We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Universal credit = more riots.
Comments
-
I expect so.Graham_Devon wrote: »So can you answer my other questions? Or am I to continue not believing you?
It's a perception, though not a unique one, e.g.Graham_Devon wrote: »You have made a bold statement.
http://news.scotsman.com/news/Declaring-war-on-culture-of.6720171.jp
Other perceptions are available. Your mileage may vary."It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
What are you talking about nobody batted an eyelid? The crisis was postponed but made worse.
Every time they pump inconceivable amounts of units of fiat currency into the system it just extends and pretends but makes the debt crisis worse.
True but the only thing you can be sure of is more inconceivable amounts of units of fiat currency pumped into the system.0 -
QE wasn't part of the bank bailouts. When it happened, the Bank became the holder of £200bn of the Treasury's debts. Didn't do Sterling much good, but it certainly didn't do gilt yields any harm, notwithstanding that the decline of Sterling will emerge as inflation sooner or later.Every time they pump inconceivable amounts of units of fiat currency into the system it just extends and pretends but makes the debt crisis worse.
Sovereign debt is still fundamentally the safest asset around. It takes really gross political incompetence to persuade markets that it might not be."It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
So are you going to explain your profound statement the Tories are at war with the benefits system? Come on I want some hard facts and evidence not left wing spin that doesn't actually say anything
Many can talk but not actually say anything....0 -
Considering it's what they've always wanted to do - cheers from the Tory back benches when Osborne announced how much he was cutting from the benefits budget - I'm bemused that some of them now seem to be in shamefaced denial.So are you going to explain your profound statement the Tories are at war with the benefits system?"It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
Considering it's what they've always wanted to do - cheers from the Tory back benches when Osborne announced how much he was cutting from the benefits budget - I'm bemused that some of them now seem to be in shamefaced denial.
Let's be honest.
It was just a flippant line, with no basis, apart from hatred towards the tories, so you thought you would smear them. It backfired.0 -
Considering it's what they've always wanted to do - cheers from the Tory back benches when Osborne announced how much he was cutting from the benefits budget - I'm bemused that some of them now seem to be in shamefaced denial.
I watch Parliament Live most days and have seen neither cheers nor shamefaced denial.
I think most politicians would like to retain their seats in power, so why would they be cutting anything unless they really had to?0 -
When you look a the shops that have been looted, it was mobile, electrical goods and sports stores mainly.
It's anger about the worldwide crisis. These are things they want but can't afford. The social unrest started in the middle east and is spreading around the world, you have to look at the big picture not just a UK problem.
It will be spreading in the USA soon, its a debt problem plain and simple. Irresponsible governments kept on kicking the can down the road increasing their debts instead of facing their debts.
The Euro crisis and the US dollar crisis, the entire world is under such a heavy debt burden.
I am sure if it was not for the cuts in the UK these riots would not have happened.
There is no option but to cut further, the cuts so far have not made a dent in the debt problem which is still getting worse.
The universal credit benefits cut will have to go ahead or something like it, the longer they put off cutting benefits the worse the problem becomes.
At the same time they are cutting back on police again because of the debt problems, I say again this social unrest is nothing to what the UK will see when benefits keep getting cut more and more down the road.
Not true. Until at least the 1950s throughout history in the UK and other parts of the West, there were many people with huge families living in the most abject poverty in slum conditions, e.g. in the East End up to the 1950s, with few benefits. Yet there was no rioting or looting – they continued with their lives and tried to get work where they could without expecting taxpayer support. (Though of course there were always individuals who broke the law in various ways, even when extremely severe punishments were meted out.)0 -
No need to take it so personally. It was the Labour government that started it, raising the pension age and reassessing people on Incapacity. Which only takes available jobs away from teenagers, but unemployed teenagers are cheaper.Graham_Devon wrote: »Let's be honest.
It was just a flippant line, with no basis, apart from hatred towards the tories, so you thought you would smear them. It backfired.
One of the causes of disaffection is the way New Labour turned on its own and left them without a voice. Miliband only talks about "the people in the middle". He daren't mention the people at the bottom, if he doesn't want to be lynched by the right-wing press.
I didn't particularly intend to attack the Tories, I thought I was only stating what I took to be an obvious and well-known fact."It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
It's not poverty as such, it's social exclusion. Society used to cater for poverty. The poor didn't just get left behind. They didn't find that without broadband and Sky and a mobile they became non-people, unable to participate in ordinary life. Slum-dwellers didn't go to the corner shop and find it full of imported premium lager at £2 a small bottle and organic Mediterranean salad at £2 a small bag, such as you'll find in your Sainsburys Local or Tesco Express. Of course they had to buy inferior poor-quality stuff (let's not forget that in our misty-eyed nostalgia), but at least the cheap stuff was in the shops. No use looking in Netto for offal or the cheaper cuts of meat.Until at least the 1950s throughout history in the UK and other parts of the West, there were many people with huge families living in the most abject poverty in slum conditions, e.g. in the East End up to the 1950s, with few benefits. Yet there was no rioting or looting
People will put up with poverty when there's no disgrace in it. What they resent is having to accept what everybody else despises."It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 353.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.2K Spending & Discounts
- 246.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.2K Life & Family
- 260.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards