BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 20 Oct 10 - 01:13 PM

It was tough, but it was needed. I feel they could have done more. The benefits system is still too generous. The 980million overseas aid budget should have been cut. Charity starts at home.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Stu
Date: 20 Oct 10 - 01:31 PM

"The benefits system is still too generous"

Why?

"Charity starts at home."

It does? Why burden already stretched charities with the appalling changes to social housing legislation and closed-down quangos then?

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 20 Oct 10 - 01:39 PM

Do you have kids Bonzo? Do you have, or hope to have, grandchildren? Do you expect all of them never to need any assistance from the state, to never experience serious injury or disability or never find themselves bankrupt and penniless, or otherwise disenfranchised from essential supports?

As the last remaining descendant of a number of quite affluent ancestors, in theory I aught to have been a rather wealthy young woman. But a number of human tragedies conspired to determine that I neither inherited a bean, nor was I blessed with the necessary well-being to forge my own path to material security (Dickens would love it!)

It would be intriguing to know what my upper middle-class great grandparents who buggered off to tax exile with their savings many years ago, would now think about their genetic line dying with me currently wondering if I might be homeless sometime in the near future.
Perhaps nothing much, but then they were Tories.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 20 Oct 10 - 01:43 PM

I would expect them to save for a mortgage deposit just as I did in the 70s.

I'm not familiar with this expression "social housing" do you mean Council Houses??

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 20 Oct 10 - 01:59 PM

So you can't imagine a scenario where your children or grandchildren are struck with some illness or disability? Or even where they through no fault of their own, make a bad investment on dodgy advise and lose their life savings? Or or or? Considering the affluence of those who came before me, my fortunes have been pretty crumby. Bad luck can afflict anyone. That's what the state is there for, not merely to 'carry' some supposed willfully indigent underclass, but your children and their children too - if and when they need it.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Oct 10 - 02:02 PM

I would expect them to save for a mortgage deposit just as I did in the 70s.

And how did the cost of the house you were buying compare with your annual earnings, Bonzo? Two or three times perhaps.   Now it'd be likely to be more like ten times, more in places like London.

"Social Housing" also includes property rented from Housing Associations as well as from Councils.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 20 Oct 10 - 02:04 PM

My son fends for himself and it's his choice to have 3 children. If he's got any sense he will get round the cap on child tax benefit.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 20 Oct 10 - 02:11 PM

"There will be no jobs for these people to go into except care work? That is a mind boggling thought isn't it?"

It's been this way for years down here in the West Country, CS...and yet...we have to pay 50% HIGHER water rates for those bloody sharks at South West Water.

There ain't no jobs down here, barely above minimum wages..seriously not..Most are on minimum wage, have been for years and years..Care jobs are pretty much all there is. A bit of shop work if you're lucky, but so many shops are closing...

Torbay is particularly badly off. People here are already dirt poor.

Council house reviews? Yup, they should be reviewed from time to time, because someone could be living in one having found a highly paid job, and that's so unfair. I knew a bloke whose parents have always lived in their council house. They struggled all their lives, but when they died he was allowed to buy that house for a pittance, despite having a well paid job at British Telecom. Why?

As for foisting up rents, that's ridiculous. Where the fuck do they think people are going to get the money from?

I know what it's like to live in fear of losing everything, because it happened to my dear Dad. He never owned his house, had a private landlord on the Pinnerwood Park Estate. When he had the money, (in the days when houses there were valued around £2,000) they refused to sell any houses off. When he was doublecrossed by his business partner, losing all, he struggled for the remainder of his days. He'd struggled anyway, just being a humble optician. New landlords took over, sold off most of the private rented housing they'd inherited, for huge sums of money, then tried to inflate the rents of those who couldn't afford to buy in order to get them out so they could sell their houses too.

It was absolute shite. Dad was sick with worry. Luckily people were far more protected, tenants that is, in those days, so they only were able to increase the rent by a small amount, but they tried over and over, to get more money from folks who couldn't afford it.

I saw the worry, the suffering, the insecurity, firsthand..and I remember, when I was about 13 bursting into floods of tears at my friend's house, at the thought of losing the only 'home' I'd ever known. That house was part of me..I'd never known anything else, and now, some bastard had turned up trying to get us out.   I don't think any of us ever felt 'safe' there again..

I worry terribly for all those who are already struggling so very much...

