The harsh truth about Tory policies

StevieJ

prowla wrote: »

The tories will not be worse.
It's practically impossible

Depends if you are rich or poor :eek: I wonder if they will make the cost of a nanny tax deductable maybe, if the 'young fogey' Hogg is made Chancellor at some point.

A._Badger

shuze wrote: »

"Ranting" in your book appears to be anyone who doesn't agree with you. You are the law-breaker who thinks his precious time is worth more than the safety of other road-users.

Talking of independent thought, you should put down your copy of the Daily Mail and step into the real world sometime. You might like it

You know, looking at the respective circulations of the Mail and the (shortly to close, it is said) Independent, I suggest you might be advised to check your version of 'the real world'.

If it's the one inhabited by Indy readers, it is shared by vanishingly few.

PaulW1965

Emy1501 wrote: »

As I said above I know someone who turned down a 20K a year job in the south east because they were better off on benefit. They have a kid and neither of the parents work.

Where I am in the south east a couple on beneift would get probably £1200 a month for house benefit if they have a kid, £300 a month each for job seekers allowance, no council tax, free school meals, free child care whilst they try and look for a job etc. Thats over 2k a month the quiv to nearly 35K a year if they worked and I'm sure there are more benefits that could be claimed.

£20k to look after a family in the SE is not a lot of money tbh. I don't know how any family could live on that here. I think that is the problem here - what you consider to be a "generous" amount of money does not seem so to me.

As for the money you claim a family receives in the SE that seems like a reasonable amount to me. What you are actually saying is that the family live on £600 a month. Again this does not see like a large amount of money in the SE. Utility bills could easily take up £150 to £200 (Electricity, Gas, Water, TV licence) of this. Food another £200. Leaving some money for clothes, travel and other expenses. Again I wouldn't want to be raising a family on his sort of money.

Finally, remember this. Benefits are not a hand out. People pay taxes year in year out to receive these benefits. Ther are perfectly entitled to them.

Emy1501

PaulW1965 wrote: »

£20k to look after a family in the SE is not a lot of money tbh. I don't know how any family could live on that here. I think that is the problem here - what you consider to be a "generous" amount of money does not seem so to me.

As for the money you claim a family receives in the SE that seems like a reasonable amount to me. What you are actually saying is that the family live on £600 a month. Again this does not see like a large amount of money in the SE. Utility bills could easily take up £150 to £200 (Electricity, Gas, Water, TV licence) of this. Food another £200. Leaving some money for clothes, travel and other expenses. Again I wouldn't want to be raising a family on his sort of money.

Finally, remember this. Benefits are not a hand out. People pay taxes year in year out to receive these benefits. Ther are perfectly entitled to them.

What are you suggesting that nobody works unless they earn over 35K a year if they have kids? How are you suggesting this is funded? 20K a year is not a great deal to you but it is to many hard working people. Surely if one parent works and the other works part time with a bit of state top up and help then it is better for the system than a system where its pointless to work unless you earn 35K plus.

You maybe rich but I know alot of people who work full time and have less than £200 a month left over once their bills are paid off. Maybe these people should go on benefit too and stop paying taxes?

As for your comments about paying taxes, there are many on benefit who have never paid taxes in their lives. They then have families who fall into the same trap etc.

The other day my eldest son wanted to know why his friends who's parents do not work live in a better house than us and why his friends alway have the latest games consoles etc. It wil not be long before he starts to think that being on benefit seems a lot easier than doing an honest days work.

Benefits should the choice of last resort not the choice of first resort.

Its funny really I meet many well off labour supporters and when you discuss the less well off, they always give me an impression of how many see poor third world countries. Give their £50 a year to a charity and they don't have to feel guilty about the problem. Its the same here pay lots of taxes and throw lots of money at the poor and then there is no need to feel guilty or actually try and do anything about the problem as most of people live nowhere near an estate and their kids never mix with the local council kids.

I was talking to a couple the other day about the above they had the same view as people like a few on here regarding benefits ie we should give benefits to all the poor and nobody is on benefit out of choice etc. When I mention though we were thinking of sending our kids to the local school which is a mixture of kids from all backgrounds they seemed horrified that I consider sending my kids to a school like this even though their SAT results and ofstead results were better than most!

