[Closed] A truly sad day for British society...

Here here

As a natural right winger, I agree entirely.

We need a long term national plan, not short sighted one eye on the next election self interest.

+1 for everything evb says. If your username is also your location, then your MP is [url= http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24964/rory_stewart/penrith_and_the_border/divisions?policy=6670 ]one who nearly always votes through benefit cuts[/url].

3/10 on the rant score; (Good spelling, punctuation, no random caps, no excessive excalmation marks, and above all a rationl and hard to disagree with point).

Is disappoint, but agree wholeheartedly.

The disadvantaged / poor / uneducated / young don't vote much.

Politicians aim to be voted in and work hard at that.

Its the older, retired, middle class, well paid people that vote more. So I don't expect thing to change much.

[img] [/img]

there have have truly sadder days, there will be further truly sad days. What really is sad are those that moan but don't vote and don't get involved. Am pointing at no one in particular unless you qualify.

Little to disagree with there. I particularly agree with the need for a more long term approach rather than parties and individual politicians looking to their own interests. Unfortunately under the existing system this will always be prevalent. Politicians need votes so will appeal to those who they think can secure their futures rather than the country as a whole. Why should Osbourne care about some wheelchair-bound unemployed guy in Orford? He's hardly likely to vote Tory so he doesn't matter. Osborne, Duncan-Smith, Johnson and Gove are psychopaths who firmly believe that they are right and everyone who doesn't agree is not only wrong but dangerous to both them and the country.

Hameron on the other hand is a brain dead puppet.

If any high rate taxpayers truly agree with the OP, they'll be paying their £43/mo to a charity next year.

It's disgusting.

I've benefited massively from yesterdays budget. I feel like I'm being bribed. I'm a member of that poor, downtrodden demographic, the relatively well-paid, white, middle-class, educated, English male. I'm doing just fine already, comparatively speaking, considering the state of the economy. There are plenty of other people out there who really need the help. If there's money to give away in tax breaks (which I dispute, given the state of the NHS and education, the number of homeless, the treatment of the elderly, etc) then it should be spent on people who need it more than me! Which is practically everyone else! For ****'s sake!

If any high rate taxpayers truly agree with the OP, they'll be paying their £43/mo to a charity next year.

While you were typing that, I was typing this:

Right, I'm off to increase my donations to Shelter and whatnot, hopefully that'll make me feel less dirty.

Oh, and Gideon? I'll ****ing hang before I vote for the likes of you, no matter how much cash you throw at me, you oleaginous little cokehead piece of shit.

oleaginous little cokehead piece of shit

Quote of the week right there!

oleaginous little cokehead piece of shit

His size is just a matter of perspective.

There is no such thing as society.

I agree re. giving to charity, and being relatively well off, we do. However, turning the welfare system into one funded through voluntary donations is entirely wrong.

Poor rant but completely agree.

We can find money to bomb the **** out of Syria and give tax breaks but not support the NHS and disabled.

Tells you alot about the current governments priorities.

This has to be the worst government in my life time. (I'm 37)

Its the Tory party raison d'etre. Its what they do. And they're really, really good at it.

Redistribution of wealth. To take from the poor and disadvantaged, to give more to the people who already have plenty.

The thing that I find staggering is that anyone other than the top 5% of earners votes for the inhumane, casually heartless, self-serving shower of shits!

Sorry i dont vote so apparently i am not allowed an opinion.

Oh, and Gideon? I'll **** hang before I vote for the likes of you, no matter how much cash you throw at me, you oleaginous little cokehead piece of shit.

😆

Agree entirely with this. Another one who will be better off from this bribery budget. But my brother on the other hand, who has long term mental health issues and can't work, will suffer to bribe the likes of me. Just disgusting.

"Just disgusting."

Sums it up really . If I type my true feelings I will get banned .

The total welfare budget is about £130bn (need to check). Personally I am in favour of the most needy getting priority access to this money. I am in favour of the least needy getting nothing.

@binners the change to the 40% tax band benefitted 600,000 middle class earnjng around £42k, the low paid should vote Tory as a weak economy impacts them the most and Labour currently have no credible offering. We are still paying the price for Labour mismanagement and mark my words it's going to get a whole lot worse in the next 3 years. IMO we really have seen nothing yet in terms of financial pain.

The thing that I find staggering is that anyone other than the top 5% of earners votes for the inhumane, casually heartless, self-serving shower of shits!

I would like to commend John Humphreys on Radio 4 at about 8:10 this morning for confronting Osborne with this (or something very near to it)

So you've failed completely on your first 2 targets and your 3rd one, that of getting a surplus is likely to be missed as well.
What does a man need to do to get sacked?

I don't think it's a given that a Tory government will produce a better economy than a Labour one. Or that its proceeds will be spread any more evenly.

You're not talking about the trickle down effect are you Jam?

Can someone explain exactly WHY top rate taxpayers (me included) need an extra £43/mo? At the expense of the disabled on benefits? FFS.

oleaginous [b][i][u]little[/u][/i][/b] cokehead piece of shit.

I've just googled that bit, I'll have to scrub myself with a wire brush and bleach mind, and he's apparently 5'11".

Heres a thought for you Jammers. As a natural right winger it might blow your *ing mind completely though. But maybe some people, when voting, take into account other considerations than purely [b]WHAT'S IN IT FOR ME, ME, MEEEEEEEEEEEEEE?!!!!!!![/b]

I know, I know..... *ing mental, right?

You get better jambalaya, the low paid should vote Tory! 😆

What the **** does being little have to do with it?