Bonzo, please back off, you seemingly have no idea how so many people are suffering 'out here'...genuine people, good people, people who've scrimped and scraped their whole lives long. Yes, there are scroungers, there always will be, sadly...in every country, and they'll always find a way to fiddle things, but there are many who are going to have such hardship forced upon them....


.....whilst these Bloody Bankers get away with EVERYTHING and give themselves bigger and bigger bonuses!

Levels, I was on the Poll Tax March, as I've said many a time..I'll be on the new ones that will be coming up very shortly too.

There are people out there who have so much of OUR money and no-one, but NO-ONE is making these bastards hand it back, not in the UK, nor the USA, nor Europe or anywhere else...

And they are literally, laughing all the way to their banks...where they sit and slobber over OUR money!!

Revolucion, here we come......

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: bubblyrat
Date: 20 Oct 10 - 02:14 PM

Of course they are not going to build aircraft-carriers with no aircraft to fly from them !! Assuming that the first one is ready in 4-5 years time, then it gives the Navy that much time to purchase,set up facilities for,and train the air & ground crews of,suitable "off the shelf" combat-ready aircraft.The primary requirements would then be ;

Trained pilots who can land on a conventional carrier.These would be trained (to fly the FA 18 Super Hornet )in the USA, where they could also receive DLP (deck landing practice) aboard US CVAs.Eventually,they would fly / deliver these aircraft to the UK.

A suitable airfield (RNAS Yeovilton) would have been set up to operate Hornets,with a Headquarters Squadron,a maintenance unit,engineering workshops,flight simulators,ordnance storage,etc etc & 101 other necessary facilities,including a Deck Landing Mirror for MADDL practice (Mirror Assisted Dummy Deck Landing ).

Other support,training, and trials facilities would be provided at Boscombe Down and possibly Farnborough.

Pilots would continue to undergo DLP and actually recover to / take off from US carriers in European / Mediterranean waters; by the time the first new carrier is ready,the aircrews should be pretty proficient !!

About 3 to 4 weeks ago,I have been led to believe, a senior Royal Navy ( possibly Royal Marine !) officer left for the USA in order to finalise the purchase of said FA 18 Super Hornets, at about $24 million each, a considerable saving on the JSF at £ 100 Million each !!! An attractive proposition for any cash-strapped government.

Of course, I could be wrong,but it makes good sense to me , and probably does to Mr Cameron & his advisors, but he wouldn't let US know,would he ?? Although it seems to be common knowledge in ---er --SOME circles !! And remember; if it's true,you didn't hear it from me !! Meanwhile ;
    I have serious doubts about the carriers' "Home Ports" ; "Eagle" and "Ark Royal", the navy's biggest ships ever ,at around 50,000tons and 800 feet long,were both based in Plymouth.The dry-dock in Portsmouth was much too small to take them.The only other dry-docks we could use were in Gibraltar & Singapore !!( I was in "Eagle" ).Therefore, I cannot see HMSQE or HMSPOW going to Portsmouth at their current length of 925 feet !! Yes,there IS a dry-dock at Rosyth,where they are being assembled,but ,once completed & fitted out,with their superstructures ,islands and radar antennae fitted, I can't see them getting under the Forth Bridge ---HMS Eagle and HMCS Bonaventure couldn't in 1968--I was there !! And I think even the Plymouth dry-dock would be a "tight fit", it always was !!

       We shall see !!

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Oct 10 - 02:23 PM

The idea that "care work" should be seen as some inferior kind of last resort employment which anybody can do, and for which the pay should be minimal is contemptible.

It's responsible demanding work which requires dedication and imagination. And people doing it deserve to get a decent living wage.

(And nobody deserves to be paid more than a decent living wage - but that's another matter.)

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 20 Oct 10 - 02:53 PM

The trouble is, McGrath, 'care work' is not regarded as good work to do because you are expected to work damned hard for minimum wage, often doing the most personal things for others.

Now, there's nowt wrong with that, hell we all get to that stage, pretty much, in our lives, and we all need help, care, sympathy and empathy, but most of the people who own care homes make a bloody fortune, whilst treating their staff like slaves....and sadly, often treating their residents merely as commodities to make a big fat income from.

The care home next to me, a home for adults with autism is owned by a group called......'Midas' Homes.

I think that sums it up...

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 20 Oct 10 - 03:09 PM

The biggest problem of this entire system is that it tends to value want over need. Thus those things that are actually essential to society are undervalued while those that superficially massage and plump are overvalued. Of course once the shite hits the fan, the people that do stuff that people need, might eventually get noticed.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 20 Oct 10 - 04:06 PM

The biggest lie (Goebbels, anyone?) is the blame game. Until the bank meltdown (which followed global capital issues - and at the time of Brown's limitation of regulation the only conservative complaint was that he was not de-regulating enough - so the bank failure is the fault of capitalism and its political mouthpieces) the UK had one of the lowest deficits in the G7.

It is quite false to try to lay the blame for the deficit at the foot of the previous government.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 20 Oct 10 - 04:09 PM

Nobel prize winning economist confirms that spending cuts make a recession worse and do not reduce deficits...

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Oct 10 - 07:23 PM

Vulnerable 'shut out of society' by spending review welfare cuts

Just about the nastiest cut I can imagine is the decision to take away the "mobility allowance" from disabled people living in care homes. A payment which has made it possible for them to get out and keep in touch with relatives and the world around them.

I rather doubt if many people are going to try to justify that one. I imagine most people who seek to defend the cuts will prefer to ignore it.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Oct 10 - 07:45 PM

Disabled people among the hardest hit by spending review

Richard Hawkes, chief executive of the disability charity Scope, said: "The government has not delivered on its promise to support disabled people into work, penalising those on ESA and jobseekers' allowance who have worked and paid national insurance in the past and who now cannot rely on getting the support they need when they need it, in an increasingly difficult employment market. Disabled people and their families do not have 'broad shoulders', so why are they bearing the brunt of these cuts?"

About the mobility allowance cut:

Guy Parckar, acting director of policy and campaigns at the charity Leonard Cheshire Disability, said: "This is a fundamentally unfair change that could have a hugely detrimental impact on thousands of disabled people, leaving many effectively trapped in their homes, unable to afford to go out.

Many people in residential care already have their income capped at £20 a week once their care has been paid for and rely on the mobility benefit to be more independent.

This change will hit one of the most vulnerable groups in society,"    said Parckar.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Stu
Date: 21 Oct 10 - 07:12 AM

"If he's got any sense he will get round the cap on child tax benefit."

Proposing he becomes a benefit cheat? Nice.

It looks like the proposed bank levy is a white elephant; due to changes in corporation tax big banks might still be better off under the new arrangement. No surprise that Osborne is looking after his own.

Also, 70% of Great Britain is owned by less than 1% of the population; surely a land tax might be a fair way of raising funds from the landed classes?

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 21 Oct 10 - 11:20 AM

Could have been much worse.

I still have huge concerns that we don't have a private sector that can operate independently of the public sector, and he is relying on just that. But overall, even allowing for the lies and deceits, he did argue for a much more radical approach, so as I said, it could have been worse...

In fact, there is no good answer, just different shades of a difficult one, regardless of which party is rearranging the deck chairs.

(Oh, the lies and deceits; the ones I can rattle on about from a position of being involved... he talks of not cutting the NHS, just google QUIIP. £15Billion savings being required of The NHS. the Department of Health, which franchises, regulates and "owns" the NHS from its budget is seeing a 33% cut in the small print of his statement. Prior to that, most of the people I work with, myself included, are having roles reassessed. In short, an average £10K wage cut is expected to be announced, so level down the people from different commissions that merged into ours... My cynicism tells me such contradictions amplify around all government departments.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Oct 10 - 11:29 AM

Cuts to the mobility payment to severely disabled people in care homes isn't a matter of rearranging the deckchairs,. They amount to throwing them overboard. Not just clumsy, but vicious - and stupid because even Daily Mail readers will find them disgusting.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 21 Oct 10 - 02:16 PM

Think I just heard on Beeb R 4 that disability claimants living with someone who has savings will not be entitled to benefit. To take effect a year after the imminent reassessment.

So if my illness should put me in a state of not being able to work, then because my partner has savings I would not be entitled to any benefit?

Why doesn't the government just set up voluntary euthanasia clinics now? Hey... There's a business opportunity. Should set up franchises directly adjacent to rich city homes and charge them to come watch.

Naww... that won't work because the mobility allowance is needed to get the conscripts volunteers to the inhumation office.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 21 Oct 10 - 02:18 PM

Of course we do have a private sector that, particularly in manufacturing, is increasingly outsourcing to overseas companies exploiting cheap labour. So I suppose the solution to unemployment would be to encourage those who will lose their jobs to move to a sweat shop in a third world state?

