Will the cruel Tory welfare reforms save any money?

First topic message reminder :

My personal opinion is that the current spate of tory reforms to the benefit system are cruel, regressive, and worst of all won't save money (the alleged intention).



In a supposedly modern civilised country one would think housing would be considered a human right.......rather than simply an investment / a chance to make a fast buck.

I note there is talk of a yacht for the biggest benefit claimee of them all. I note over £10billion has been spent on the olympics. I note £32billion is being spent on a high speed rail link (london-birmingham) - this will shave, a no doubt absolutely vita,l 32mins off the journey (essential??!!!) and be used by a miniscule % of the UK population.

How about investing this money in affordable social housing instead? Or do government no longer care to invest in those they view as peasants and serfs?

The tories efforts to turn the nation against those unfortunate enough to find themselves unemployed via vile smears, and an insidious propaganda campaign, are reminiscent of Nazi germany's propaganda campaign against the jews.

Iain Duncan Smith is a disgusting human being and has blood on his hands.

Instead of kicking the weakest targets that can't defend themselves....maybe the Bullingdon bullies should try picking on somebody their own size.....like the bankers, or benefit leeching corporations like Tescos.

They currently resemble a 20st thug stamping on a little girls head.

Welfare is essential and if we are to remain a civilised country we owe it to ourselves to provide for those less fortunate; unless we want to see people starving and homeless turning into savages.

The biggest burden on the UK in recent times has not been the unemployed.....welfare is not a burden - it is an essential expense in a civilised nation.

The biggest burden, and the cause of much unemployment, has been the rich greedy bankers who have cost this country, and us taxpayers, untold £billions in order to benefit a few. They have placed the real burden on the UK.

Miners strike in the eighties was about pit closures not wages, but saying that, miners deserved a decent wage, they lost their health, life, and limbs.

Ok....so please now tell me why the unions, the workers or private companies didn't take over the ownership and running the pits that were closing?

Now please tell me what dangers do the bankers get in to to merit their nice fat bonuses. The only danger they have, is getting an hernia carring their ill gotten gains to the bank

There are no dangers and they don't deserve their fat bonuses

People who have never worked down a mine, coal, tin or gold, are not entitled to comment on work done by men who put their lives on the line daily.

Yes they are......we are entitled to comment on anything we want to...I think it's called freedom of speech

Well then bluey, I take it you condemn equally Gideon, Hammond and some others on the Conservative front bench who owe their part of the 52 Billion owed to us by way of fiddled Taxes..

Unfortunately for your argument I do...Tax avoidance, particularly from big business needs to be stopped. There is also an argument to make the UK more tax competetive with other jurisdictions to stop companies moving overseas, thus losing ALL tax revenue

Blue says.
Yes they are......we are entitled to comment on anything we want to...I think it's called freedom of speech

They also say ignorence is bliss.

People who have never worked down a mine, coal, tin or gold, are not entitled to comment on work done by men who put their lives on the line daily.



Yes they are......we are entitled to comment on anything we want to...I think it's called freedom of speech

Blue I agree, because when those who have never been involved in an industry or job they more often than not just show their ignorance of what those who do the job have to put up with.........or even what the job really involves.....

Blue says.
Yes they are......we are entitled to comment on anything we want to...I think it's called freedom of speech
Freedom of speech, you should only speak when you know what you are talking about, that is why i avoid some of the discussion on here, it is quite simple to make yourself look foolish.

it is quite simple to make yourself look foolish..

Please elaborate...or at least answer the point I put to you? If I am foolish I will concede, but once again it seems nobody from the left will or can answer my question

jackthelad wrote:Ted was a good man, just a pity he happened to be a tory, if he hadn't, Maggie would have had no reason to stab him in the back.
Miners strike in the eighties was about pit closures not wages, but saying that, miners deserved a decent wage, they lost their health, life, and limbs. Now please tell me what dangers do the bankers get in to to merit their nice fat bonuses. The only danger they have, is getting an hernia carring their ill gotten gains to the bank. Miner's hardly got a wage for failure, never mind a boody bonus. People who have never worked down a mine, coal, tin or gold, are not entitled to comment on work done by men who put their lives on the line daily.

