George Osborne considering freeze on benefits to save £4.4bn

donaldtramp

FREEZE?
What we need is MASSIVE cuts in benefits.

And I've got a funny feeling they are on there way......;)

Nice_Username

carolt wrote: »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/budget/7839541/George-Osborne-considering-freeze-on-benefits-to-save-4.4bn.html

Souds fair enough to me.

Yes, obviously it's fair to make the poorest in society pay for the greed of the wealthy banking elite who caused the global financial meltdown in the first place.

Meanwhile the huge bonus culture continues and the super-rich and giant multi-nationals are still free to exploit tax loopholes which mean the poor also continue to pay proportionately far more tax as well.

Brilliant. :beer:

carolt

Firstly: define 'poorest in society'. On benefits does not ncessarily mean poorest.

Secondly, just because bankers are guilty as charged does not mean everyone else is innocent.

I dislike parasites at either end of the spectrum - whether it's lazy bankers or lazy benefit scroungers.

I have started many threads on lazy bankers - maybe you need to use the search function to find an appropriate thread to put your post on?

This thread is related to saving money on benefits.

Incidentally, this freeze means that I too will be poorer as a result (child benefit for example).

I still applaud it as in the current economic climate I think the savings need to be made.

Nice_Username

carolt wrote: »

This thread is related to saving money on benefits.

No, the OP simply states "sounds fair enough to me".

I contest that it isn't actually fair at all, not in the slightest.

Incidentally, this freeze means that I too will be poorer as a result (child benefit for example).

I still applaud it as in the current economic climate I think the savings need to be made.

Then I suggest you have another rethink and consider the broader picture bacause all the "We're all in this together" nonsense is complete b0llox. We're all being mugged off.

amcluesent

>It must be extremly difficult to be judged a 'sponger' simply because you got ill<

I've got no problems with the benefits system being a 'safety net' for those whose fortunes have taken a turn for the worse.

But after Labour bought votes from the underclass, it's become a feather-bed and so multiple generations have found it comfortable never to work and procreate until they do better on benefits than the average wage earner. That's what has to be stopped PDQ.

And we'll know it's working when lardy mams, totooed, wastrel dads and their menagerie of bast*ard ferals are weeping and wailing that it's all too, too terrible and they've had to cancel Sky Sports HD, the subscription to which is a 'umin right'!

Nice_Username

amcluesent wrote: »

>It must be extremly difficult to be judged a 'sponger' simply because you got ill<

I've got no problems with the benefits system being a 'safety net' for those whose fortunes have taken a turn for the worse.

But after Labour bought votes from the underclass, it's become a feather-bed and so multiple generations have found it comfortable never to work and procreate until they do better on benefits than the average wage earner. That's what has to be stopped PDQ.

And we'll know it's working when lardy mams, totooed, wastrel dads and there menagerie of bast*ard ferals are weeping and wailing that it's all too, too terrible and they've had to cancel Sky Sports HD.

Ever considered that this so-called "underclass" is a result of our capitalist society, and they are simply the surplus waste that is a byproduct of our economic system?

No, I don't suppose you have.

StevieJ

A._Badger wrote: »

And the same is true of Grauniad writers. So what?

Just an observation,you are not one of them are you

milliebear00001

amcluesent wrote: »

>It must be extremly difficult to be judged a 'sponger' simply because you got ill<

I've got no problems with the benefits system being a 'safety net' for those whose fortunes have taken a turn for the worse.

But after Labour bought votes from the underclass, it's become a feather-bed and so multiple generations have found it comfortable never to work and procreate until they do better on benefits than the average wage earner. That's what has to be stopped PDQ.

And we'll know it's working when lardy mams, totooed, wastrel dads and their menagerie of bast*ard ferals are weeping and wailing that it's all too, too terrible and they've had to cancel Sky Sports HD, the subscription to which is a 'umin right'!

Trouble is - the 'deserving claimant' is tarred with the brush of 'sponger' because of people's (your) vitriolic judgement of those you have decided are 'undeserving'. While I accept you may have the power to simply look at somebody and decide whether or not they are 'deserving', I'm afraid that I haven't quite managed to acquire that particular superhuman insight.

The ugly truth is - a cancer victim waiting in the Job Centre to sign-on, will be viewed as a waster by 'your sort' just as any other claimant would be.

StevieJ

kennyboy66 wrote: »

Still, won't stop people posturing about the !!!!less underclass, carrying on the British Hogarthian tradition, while wilfully ignoring policies that work - usually education, economic opportunity and sex education.

That certainly strokes the imagination :eek:

worried_jim

Progress--