Isn’t it interesting that at a time when the Government is achieving the highest unemployment figures in 17 years, and “when benefit costs will be soaring due to that simple fact, they chose to once again focus on those poor sod who are unemployed and stick it to them with the “half the world is scamming benefits and bleeding us poor taxpayers white myth”. This is just as cynical as the earlier assault on invalidity benefits, which has done little to reduce fiddling and much to increase stress on the people least able to deal with it.

Even more interesting the ongoing failure to address fat cats bonuses and the banking sectors excesses. Not difficult to do, simply increase the tax on unearned income, and in the time honoured way have HMRC issue tax demands on anything they suspect is unwarranted, it then becomes the individuals problem to prove it was earnt. If you’ve generated £35 million additional revenue for your bank that shouldn’t be hard to prove, whereas Fred Goodwin might struggle to convince even his Mum he’d earnt what he got. Much easier than trying to do the poor for a few coppers.

Double Post

Crikey. You lot are still arguing about this?

Think about it for a moment….. You’re arguing on an inconsequential bike forum.

Why are you wasting so much time doing that?

Really is this what it’s come down to as a nation we’re striving to push children into poverty, it’s more than a bit of a worry that the government seem to think this is what the majority of voters want?
I’m not vaunting huge payouts for people cheating any system, but a change in a system which will lead to homelessness and increased child poverty surely can’t be right in a civilised western nation.
Next stop the workhouse?
What’s even more terrifying is that part of this bill includes a surcharge for the CSA that will see 12% of payments diverted from those receiving them. Even Lord McKay the Tory who created the CSA is voting against this (the surcharge is a labour policy, but no attempt to use has been made till now).
I feel genuinely ashamed to have voted for this government.

i was really excited when i read this thread, i’ve never even tried claiming benefits before, but from some of the stories i read i thought i must be entitled to some.

but alas, i checked on that Turn2us website, and they simply turned me away empty handed.

i feel cheated by our government. we need benefit reforms and we need them now.

Have you not thought that if the Government are giving £26K in benefits to families to live on
Just how many of you are actually being under paid. Thus proves the gap between the rich and poor
is widening ever more.

Have a read of this.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jan/23/welfare-cuts-emergency-loans?fb=native&CMP=FBCNETTXT9038

Crikey. You lot are still arguing about this?

Think about it for a moment….. You’re arguing on an inconsequential bike forum.

Why are you wasting so much time doing that?

Makes you wonder why you bothered to read the thread and post at all, if you’re that disinterested, doesn’t it 😉

High level of amusement for TJ’s unintentional irony though

Have a read of this

Thanks TJ, that was thoroughly depressing……it was like reading about the situation in some poor undeveloped country, not one of the wealthiest nations on earth 😐

And it’s worth remembering that not only is Ed Miliband committed to not restoring Tory spending cuts, but the Guardian fully backs him, explaining away the continued fall in support for Labour in a recent poll (in their editorial on Monday) as probably due to the public “not yet had time to shift perceptions about the Labour leader” and because Labour hadn’t shown unity on the issue…..arse-holes.

I read Toynbee’s article yesterday TJ and was amused at who she chose to quote at the end of it. Would you care to enlighten everyone and explain how she chose to source material from a right wing propoganda unit?

Simon Jenkins gives a different perspective in the same paper today:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jan/24/cameron-understand-state-fight-deficit

The dire recent performances of such giant departments as defence, health and the Home Office show that the British state has bitten off more than it can any longer chew. They lurch from crisis to crisis, and responses become ever cruder. Lansley’s laudable ambition to reduce NHS bureaucracy could have been achieved without yet another blood-drenched reorganisation. Duncan Smith’s attack on welfare dependency – which long defeated his predecessors – should have started with the big-dividend areas of disability and housing, and fought shy of “taking money from the mouths of children”. Change in overcentralised government always throws up high-profile “losers” that make it vulnerable to the charge of timidity or cruelty. Both are rife today.

Thatcherism is still the ruling ideology of Whitehall, but in seeking “public-private partnership” it failed in what should have been its starting point. It knew what the private meant, but lost sight of the public. David Cameron well distinguishes between “society” and the state, but takes his distinction no further. He therefore underestimates the reactionary power of state institutions to guard themselves. However much he may deplore the state, he must define its constitutional rationale. Otherwise he will fight constant battles with it, most of which he will lose.

So even The Guardian is becoming RW!!!????

Jenkins is wrong on Money Supply as like most people he has forgotten/doesn’t understand basic ISLM macro economics. Monetary stimulus doesn’t work with a flat LM curve, but hey when has fact stood in the way of anything!!

The Guardian is becoming RW!!!????

The guardian has always had a range of opinions, and they are generally put across honestly in the articles.

MSP yes I am aware. That was just a little joke!!

That was just a little joke!!

Well that’s a relief, for a moment I thought you were serious about reading a Polly Toynbee article. I did think to myself why the **** would anyone do that, and more importantly, quote it.

Many Bishops feel that families cannot be raised on £26,000 a year, yet they pay their Vicars about £22,000 a year. 😯

But they get a vicarage as well, which is worth a fair bit.

Many Bishops feel that families cannot be raised on £26,000 a year, yet they pay their Vicars about £22,000 a year

But they then live rent/bills/council-tax free, plus some other expenses.

A small postscript to all this. It was interesting today to hear that the governments proclamations of some 391,000 immigrants claiming benefits as if there was some incredible scam going on has been brought up short by the office of national statistics. They have come as close as a civil servant can to calling the governing party liars, by firstly pointing out that 98% of these people are perfectly legitimately entitled to claim under reciprocal agreements which also sees large numbers of British Expats claiming benefits in places like Spain, and that in fact immigrants on benefits are a lower percentage of the total than they represent in the population as a whole. i.e. immigrants are less likely to claim benefits than other parts of the legitimate population. Secondly asking ministers not to quote raw figures until they have been thoroughly vetted and passed as being accurate by the Office whose job it is to provide accurate information.

Lies, damn lies and Tories!

Isn’t it interesting that at a time when the Government is achieving the highest unemployment figures in 17 years, and “when benefit costs will be soaring due to that simple fact, they chose to once again focus on:

– European judges – up yours, Delors! Stick it up your Brussels, Frenchie!

– Scottish independence – up yours, Salmond! Stick up your kilt, Jocks!

– Benefits fraud – up yours, dolescum! Stick it up your Trisha, spongers!

All very emotive (and policy-free) topics which will reduce the likelihood that the Con-Dem coalition will have to address the genuine big problems facing the UK government. You’re absolutely right, BB.

Ernie – I did read, although didn’t enjoy, Toynbee’s article. The joke was the fact that she quoted the IFS in an article in The Guardian. It was amusing as someone had commented that quoting the IFS was right wing propoganda (sic) – that comment and Polly Toynbee combined made me laugh, that’s all.

But unintended humour is a feature of STW after all.

Thanks for explaining the joke to me teamhurtmore.

But I don’t think you fully understand the nature of the Guardian.

Still, I’m pleased to hear that a combination of what someone said on here, plus what Polly wrote, amused you and made you laugh 8)