Ted Heath was indeed a good man, but he was not a Tory, he was a left wing Conversative, just like those Conservatives before him.

Bluey, I do sometimes wonder why you actually support the Tory’s, you have absolutely nothing good to say about them and fail to tell us when put to the question, anything they have achieved either in the 20 months they have been in power or even the 18 years the where in before, which is to me is understandable, yet you seem to agree with a lot Labour have done over the years. But you condemn every Labour supporter for supporting a Political Party who have proven by fact as opposed to rhetoric they are the better Government.

I may be wrong but to prove that, you will need to furnish me with a list of Tory accomplishments. If such list can’t be provided I guess we have two choices as to why you support them so vehemently, 1/ could be, You simply hate the Labour party, or 2 its just a matter of blind faith, in which it could be argued it’s a matter of the blind leading the blind.

bobby wrote:Bluey, I do sometimes wonder why you actually support the Tory’s, you have absolutely nothing good to say about them and fail to tell us when put to the question, anything they have achieved either in the 20 months they have been in power or even the 18 years the where in before, which is to me is understandable, yet you seem to agree with a lot Labour have done over the years. But you condemn every Labour supporter for supporting a Political Party who have proven by fact as opposed to rhetoric they are the better Government.

I may be wrong but to prove that, you will need to furnish me with a list of Tory accomplishments. If such list can’t be provided I guess we have two choices as to why you support them so vehemently, 1/ could be, You simply hate the Labour party, or 2 its just a matter of blind faith, in which it could be argued it’s a matter of the blind leading the blind.

bobby, pardon my for interrupting, but Britain has not had a Labour Government since the 70's. What we hasd under New Labour was Thatcherism.

I trust you didnt mind me pointing that out.

Bobby......I do support Tory policy, but I am not going to lie or pretend that everything they come up with is good.
What kind of person would I be if I thought tax avoidance by big business was a good thing for the country.....well a pretty cr*p person for sure.

I criticise many posters views on here because they are totally biased, hypocritical, unrealistic...or just plain ludicrous....Not because they support Labour, everyone is free to support who they like. The problem is that many posts come along that criticise Cameron and the Tories for something or other and I sit here and think, 'Hold on a minute, didn't Labour do just the same thing a couple of years ago? and why are they ignoring this?'…and they blatantly do ignore it, even when I remind them

They ignore it because I can see now that it's all about political ideology and not what the parties or governments actually do

Throughout my life the political experience I've been part of is watching the Tories come into power and fix the problems left behind by Labour....We saw this in 79 and we are seeing it again now. It took Thatcher a few years to put right the mistakes Labour made by giving the unions too much power and it will take Cameron a few years to put right the mess left behind by Brown (Not all his fault I concede)
So you ask me what good the Tories have done over the years and I say the sorting out Labours mess is probably the biggest, but then Thatcher did go onto turn the country around from being the sick man of europe to being one of the largest economic powers in the world.

So when it comes to Labour, why would I lie not agree with the good things I believe they have done just because it's brought about by Labour and I’m a Tory? I cannot do that and then debate seriously and with any conscience on here if I did that...that would make me a hypocrite

Blue says,
Ok....so please now tell me why the unions, the workers or private companies didn't take over the ownership and running the pits that were closing?

