Universal credit = more riots.

StevieJ

adyj73 wrote: »

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....

Let us kick off with their campaign poster I agree with your statement BTW

TedButler

Sapphire wrote: »

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.)

If universal credit comes in next year, we may see a return to poverty in slum conditions. The difference is in 1950's people were not as spoilt as they are today, that is why the rioting and anger will be far more serious next year.

If the benefit cap comes in at no more than 500 per week per household, then in London most of that 500 wk would need to go on rent and council tax. People would rather choose to live in a slum where at least they will be able to keep enough of their 500 per week to pay bills and have enough left to live.

worried_jim

interstellaflyer wrote: »

£500 a week is £26000 a year and no tax or ni to deduct either, I work bloody hard for a measerly £12000 a year and that's before tax and ni, our total household income is around £17000, we get very little help from the state, it makes me sick, no wonder these scum want to keep poping out ferral sprogs, ok the job market is tough but there are jobs out there if you try hard enough, problem is these people don't want to try and many are just un-employable anyway due to their attitude and lack of respect, for some of them the kindest thing would have been to put them down at birth.

I salute you sir/madam!

TedButler

pqrdef wrote: »

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.

People will put up with poverty when there's no disgrace in it. What they resent is having to accept what everybody else despises.

If universal credit comes in next year, we may see a return to poverty in slum conditions. The difference is in 1950's people were not as spoilt as they are today, that is why the rioting and anger will be far more serious next year.

If the benefit cap comes in at no more than 500 per week per household, then in London most of that 500 wk would need to go on rent and council tax. People would rather choose to live in a slum where at least they will be able to keep enough of their 500 per week to pay bills and have enough left to live.

The will be many families forced to move out of London,more supply less demand= lower prices.

heathcote123

Jennifer_Jane wrote: »

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?

Because in theory, the tories believe in self reliance and a smaller state, so ideologically, cutting services and taxes are the tory thing to do. And I very much agree with it. (though maybe I am harking back to the days of Lady Thatcher a bit much)

However in practise this can be a bit difficult to achieve when half the voting population have jobs as 5 a day advisors and are in receipt of tax credits.

heathcote123

TedButler wrote: »

If universal credit comes in next year, we may see a return to poverty in slum conditions. The difference is in 1950's people were not as spoilt as they are today, that is why the rioting and anger will be far more serious next year.

If the benefit cap comes in at no more than 500 per week per household, then in London most of that 500 wk would need to go on rent and council tax. People would rather choose to live in a slum where at least they will be able to keep enough of their 500 per week to pay bills and have enough left to live.

The will be many families forced to move out of London,more supply less demand= lower prices.

Fantastic, working people may then be able to move to london rather than having to commute. Can't really see it putting much more than a dent on prices though - they'd have to go somewhere, so it would put upward price pressure on the surrounding areas, evening things out a bit.

merlin68

To be fair the benifit cap isn't going to affect that many people. Most large families seem to have at least one child on DLA and the cap won't affect them. A normal family of 2 plus 2 would only get £246 a week in money anyway.