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: mandotim
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 04:22 AM

What gets me about this whole scenario is the basic untruth behind the reason for the cuts. Blame is being laid at the feet of the Brown administration. The banks collapsed because of their unwise involvement in the US banking system and its insane approach to lending. We (the UK taxpayer) lent the banks over £950 billion to 'recapitalise' (in other words, pay for their recklessness and criminal stupidity). Our deficit in the public finances is now £850 billion. The mathematics is easy; we were a fiscally sound country with well resourced public services until the banks screwed up. The Coalition claims to have placed a levy on the banks to raise £7 billion per year (although their own Red Book figures show that thiey don't anticipate any of this being collected, as the banks will simply use avoidance tactics to make sure the money stays with them). Even if it was collected, it would take over 120 years to pay off the loan, even at zero interest. Try getting those terms from a bank!
Those to blame for this problem are getting away scot free, whilst those with nothing to do with the crisis are bearing the full brunt of the cuts. This is rather like being a parent with two children; one does something really bad, so you discipline the other one.
What is really scary is the apparent view from the government that there is no need to 'dress up' the cuts in some way to give the appearance of fairness. They are unfair, they know they are unfair, they know the disadvantaged will suffer disproportionately, but they make no excuses. We get the grotesque spectacle (to quote Neil Kinnock out of context)of a multi-millionaire Prime Minister with a multi-millionaire wife telling us 'we are all in this together'.
All civilisations decay over time, and Gibbon's 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' is the primer; what almost always happens is that gross inequality and conspicuous consumption leads to a sense of decadence; eventually the disadvantaged begin to notice, and revolutions happen. I thought this might happen under Thatcher, but she was savvy enough to hide the message and trim the policies enough to avoid it (although it was close around the poll tax and the miners strike). This time, I don't think those in power have enough intellectual ability to see the danger. To the barricades?
Tim

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Stu
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 04:45 AM

"Of course we do have a private sector that, particularly in manufacturing, is increasingly outsourcing to overseas companies exploiting cheap labour."

It's a damning indictment of the intelligence of those in charge this time time round that they don't seem to understand this point. The problem is that it's not just the manufacturing sector that is haemorrhaging contracts to overseas suppliers; the service industries that were to be the saviour of the economy are also being lost to foreign companies who pay their staff next to nothing etc etc. This is of course an inevitable consequence of the lassaize-faire economic approach so beloved by the Tories, and their retrogressive compulsion to allow the markets to regulate themselves (which they are totally unable or desire to do - even though their are dire consequences for society as a whole. This is the fatal flaw in the hands-off capitalist economic model).

Of course, future Baronets and the husbands of rich heiresses don't have to worry about the consequences of this, but the rest of us do. In fact, I wonder if even the sheeplike mass of middle-class toff wannabees, kept in check for so long by the false aspirations sold to them by uber-capitalist media-moguls and porcine politicans, might be jerked out of their reverie for all things material by the fact their police are disappearing off the streets and there will be empty aircraft carriers doing circuits of the island with nothing but bored sailors on the flight deck.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 04:50 AM

What absolute nonsense I read here, what losers!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: mandotim
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 05:15 AM

Hi Bonzo, thanks for your usual penetrating analysis. Would you care to enlighten us from your lofty position; exactly which parts of my analysis above were nonsense, in your view? Your term 'losers' is an interesting one. I would be grateful if you could supply your definition of 'winners' in the current scenario.
Best wishes
Tim

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: theleveller
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 06:22 AM

For Bonzo, read Bozo.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: mauvepink
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 07:15 AM

I have clients who rely on some of the disability benefits just to be able to live each week. Recently I have had two talk of suicide because they cannot cope with all the forms and the judging/decision makers. Some are already sitting in cold homes because they fear the energy bills again. This is a generation who have worked and seen their savings gone on care. I fear for many of them.

Where are the backbenchers? How can these things be pushed through without them being accepted? If the grass roots of the coalition do not agree with what their leaders are doing then how can it happen?

Am I being cynical in thinking that very few of them will be affected in any way over these cuts as they have their wages secure and their pensions sorted? Come the next round of voting and I wonder what memories people will keep of some of the dracaonian measures being taken against some of our most vulnerable in society?

I also know lot of diabled people who want to work. But things just go a whole more difficult for them too as some of the help and incentives they got to be in work are axed or reduced.

All very worrying :-(

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: theleveller
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 07:51 AM

"I also know lot of diabled people who want to work. But things just go a whole more difficult for them "

Too true, I'm afraid. With an even greater number of applicants for every job, disabled people will be at an even greater disadvantage. Unfortunately, the selfish, uncaring attitude of people like Bozo/Bonzo/Boko above, who don't give a shit for anyone but themselves, is still prevalent in our society today - the true legacy of Bloody Thatcher. These are society's real scroungers as they use every trick in the book - legal and otherwise - to minimise the amount of tax they pay whilst greedily grasping their own benefit handouts such as higher rate tax relief on pension contributions.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 07:51 AM

I had hoped that as the father of a child with severe disabilities (who sadly died last year) we could expect that whatever else David Cameron might do, he could be relied on to refrain from targeting people with disabilities when it came to imposing cuts.

I suppose I should have known better.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: mauvepink
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 08:13 AM

Perhaps, McGrath, had his child still been living, THEN he would have shown more empathy? I'm not sure but I also think we should not go too far down this path of bringing his personal life into his decisions.

I do agree with you though and understand your sentiments.

He keeps saying, at every opportunity, "Nick and I did not come into politics to do this... " but he dos a good job of showing otherwise. They should be held accountable legally for all the things they said they would not do and which they have gone ahead and done.

Changes were much needed. The deficit certainly needs quelling. There just has to be a fairer and kinder way to do it without impacting the most vulnerable in our society so much. I feel almost certain that suicides in the next couple of years will rise. Perhaps they should have booths erected in the benefit buildings where we can just walk in and have it done...

"Are YOU a drain on our society? Do YOU feel you are taking from the state? Have no fears. Just step inside and we will show you our cure...."

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 08:42 AM

What was the economic model followed after WWII? I'm neither strong on history or economics, but I am aware that we were in shit-loads of debt and that much of what the Tories are claiming we must now cut, was in fact created during the post war period.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 09:09 AM

Here is a video clip with an open letter to David Cameron by "Bendy Girl", a very eloquent lady - Shame on you Prime Minister - and here is a transcript http://networkedblogs.com/9uIGM

"Whilst I'm not a natural Conservative voter, when you became Prime Minister, as a disabled person, I was reassured by the personal knowledge and experience you have of disability that you would fight our corner and that you would protect us. Perhaps I was naive to believe you ..."

That's how I felt, as the father of someone with very severe disabilities. I feel betrayed and kicked in the teeth. This isn't about politics, it's about personal honour.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 10:37 AM

No one can honestly say that there isn't widespread abuse of the benefits system in the UK. That is the reason the government has made it a priority.

I have read the bleeding heart stories above, but what about the other side of the coin ?

Life's fine and dandy for families on housing benefit in London's wealthiest borough, Kensington and Chelsea.

One mother of four is being housed in a five-bedroom, two-bathroom mansion worth £2million – and taxpayers are paying her staggering £1,755 a week rent.

This isn't an isolated case. In fact, there's another family in the borough whose rent is even higher and five councils in Britain pay more than £70,000 a year to rent a property for someone on housing benefit.

What madness this is. We rightly feel sympathy towards anyone who has fallen on hard times but housing them in a lavish style that most of us can only dream about makes a mockery of those who work hard and pay their taxes.

The Government promised to reform the system so these abuses would stop, that is exactly what they have done. Under Labour, the cost of housing benefit has soared from £11billion in 1997 to more £21billion in 2009. The Government promised to reform the system so these abuses would stop. As usual, Labour did nothing but talk about it.

That's because it was in Labour's interest to keep throwing money at anyone who might one day vote for them. There were far too many nice little jobs being created under Labour such as Benefit Advice Officers, Community Advice Centres advising loafers what to write or how to act on during a D.L.A. application. These forms were rarely assessed by medical doctors, civil servants passed the applicant.

The majority of the measures announced yesterday will not hit those of a working mentality, but it will see the lazy, the workshy and the spongers in our society who enjoyed having their rent, mobility, council tax and beer money supplied courtesy of the British taxpayer.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: mandotim
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 11:02 AM

Actully Ritchie, it depends on your definition of 'widespread'. Most authorities (including the government)estimate that no more than 7-8% of benefit claims are unjustified; and that includes mistakes as well as deliberate attempts at fraud. If you mean 'widespread' as in 'reported by the Daily Mail', then perhaps you have an argument. There is another side to your coin too; for every £1 saved by stopping unjustified benefit claims, you could save £50 by closing the loopholes via which the top 10% of earners in this country avoid paying their fair share of tax. Read the Red Book, it's available on line. People taking advantage of the domicile rules alone account for more than benefit fraud. I assume your argument is based on the presumption that everyone should abide by legislation? Why not subject tax avoidance to the same rules as tax evasion, and force the wealthy to pay their share as intended in primary legislation?