Blue that is not as simple a thing to do, some miners clubed to gether their redundancy money, and tried, they are trained to work down the mine, not to run them. I think they failed, the best mines was taken over by private companies, who employes some of the reduntant miners. As far has the unions running them, that would be a stupid idea, too, all the union leaders and committee men were miners or ex-miners, they were not schooled as pit managers though. Plus the fact that you would need a lot of money to start from scratch. It appears to me you are not a very smart fellow, just like me, but i am smart enough not ask stupid questions. Communism failed in Russia too, workers are not infallable, they get things wrong.
75 thousand tons of coal sailed in to Newcastle this week from America, coal use to leave Newcastle. Now i hear the Americans have the contract to print the tickets for the Olympic games, we are not capable. The Germans are building our trains, we will have to buy French aircraft, get fuel from abroad. The only thing we appear to be any good at is banking, hence the big bonuses, and that is for failing, god only knows what bonuses they would have got if they had been successful.

bluey. Yes some Policies may be similar, but itlike taking a shot at someone, Labour tend to lean towards a pistol whereas the Tory's go lookin for a cannon, so to compare the two is totaly wrong. Labour may have made some Mistakes, but they would never plunge the already struggling further down for the sole benefit of the wealthy. If you look closely enough you are bound to find some similarities but it is all about language and degree’s.

By the way blue. I notice you dislike big buisness fiddlin theit taxes, but fail to respond regarding Gideon, Hammond and the like.

Thatcher did go onto turn the country around from being the sick man of europe to being one of the largest economic powers in the world.

With a little help from North Sea Oil revenues.

I notice you dislike big buisness fiddlin theit taxes, but fail to respond regarding Gideon, Hammond and the like

No Bobby I agree with you.....Nobody should be able to fiddle their taxes and if they do then they should be called to account and prosecuted, whether that's a politician (Osbourne) or whoever. I cannot legitimately complain about benefit scroungers and fiddlers to you lot and then excuse people who fiddle or aviod their fair share of the tax burden...Once again that would make me a hypocrite.

Jack.....you are entitled to your personal opinion about me, it's water of a ducks back.

But going back to the pits issue.....I am sure that the pits had managers while under national owership and these managers were also losing their jobs at the time, so once again the infrastrucure was there for these pits to be taken over, but all but a few were left to close. If you were honest you would just say....Yes Blue, many of the pits were unprofitable and therefore nobody wanted to take them on

Blue says.
If you were honest you would just say....Yes Blue, many of the pits were unprofitable and therefore nobody wanted to take them on

Yes Blue, honesty is my middle name, there were about ten pits that where unprofitable, (that is no saying they couldn't have been made profitable,) a willing work force, but bad management. As a Yorkshireman that had vote, i voted against a strike, i thought the money would be better spent on more profitable pits. Arthur was right, Maggie wasn't interested in shutting down those ten pits, she had a long list of them, and brought in an American to close them down.
As far as the redundant managers, they took their money and ran, they were paid a dam sight more redundantcy money than the lowly work force. Anyway, that would have defeated Maggies purpose, she was out the break the miners and her union. My elder brother was a pit manager, so i know, you don't really understand Blue, mining wasn't just a job, it was way of life, a pit village was a living thing, with a heart and soul. Closing that mine was like killing a living thing, why else would men and their wives struggle so hard to keep it open. Mining is not a pleasant job, it's dark, dirty, and dangerous, but the camerardary of miners take some beating. 12 months on strike is hard and a long time with no money is hard. I didn't agree with Arthur Scargill at the begining, but time proved him right and that Margaret Thatcher had been one lying bastard. I stayed on strike for the whole twelve months, and marched back to work with the rest of them. Three months later i was made redundant at 54 years of age, not bad recognition for nearly 40 years down a coal mine, i started work when i was fourteen years old. So please don't try and tell me what the redundant miners should have done, you simply don't have a clue Blue.

