided from day one they would cut the income of the poorest people in this country because that is what a tory government will always do because it is the simple way to bring down borrowing..but it is not working..sacking tens of thousands of working people and then targeting them as scroungers is not a good policy..maybe you need to get the reality check.

In George Osborne's Autumn statement he uplifted benefits and incapacity benefit by 5.2%, the rate of inflation in September.
Ah, you may say...it is traditional to do that...increase benefits by the rate of inflation.......but he didn't have to do that. He could, in these times of financial difficulty, have chosen to leave the benefits as they were.
Currently workers in all sectors are having to deal with payfreezes, which in real terms amount to a pay cut.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Originally Posted by Less

If 'the system', (under whatever political flag), makes it possible for this to exist, surely the fault lies with the rule makers?
These so called bligjhs on society are being given benefits because for whatever reason the law says they are entitled to it.
If this law is wrong then it should be changed, but not if the changing of it adds to extra hardship for the innocent that you seem keen to lump in with the scourge of the nation.

That is a spot on assessment of the problem. And I agree wholeheartedly. The entitlements need to change. There needs to be reform of the benefits system. No-one wants to tackle it....but it has to be done because the system (especially once the economic migrants start rocking up on our doorstep) cannot sustain the current level of burden.

As I have previously posted several times.......I have no qualms about those who get benefits deservingly because they are ill, or because they have lost their job, because they are disabled......it is those who have never had a job...who do not want to work.
I do not know how much more plainly I can say this. I DO NOT BLAME THE GENUINE CLAIMANTS.
The real blame lies with successive governments who have fostered a benefits dependent culture...in the hope it will get those benefit claimants to vote for them, so that they keep the benefits to which they have become used to.

[Mancie]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

In George Osborne's Autumn statement he uplifted benefits and incapacity benefit by 5.2%, the rate of inflation in September.
Ah, you may say...it is traditional to do that...increase benefits by the rate of inflation.......but he didn't have to do that. He could, in these times of financial difficulty, have chosen to leave the benefits as they were.
Currently workers in all sectors are having to deal with payfreezes, which in real terms amount to a pay cut.

Well thanks for that Margaret.. seeing as you have no leanings to any political party and have no interest in defending this governments policy on benefit cuts I can only applaud you on finding that good for you and George.

[Margaret Pilkington]

I am not defending this government or George Osborne...simply stating facts. Recent facts, that you seem to have missed...or perhaps just ignored.
But then again it doesn't suit your argument to have this pointed out to you does it?
All you want to do is gripe about the cuts. Still can't see that if you can't pay for it, then you have to do without.
One day.....maybe one day.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by Mancie

I think this government decided from day one they would cut the income of the poorest people in this country because that is what a tory government will always do because it is the simple way to bring down borrowing..but it is not working..sacking tens of thousands of working people and then targeting them as scroungers is not a good policy..maybe you need to get the reality check.

"Let us not only scatter benefits, but even strew flowers for our fellow travellers, in the rugged ways of this wretched world."

[mobertol]

Originally Posted by Eric

"Let us not only scatter benefits, but even strew flowers for our fellow travellers, in the rugged ways of this wretched world."

A true poet Eric ... a sweet smelling world for all.

Heard on SKY yesterday that they are squeezing even more money out of those with most problems, offering absurd loans to tide people over till pay day at astronomical percentage rates. Unbelievable and they were saying their "service" was valued by their customers -legalised extortion...

[MargaretR]

Fraud detection needs to be given higher priority by DWP, because the abuses that the press have shown us lately have outraged the general public.

BUT - I consider the provocation of public outrage has been a deliberate policy, in order to gain your tacit agreement to the cuts in benefits that will affect all claimants.

Whilst you are hot under the collar at the abuses you have been shown, the far more financially damaging abuses of tax evasion/avoidance are continuing unnoticed.

I repeat what I said earlier in this thread -
..your attention is being deliberately diverted.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Originally Posted by Mancie

Well thanks for that Margaret.. seeing as you have no leanings to any political party and have no interest in defending this governments policy on benefit cuts I can only applaud you on finding that good for you and George.

Keeping up to date with current affairs too.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by MargaretR

Fraud detection needs to be given higher priority by DWP, because the abuses that the press have shown us lately have outraged the general public.

BUT - I consider the provocation of public outrage has been a deliberate policy, in order to gain your tacit agreement to the cuts in benefits that will affect all claimants.

Whilst you are hot under the collar at the abuses you have been shown, the far more financially damaging abuses of tax evasion/avoidance are continuing unnoticed.

I repeat what I said earlier in this thread -
..your attention is being deliberately diverted.

I don't think that I would go as far as "deliberate policy" ... don't think tories are smart enough, or stupid enough for that. I do think that a tacit policy of throwing the poor to the lions to placate the middle and upper classes is implicit in tory politcs and ideology. But now that it is the middle classes under pressure, in order to coddle the wealthy, individuals and corporations, tory politicians have to resort more and more to throwing blame at those whom they consider defenceless. In the long term, this won't work. Folks are coming to realize more and more that they are being screwed over, and that every ship of state in the world has an Edward Smith at the helm.

[MargaretR]

Here is an example of what these 'cuts' are actually doing
DWP proposes to force chemotherapy patients to undergo stressful benefit checks

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Eric

I don't think that I would go as far as "deliberate policy" ... don't think tories are smart enough, or stupid enough for that. I do think that a tacit policy of throwing the poor to the lions to placate the middle and upper classes is implicit in tory politcs and ideology. But now that it is the middle classes under pressure, in order to coddle the wealthy, individuals and corporations, tory politicians have to resort more and more to throwing blame at those whom they consider defenceless. In the long term, this won't work. Folks are coming to realize more and more that they are being screwed over, and that every ship of state in the world has an Edward Smith at the helm.

Ya and this country all but sank under the last one mainly because he hadn't a clue how to steer the ship, mind you that's in keeping with every Labour Captain in history, when they have been relieved of their command the countries always been a basket case and that is fact

[Eric]

"In a system of free trade and free markets poor countries - and poor people - are not poor because others are rich. Indeed, if others become less rich the poor in all probability would become still poorer." Ok, we all know who this is, and many are anxiously awaiting her death, hopefully after a long painful illness I understand the ideology; but can some tory explain what is actually means.