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 11:09 AM

So is it fine by Richie Black to take the money from people in care homes that allows them to get out sometimes? Or are they included in his all-purpose category "the lazy, the workshy and the spongers in our society"?

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: theleveller
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 11:12 AM

"The majority of the measures announced yesterday will not hit those of a working mentality,

You mean apart from the 500,000 public sector workers due to lose their jobs and the other anticipated 500,000 from the private sector. Of course, they'll be overjoyed - no more work and the life of leisure on benefits.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 11:34 AM

Benefit fraud is rife in the UK. The government pretends it costs us £1.1bn annually. But the real figure is at least £3.5bn a year.

If you want the true facts, visit this page
http://www.benefitfraud.org.uk/index.html

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: mandotim
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 11:36 AM

Latest estimates are that 750,000 public sector jobs will go, with no visible expansion in the private sector to absorb them. This means a huge increase in the total benefit payed out, thereby defeating the object of the cuts. Add in redundancy costs and the removal of capital investment, and this looks like a recipe for severe deflation. Yes, the moral case for these cuts stinks to high heaven; but the economic case is equally ludicrous.
As I said above, the thing that really bothers me about this whole situation is the apportioning of blame to the utterly blameless; it isn't the fault of people on benefit, legitimate or otherwise, that we are in this mess. It's a bunch of rich, incompetent gamblers who are still trousering vast bonuses depite their abject failures.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 11:46 AM

Underpayments of benefit payments because of mistakes by the agency amount to considerably more than benefit fraud.
..................

It appears that Richie Black does actually count people in care homes because of disability as ""the lazy, the workshy and the spongers in our society". Just so we know where he's coming from.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: mandotim
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 11:50 AM

Ritchie, I said 'most authorities'. By this I meant either accountable public bodies such as the National Audit Office, the Office for National Statistics etc. or reputable peer-reviewed research; not a nutty self appointed right-wing blogger like John Page, who has never responded to a single academic challenge to his figures. He gets most of his information from the right wing press and wikipedia, then conflates it into an illogical case. If you want to argue this case, go away and do some proper research, rather than repeating half baked rumour. To cite the benefitfraud website as 'truth' is simply laughable. There is undoubtedly benefit fraud, and it does cost money. The case I made was that A) it isn't as much as you, Page and the Daily Mail seem to think, and it certainly is nowhere near as much as the amount of tax that is avoided by the wealthy. Rather than tackling benefit fraud, be it £1.1bn or £3.5bn, why not seize the bonuses from the bankers who caused the mess? Not their salaries, just the bonuses. That's £10bn or so towards the deficit right there.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: theleveller
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 11:54 AM

"It appears that Richie Black does actually count people in care homes because of disability as ""the lazy, the workshy and the spongers in our society"

Of course they are - they don't have jobs and some never even get of their backsides and go out.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Ringer
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 12:04 PM

Here's a quote from p17 of the full Treasury report:

"Even after these spending cuts, total public spending (Total Managed Expenditure) in 2014-15 will be higher in real terms than in 2008-09. At 41 per cent of GDP, this will be around the same level of public spending as in 2006-07. Spending on public services in 2014-15 will be higher than 2006-07 levels in real terms."

There are no cuts! What is reduced is the rate of increase in real terms of public spending!!!

Why is the press not pointing this out? Oh, I've just realised why: because the press is a ass. The press thinks that a drop in inflation means prices are falling.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 12:54 PM

Here is the phone number of Conservative Party Headquarters.

The Conservative Party - Contact Details

I've just got through, and the lady who answered put me through to the appropriate department.....they'd gone home. They did at least bother to put their answerphone on. I think they'll probably regret it by Monday morning. Hopefully, they'll ring back, as I requested, and explain to me what the fuck they're doing taking money away from the weakest, whilst the strongest and the richest are still getting Winter Fuel Payments, regardless of if they're million/billion/trillionaires or not.

Bonzo...for your information:

I'm a carer. I look after my ex-mother-in-law pretty much 24/7, as she lives with me. If I earn ONE penny over £433 a month my carer's allowance is stopped immediately.

What I need, of course, is a 16 hour job, because this would enable me to keep my carer's allowance and get working tax credit. But to find a job of 16 hours is sooooooo hard, almost impossible actually.