Reminds me also of one of the posts above regarding if we do not pay lots of benefits then the less well off may start to mug the rich. I can see the less well off are highly thought of by some of you on herewho claim to be their supporters:rolleyes:

shuze

A._Badger wrote: »

You know, looking at the respective circulations of the Mail and the (shortly to close, it is said) Independent, I suggest you might be advised to check your version of 'the real world'.

If it's the one inhabited by Indy readers, it is shared by vanishingly few.

If you'd actually bothered read my post correctly, you'd have realised that I wasn't referring to the Independent newspaper, which I never read. Still, let's clutch those straws eh?

Graham_Devon

PaulW1965 wrote: »

£20k to look after a family in the SE is not a lot of money tbh. I don't know how any family could live on that here. I think that is the problem here - what you consider to be a "generous" amount of money does not seem so to me.

As for the money you claim a family receives in the SE that seems like a reasonable amount to me. What you are actually saying is that the family live on £600 a month. Again this does not see like a large amount of money in the SE. Utility bills could easily take up £150 to £200 (Electricity, Gas, Water, TV licence) of this. Food another £200. Leaving some money for clothes, travel and other expenses. Again I wouldn't want to be raising a family on his sort of money.

Considering this money just "arrives" into their bank accounts, it's not all that bad is it?

Time to get real. What you describe above is the majority of working families too.

kabayiri

The harsh truth about Tory policies....?

...is that we won't know the full impact until the next government gets in, if it is indeed Tory.

I think this for 2 reasons :-

a) I have a feeling when the books are looked over, the situation may be worse than we currently know. It feels like all the QE has allowed us to tread water so far. It will stop at some point.

b) we don't know what future world events will happen in 2010. If the US takes a downturn how much will that effect us? The UK government doesn't really have much financial ammunition left to deal with unplanned events.

JasonLVC

carolt wrote: »

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-the-harsh-truth-about-tory-policies-1815642.html

Scary article. :eek:

Thoughts, anyone?

Its not a scary article at all. It is an opinion of a biased author. Nothing more and is terribly written, it is like a rant you'd find on a certain forum;).

The article asserts that a single Council in London somehow represents the entire Tory policy?. There are councils across the country of all political persuasions who are cutting costs, cutting jobs and dropping grants to local charities - the simple truth is that all councils have got to make cuts....be they Tory or otherwise.

The article was basically a rant at Boris Johnson (which is fair enough) and there was not a mention of Labour dropping the 10% tax band, the raft of benefits changes to come from New Labour, the two tier NHS system and the School academies where anyone with a few £m can build a school and start teaching folks.

This is not meant to be a pro-Tory post, just cannot seem to get excited by one persons opinion being presented as if it is Tory policy....considering Cameron hasn't even mentioned any core policies as yet, perhaps the Independant is doing what every other newspaper does....and just making it up.

whathavewedone

At the risk of being labelled a "tory shill" again, the article is nothing more than a badly written piece of scaremongering.

I must have read a zillion articles like this recently in the Guardian and on blogs like Labourlist.

Labour supporters know that even if they were to suddenly come out with popular policies it's too little too late. The vast majority of the electorate don't trust them.

All they can do is churn out articles based around "Toreez eat babeez" themes. If you think things are bad now, things are going to get a lot worse! etc etc etc.

Trouble is that people are wearily resigned to the fact that things are going to get worse before they get better. They want to know the full extent of it and have a government that will actually do something about it, painful though it may be.

People don't want to be treated like children who can't be told harsh truths, they don't believe Labour any more when they say don't worry, we know what we're doing and soon all will be rosy again.

"No more boom and bust"

"We are best placed"

"I've saved the world"

Yeah yeah yeah.

lostinrates

nearlynew wrote: »

F*ck.

You were doing well there until you got to the Obama bit.

On the public face of things I agree, and have concern one man is made a hero of on looks and promises of a future, not on present acheivment. However, an anecdotal some one I know has met in a professional capacity many off duty world leaders, over a coupe of decades. Has had one thank you letter in all that time. From the Obamas. That did kind of soften me a little: it seems they might remember something others forget. Or perhaps they just have good manners.