Jack, My hat is off to you.

jackthelad wrote:Blue says.
If you were honest you would just say....Yes Blue, many of the pits were unprofitable and therefore nobody wanted to take them on

Yes Blue, honesty is my middle name, there were about ten pits that where unprofitable, (that is no saying they couldn't have been made profitable,) a willing work force, but bad management. As a Yorkshireman that had vote, i voted against a strike, i thought the money would be better spent on more profitable pits. Arthur was right, Maggie wasn't interested in shutting down those ten pits, she had a long list of them, and brought in an American to close them down.
As far as the redundant managers, they took their money and ran, they were paid a dam sight more redundantcy money than the lowly work force. Anyway, that would have defeated Maggies purpose, she was out the break the miners and her union. My elder brother was a pit manager, so i know, you don't really understand Blue, mining wasn't just a job, it was way of life, a pit village was a living thing, with a heart and soul. Closing that mine was like killing a living thing, why else would men and their wives struggle so hard to keep it open. Mining is not a pleasant job, it's dark, dirty, and dangerous, but the camerardary of miners take some beating. 12 months on strike is hard and a long time with no money is hard. I didn't agree with Arthur Scargill at the begining, but time proved him right and that Margaret Thatcher had been one lying bastard. I stayed on strike for the whole twelve months, and marched back to work with the rest of them. Three months later i was made redundant at 54 years of age, not bad recognition for nearly 40 years down a coal mine, i started work when i was fourteen years old. So please don't try and tell me what the redundant miners should have done, you simply don't have a clue Blue.

Make that "two hats".

Blue,

I came to County Durham in 1980.

The Pits here starting in the North - Ellington in Ashington, Westoe in South Shields, Monkwearmouth in Sunderland, and Vane Tempest in Seaham, all of which are on the North Sea Coast, were pulling out high grade coal like no-one had ever seen. Productivity was way way up! The seam of coal that these pits were exploiting goes as far as the Dutch Coast! so that is without touching the coal under my feet, 8 miles inland!

Yes Managers were losing jobs, the record of Tory administrations aiding co-operative workforces is not very good and always tended toward their own kind in management - ie. I DESERVE TO BE HERE whether or not that is true!! Flashman syndrome!

Gubmint - Tory help to for cooperative pits just was not there!

Don't go looking for the figures though they are safely esconsed in the same place as the TSR2 Blueprints!

blue
Your post on Greece, would have been nice if it had come from your own
thoughts on the subject rather than of something written by another, with respect.

Hello Ivanhoe

"Hello Mel. Why in your view, are working class Tory's so thick and thick skinned ??."

Because they confuse the PM's arrogance and total defiance of anything and anybody, as strenght. They live in hope that what they beleive to be
a strong leader will bring an end to their misery. Unfortuntely the same applied to the Thatcher Witch and before they woke up to what was happening behind their backs, it was all too late. Same applies now with Camer-Con.

I am am disgusted with Lansley and Camercon.

These two barstewards seem to be the only ones who wish to reform our NHS. Again they are to railroad these reforms through as a starter for the privatisation of OUR NHS. Profit before service and poor service at astronmical costs.

Oh I forgot, there are some who agree with these two evil greedy creatures,
the private medical companies. I wonder why?

These two barstewards seem to be the only ones who wish to reform our NHS

Not at all, it has been Tory Dogma for more than thirty years, but the current uncertainty serves to remind us that Success has many parents but Failure is an orphan.

Mel wrote:Hello Ivanhoe

"Hello Mel. Why in your view, are working class Tory's so thick and thick skinned ??."

Because they confuse the PM's arrogance and total defiance of anything and anybody, as strenght. They live in hope that what they beleive to be
a strong leader will bring an end to their misery. Unfortuntely the same applied to the Thatcher Witch and before they woke up to what was happening behind their backs, it was all too late. Same applies now with Camer-Con.

Precisely.

blue
Your post on Greece, would have been nice if it had come from your own
thoughts on the subject rather than of something written by another, with respect..

Yes Mel...that's why I put the link below....Many posters post information from other sources on here, but as usual it's ok for your back slapping commies, but not ok for me?

Not a nice response blue, one that is usually expected from a Tory. You Tory lovers dont like the truth. Like your party leader, they prefer lies to the truth, it seems to get them places in the short term which is enough to do as much damage to the poor to feed their hungry for more greedy wealthy kind.