Many employers won't give out 16 hours, because they don't want people who are only interested in claiming working tax credit, and they know that if you're a carer as well, you probably won't be able to work extra hours for them 'at the drop of the hat', because again, you will lose £200 a month, instantly.

Down here in the West Country most jobs pay basic minimum wage. It's 'tradition' mainly, because Corporate and InUnCorporate Bastards know that jobs are desperately wanted and down here they'll work for peanuts, so even if they can afford more, most won't pay higher amounts because they're mean, scroogish buggers who don't give a shite about anyone or anything, other than their profits.

So, you get jobs for 15 hours, even 15 1/2 hours, or 19, 20...etc...OR you'll get loads for just an 8 hour contract, but they want you to be 'flexible' 24/7..and the job description is 7am to 10pm Monday - Sunday.

Well, fuck that! GEEZ! Things never used to be this way.

Many people down here don't even *HAVE* contracts in the first place, so they have no protection, yet they are STILL expected to be available as and when.   They take these jobs because if they didn't, so many of them would basically starve to death, lose their houses and be out on the streets, almost instantly.

Meanwhile, we're also paying TWICE the amount that you do for our Water..a life-giving substance which we should all be paying exactly the same for...

But hey, don't let that put you off your second home in the West Country, with its pretty beaches and quaint villages..Just don't look too deeply behind the curtains..

Come to Torquay and see the people here, the hard, line worn, worry worn faces, the missing teeth of the young men and women, the drug addicts, the drinkers, the used and the abused.

We have become the Land That Time Forgot down here...And meanwhile, our Mayor (spit!) wants to build another Casino, another posh hotel...whilst his town is dying on it's feet and his people get angrier and angrier...

The Mayor and I exchanged many emails, but trust me, he thinks he's the beesknees...and doesn't give a fig that so many folks here loathe him for what he's done..

Anyway, I digress...

There are many disabled people down here, and I guess they're now going to be suffering even deeper, whlist those at the top toast their toesies in front of their fire, fires which they have probably lit with crisp, clean £20 notes from their winter fuel bill, so they can laugh at how much they're given when they're already rolling in bucket loads of dosh!

And as for The Daily Mail.....

Well, today their main headline was about the Royal Family getting an increase from all these cuts and tuts....and how disgusting that is, in a time of such finanacial need. inside this paper they discussed the total unfairness of the new pension age of 66, the crapness of the University fees..etc..etc......amongst many other things. In fact, they are NOT happy bunnies. So maybe there are some in here who need to read what they're actually saying, rather than cling to the old idea of 'The DAILY MAIL!!!!!!!!' as they tend to think of it.

I read a variety of papers, depending on which way the moon is glowing at night, so I don't suffer from Newspaper Prejudice as some in here do.

We should be on the streets about so many things...And how dare they raise the pension age, for who the fuck is going to employ me or pretty much anyone else at 60, let alone 66? There are no jobs. And HOW are the young to get *any* jobs if all the old folks have them...????   Talk about dividing a society up...Yeesh!

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 01:03 PM

"Rather than tackling benefit fraud, be it £1.1bn or £3.5bn, why not seize the bonuses from the bankers who caused the mess? Not their salaries, just the bonuses. That's £10bn or so towards the deficit right there."

Err, I guess because they don't want to?

Anyway Lizzie Cornish, I do hope you can walk your talk because very soon the proles will need loud mouths like you to help them get very upset. The day of serious street politics is fast upon us.

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 01:16 PM

And, Bonzo, you find me a place that could care for my ex-mother-in-law almost 24/7 for less than £8 a day, for that is what you get as a carer, £53 a week. And if I were caring for 2 or more people, I'd still get exactly the same amount.

What is does is force people to find work for longer hours, so they can survive. You end up having to leave those you're caring for, for longer hours. For many of those hours, you actually end up working for absolutely nothing, because over £200 of your wages goes to making up the money you lose from your carer's allowance.   It's shitty. The Carer ends up exhausted. The Cared For ends up NOT being cared for and left alone. But that's what life is like out here in RealityLand, rather than 'I'mperfectlyOKsowhyshouldIgiveatossaboutanyoneelseLand, Bonzo.

So, if I were you, I'd bugger off to Argentina and stay there,..taking 'Richie Black' with you and that way the two of you won't ever have to sniff down your noses at those you deem to be scroungers or undeserving of help.

Thank you.

(and she went off muttering "Bastards!" under her breath...