I would like to commend John Humphreys on Radio 4 at about 8:10 this morning for confronting Osborne with this (or something very near to it)

So you've failed completely on your first 2 targets and your 3rd one, that of getting a surplus is likely to be missed as well.
What does a man need to do to get sacked?
Well asked sir, well asked.

Counts being counts.

But then, they are the [b]elected[/b] government.

Sorry i dont vote so apparently i am not allowed an opinion.

So why not vote for Labour then, if they are closer to your values?

I don't understand not voting - do you think the system of government in a country is going to change (without a revolution) by abstaining.

I've just googled that bit, I'll have to scrub myself with a wire brush and bleach mind, and he's apparently 5'11".

What the **** does being little have to do with it?

Nothing really, obviously. I was ranting, it's not meant to be totally coherent. His physical stature is irrelevant, but his actions are contemptible, perhaps I was applying 'little' in that sense, he's a figuratively little man, small-minded, morally and philosophically stunted.

I agree re. giving to charity, and being relatively well off, we do. However, turning the welfare system into one funded through voluntary donations is entirely wrong.

For the record I've just increased my monthly donations to charity by roughly the amount I'm going to benefit in the next tax year (I think, will check properly later, and that's excluding gift-aid, which goes on top I think). It's just a short-term way of doing something to redress the balance, and I agree entirely that it should not be the way we look after the most vulnerable in a civilised society.

Agreed... just reading summary of it again to check I haven't imagined it...

* reductions in higher rate tax,
* increase in tax free entitlement,
* reduction in Capital Gains Tax,
* reduction in Corporation Tax,
* cuts to disability benefits.

Nope, it still definitely says all that... disgraceful. Oh, and that's not even mentioning the Academies... I have Canadian citizenship, thinking now might be the time to cash in and move there instead...

I don't think it's a given that a Tory government will produce a better economy than a Labour one

No, no it isn't... https://mickfoster.wordpress.com/2016/03/13/who-is-better-at-managing-the-uk-economy-labour-or-the-tories/

<totally failed to share a table from google photos>

Found one I could link to.

[img] [/img]

now off to increase my CAF donation.

I don't think Labour are the answer to this - replace a bunch of self-serving muppets with another, equally self interested set of muppets?

No thanks. I'm moving to China. One-party politics is where it's at these days.

If any high rate taxpayers truly agree with the OP, they'll be paying their £43/mo to a charity next year.

Yep. no problem.

I don't think Labour are the answer to this - replace a bunch of self-serving muppets with another, equally self interested set of muppets?

All politicians are self serving to some extent, but Labour have never persecuted the poor like this and never would. They generally ask those who can easily afford to pay more, to do so. Which is fine by me.

Increase in personal allowance, with no increases on fuel etc. Means those on lower incomes should be better off. Exactly the type of policy that Labour would traditionally support.

I have Canadian citizenship,

What left wing utopia do you expect to find there, as it has lower rates of tax than the UK.

Exactly the type of policy that Labour would traditionally support.

Paid for by cutting disability payment to who have trouble washing themselves or using the toilet?

Labour would never support that.

I havent gotten round to checking the proposed disability cuts yet, can someone please summarise what they entail and how many claimants they will effect?

Paid for by cutting disability payment to who have trouble washing themselves or using the toilet?

Are the cuts not intended to reduce benefits to those that are physically able to do the above, and remain for those that are inacapable?
My general understanding of the disability hounding and social cuts was to thin out the hoards of mis-claimants. Whether this is actually the case, nor being undertaken in the fariest manner is probably the real area for discussion.

Super ISA and the proposed savings scheme for low earners seem like good changes for all to me, before I cast this budget as a Tory cover-up i'd like to know exactly whats being covered up.

" Tory cover-up i'd like to know exactly whats being covered up."

There is no cover up , they are quite open about cutting benefits to the most vulnerable people in our country .

dragon - Member
Increase in personal allowance, with no increases on fuel etc. Means those on lower incomes should be better off. Exactly the type of policy that Labour would traditionally support.

I have Canadian citizenship,
What left wing utopia do you expect to find there, as it has lower rates of tax than the UK.

They're going in the right direction, IMO...

2. Raise Taxes on the Wealthy
The Liberals also promised a tax hike for Canada’s top 1% to pay for a tax cut for the country’s middle class. It means that anyone who earns over $200,000 would see a tax hike of around 4%, while those earning between $44,701 and $89,401 would see a cut of around 1.5%, according to the Globe and Mail.

The tax hike on the rich stems partially from Trudeau’s criticism of the Conservatives’ taxation policy. Over the course of the elections, he frequently accused Harper’s government of favoring tax cuts for the rich and big corporations over regular Canadians.

There is no cover up , they are quite open about cutting benefits to the most vulnerable people in our country .

But I think that need to be backed up with more facts rather than the most commonly spoken statement.

My personal angle is that I simply refuse to accept that Cameron et al gather in the cabinet, sat on comfy chairs made from piles of cash and resting their weary feet on the backs of hunched immigrants - rubbing their hands in glee at their latest concocted plans to make their rich friends richer purely at the expense of the underpriveledged and disabled.
That is pretty much the picture that is painted on a daily basis. How true can it really be? Are the Tories truly 'evil', with nothing but an evil agenda?

Politics falls into caricaturisation far too easily.

AFAIK the budget was designed partly to help small businesses grow.

The kinds of businesses who will give employment to the unemployed and needy.

Which is a far more satisfactory long-term strategy than just giving people money to sit around getting depressed all day.

I've seen this doing the rounds

[img] [/img]