God bless

Sorry Mel...No offence but I just read...blah blah blah.....same old rhetoric based or nothing but your own imagination and political ideology

My response is based on being labelled a Fascist for being a tory.....so I guess it's now fair game to stoop to this level

You Tory lovers dont like the truth

The truth is all I seek and that's all I want...not many truths happening around here though....plenty of exageration though

Night Mel......nothing personal in my response I can assure you

New Church of England gospel: go forth and multiply then rest, for thou shalt claim benefits from thy labouring neighbour without limit

Gospel from the Devils advovate (someone who speaks for the side that the common person is against.

Go forth and Railroad everything through parliment, irrispective of public opinion and Lords voting against, that returns profit to those who suck the blood from the helpless, for thou shalt become the Devils deciple in high order.

Unfortunately Divine Retribution will come too late to do the rest of us any good.

blueturando wrote:Sorry Mel...No offence but I just read...blah blah blah.....same old rhetoric based or nothing but your own imagination and political ideology

My response is based on being labelled a Fascist for being a tory.....so I guess it's now fair game to stoop to this level

Pardon my intrution, but this is copied and pasted from Wikipedia.

Fascists seek rejuvenation of their nation based on commitment to an organic national community where its individuals are united together as one people in national identity by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and blood through a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through discipline, indoctrination, physical education, and eugenics.[3][4] Fascism seeks to purify the nation of foreign influences that are deemed to be causing degeneration of the nation or of not fitting into the national culture.[5] Fascism promotes political violence and war as actions that create national regeneration, spirit and vitality.[3][6] Fascists commonly utilize paramilitary organizations for violence against opponents or to overthrow a political system.[7] Fascism opposes multiple ideologies: conservatism, liberalism, and two major forms of socialism—communism and social democracy.[8] Fascism claims to represent a synthesis of cohesive ideas previously divided between traditional political ideologies.[9] To achieve its goals, the fascist state purges forces, ideas, people, and systems deemed to be the cause of decadence and degeneration.

In my view, this sums up Thatcher's right wing idioligy perfectly. Thus making Thatcher a Fascist. She began in Britain, a right wing dictatership.

How astute of you. Well done.

Ivanhoe.

Superb example of Thatcher the Witch.

King is to pour £50billion into the economy, which will save the blushes of failure, whereby the "not botherd" section of Joe public will think the bounce this may bring to the economy will be due to Gideons austerity measures.
In his letter today to Gideon, he said this---Quote- "Some improvement in Britons' real incomes was set to support a gradual recovery this year, though the tight credit conditions and the government's austerity measures presented headwinds.

Can't see where he gets his " some improvement in Britons' real incomes"
Perhaps he refers to those huge companies who still make excessive profits on the backs of ordinary peoples pockets.

As far as his final comment, on this, he is surely correct with his-- " Governments austerity measures presented headwinds."

Had he added the truth he should have said gail force, however he couldn't
possibly tell the real truth as the concequences to him personally would be damaging to say the least, especially if Dave the Rave had anything to do with anything said truthful about Tory measures.

Stop worrying about the British Economy, lads. The Bank of England has plenty of money they haven't even printed yet.

Mel wrote:I am am disgusted with Lansley and Camercon.

These two barstewards seem to be the only ones who wish to reform our NHS. Again they are to railroad these reforms through as a starter for the privatisation of OUR NHS. Profit before service and poor service at astronmical costs.

Oh I forgot, there are some who agree with these two evil greedy creatures,
the private medical companies. I wonder why?

I am certain you do not need to spell it out astra, we all know when there is a American Insurance company advertising on TV UNUM and just to warn every one they take your premiums but fail to pay out due to the small print in there contract.

Hello Red,

I may seem to be up avove the clouds at times, but "ASTRA" not my non de plume, sir and he is better educated than me in any case.

The compliment is very nice and appreciated MEL, but I am sure I am bottom of the class as far as finance goes