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 01:31 PM

"Anyway Lizzie Cornish, I do hope you can walk your talk because very soon the proles will need loud mouths like you to help them get very upset. The day of serious street politics is fast upon us."


Trust me, I'm *trying* CS. I went to put some messages on BBC Breakfast News Facebook page today, but...the bastards have banned me from there too!!!   Yeesh, I've never even signed up to that page until this morning.....I know they banned me from the FB BBC Radio 2 page, because I dared to ask them why the fuck they were playing Des O'Connoer songs, rather than Show of Hands 'Arrogance Ignorance & Greed'....

Someone told me they ban you from every single site they have....

I'd rip my clothes off under Nelson's Column if it would do any good, but trust me, doing that with *my* body would only make people achieve new Olympic Gold Records for running away, rather than staying and listening... ;0)

BBC Radio Devon's still open to me though....and it was a lady from down here who went on there about the Poll Tax, all those years back, stating how wrong it was and how we should all be making a protest..and within days it had been taken up by all BBC local radio stations, finally making it to the main guys up in London a very short while later...

And the rest...is now history.........I went on the march they had in Plymouth, thousands of us, all peaceful, apart from a small rent-a-mob...but we did it, hundreds of thousands of us, all around the country....

And when I went on Radio Devon a while back, about South West Water and what thieving buggers they are, many people phoned in to agree with me. Trouble is I got all tearful on the phone, because I get so angry, so passionate about all the shit that surrounds us at present..so I lose my oomph a little...Always been that way, darn it...tears come way too fast...

I guess they came that time because I mentioned Dad, said how this was so NOT the world that he and his friends went to war for....

I found John Trudell the other day, saying how Germany may have lost the war, but the Nazis won it...Oh did I AGREE with him, from the other side of my screen here!

'Anthem for Dissent' by Ron Bankley and Splitting the Sky is just the greatest video out there on Youtube imo, and I post it whenever I can in places..tell everyone about it, spread the word...and I SO wish others would do too, although perhaps they do...

I know that this can't go on..this apathy, this bloody British Silence...because we are now fighting another Battle of Britain, one that is taking part within a Third World War, where the enemy is within, all around, silent, velvet gloved, evil...far more evil than any enemy that has ever gone before....

It's going to need the whole damn world to stand up against these guys, such is their intense power...

For years I've had to be careful, because my children were within the age of The System, and deep in my heart was a fear that if I became too outspoken I could have risked my children being taken from me. Well, my son hit 16 this year, and he is the youngest of my two kids, so now he's safe...

All I need to do now is get my voice out, but it's so damned hard to do that...which is another reason why I get so fooked off with those who took my voice away...

Sorry, digressing again..angry because I see people meekly accepting this shit, which means the bastards will yet again get away with so very much and that makes me seethe...

I'm my Father's Daughter, and I know that Dad, if he were alive today, would be aghast.....

"Some things, Liz, are so evil that you have no choice but to make a stand and fight against them.."

His words, about Hitler, have never left my head...or my heart....

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 01:48 PM

"I dared to ask them why the fuck they were playing Des O'Connoer songs, rather than Show of Hands 'Arrogance Ignorance & Greed'...."

Heh..
I'm tempted to start a thread for songs for the upcoming revolution.
I mean after all if the people are going to mobilise, they need some folk songs to do so with hey?

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 02:01 PM

Excellent idea...

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 02:34 PM

Health charities attack benefit changes

Subject: RE: BS: Spending Cuts UK - The Thread
From: mandotim
Date: 22 Oct 10 - 02:47 PM

And another thing; there is a cynical manipulation of this issue to make the public believe that the only solution to a fiscal deficit is to make cuts in public spending. Since most public spending is supposed to benefit the poorest (ha ha!) then the poor suffer most via this approach. There are two possible solutions of course; one is to cut, the other is to collect more tax. If you use a progressive (rather than regressive ) approach to taxation, then the rich pay proportionately more, and cuts are unnecessary. We could start by collecting the correct rate of tax from the wealthy, and look again at shifting from regressive taxes like VAT and into progressive ones, like income tax. And we could tax the crap out of the banks until their debt is repaid, and nationalise them if they refuse to cough up. Once nationalised, they could be forcibly broken up into proper local banks who, if they get into difficulty, can be allowed to go bust. (With this as a possibility, banks are less likely to gamble on dodgy risks; in the current scenario, they knew they couldn't lose).
With the vicious tossers we now have in power, the second approach was not contemplated, even for a second; no, the poorest must pay.