Jump to content

Recommended Posts

No Loz, it wasn't. My first post was asking for opinions because I wanted some advice on who those people should vote for.

Like I said, some of us really don't know what to do for the best, so we read your posts and haven't a clue what you are talking about so are none the wiser.


I voted Labour as usual, never made a secret of it, yet some regulars on here say it's the worse thing to do ever.


And you know what? I still have no idea why.


Don't bother explaining. It's irrelevant now anyway. I can wait 5 years.

When the most left wing candidate for Labour leader comes out with agreement further welfare cuts. including the new, lower cap on benefits, you can see the election result is really starting to hit home for Labour.


http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/29/labours-andy-burham-further-welfare-cuts-leader-business

that is a followup to an earlier story, which has probabaly provoked the hateful envious nasty shit I have ever seen on a facebook post. will try to find a link somehow tor FB stuff .


thatcher really has left a legacy that she never really planned or considered as a result

So if you're not a benefit scrounger? What if having 6 kids, not working, living with a man who doesn't work either is not the life for you.


What if you work full-time in a low paid job & struggle to manage on a single wage supporting one child. Alone.


Then what?


Just wondered. There doesn't seem to be a lot in between. There are benefits for the poor, big pay cheques for the rich and nothing for those stuck in the middle.

The irony is that for all their talk of cuts the Tories won't touch pensions, continue to pursue policies with the effect if increasing house prices (and so the housing benefit bill) and further weaken employees rights or ability to organise (driving yet more low pay).
Tory policy is often nothing to do with reducing costs (even where it purports to be), it's about reducing the size of the state regardless of the bill. We've seen it over and over again - public services and assets privatised at either a loss of with increased cost to taxpayers. It's purely ideological and lacks any pragmatism or coherence.

Sadly I watch these cuts have effect on a daily basis. Not sure that many of you do. Homelessness going through the roof at the moment, with all support services cut to ribbons. People dying on the street (2 of mine this year so far). Support budget in my borough now cut from ?17m to under ?3m.


Can the Tory voters tell me how they defend this? I am genuinely interested because I cannot see how they can.


And the social cleansing that is now beginning in earnest in London is quite sinister I think.


I am conscious my opinions are based on what I do for a living, but I guess so are a bankers.

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The irony is that for all their talk of cuts the

> Tories won't touch pensions, continue to pursue

> policies with the effect if increasing house

> prices (and so the housing benefit bill) and

> further weaken employees rights or ability to

> organise (driving yet more low pay).


I tend to agree with protecting pensions.


Most of us will grow old - and there's no coming

back from it.

ratty Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> And the social cleansing that is now beginning in

> earnest in London is quite sinister I think.



Totally agree.



> I am conscious my opinions are based on what I do

> for a living, but I guess so are a bankers.



Me too. When you're trying to implement these cuts on a daily basis it makes you a bit sick seeing sensationalist stories about some layabout benefits scrounger who is not even remotely typical.


And in my area (currently SEN) what you see is the families that have money and resources using said resources to take a council to Court and end up being awarded unbelievable resources for their child who is no more needy than shed loads of other kids from families that don't have the money or knowledge to go that route.


Sick twisted society where money follows money and fuck the rest of them.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> it makes you a bit sick seeing

> sensationalist stories about some layabout

> benefits scrounger who is not even remotely typical.


Was thinking the same thing... bloody tabloid scapegoating nonsense. An extreme case which isn't even vaguely representative of anyone I've ever met.



ratty Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I am conscious my opinions are based on what I do

> for a living, but I guess so are a bankers.


People have to realise that the majority of Tory voters are not bankers - or even particularly wealthy (left wing scapegoating nonsense!) Plenty of working class and lower-middle class Tories out there.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ratty Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > And the social cleansing that is now beginning in

> > earnest in London is quite sinister I think.

>

> Totally agree.


Is it really 'social cleansing' (which implies it is an actual purposeful policy) or is it just the fact that government after government (of all parties involved) have consistently failed to build enough housing to satisfy demand, and now we are seeing the result in that people are being priced out of London?

... but my main issue is the failure to see the bigger picture. You can't talk about reducing dependency on state intervention and at the same time pursue policies which increase house prices, depress wages and see public services delivered through more complex, less accountable and more expensive mechanisms.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • He seemed to me to be fully immersed in the Jeremy Corbyn ethos of the Labour Party. I dint think that (and self describing as a Marxist) would have helped much when Labour was changed under Starmer. There was a purge of people as far left as him that he was lucky to survive once in my opinion.
    • I perceive the problem.simply as spending too much without first shoring up the economy.  If the government had reduced borrowing,  and as much as most hate the idea, reduced government deiartment spending (so called austerity) and not bowed to union pressures for pay rises, then encouraged businesses to grow, extra cash would have entered the coffers and at a later stage when the economy was in a stronger position rises in NI or taxes would have a lesser impact, but instead Reeves turned that on its head by increasing ni which has killed growth, increased prices and shimmied the economy.  What's worse is that the perceived 20 billion black hole has increased to 30 billion in a year. Is there a risk that after 5 years it could be as high as 70 billion ???     
    • That petition is bananas.   If you want a youth centre there pay the landlord the same rent a Londis would and build it yourself or shut the f**k up to be honest. Wasting our MPs time with this trivial nonsense is appalling. If your kids are still out at 1am on a school night you've got bigger problems than vapes and booze and hot sausage rolls. 
    • There used to be a better baker than Gail's on the same site immediately before Gail's pulled their financial muscle.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...