Question Time

donnajunkie

chewmylegoff wrote: »

no they cannot, it will obviously affect them to some extent, as some food has standard rate VAT, and so do adult's clothes. domestic fuel has VAT on it, but only at 5% and that hasn't been increased. but if you are existing on the breadline it's not likely that the majority of your purchases are going to be standard rated for VAT.

are you ever going to set out your alternative solution for resolving this country's financial deficit? what costs are you going to cut, and how much are you going to increase tax, in order to eliminate the deficit whilst ensuring that benefits continue to be increased in line with inflation every year.

ok so you agree those things affect everyone. why were they given as an example of taxes specific to working people? benefit cuts are specific to claimants. what tax increases have occurred that apply specifically to employed people only?
why do you want me to set out in detail policies just because i point out the flaws in targeting those at the bottom?

ukcarper

lemonjelly wrote: »

Let us have a look at these welfare reforms and their impacts then:
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/welfare-reform-suicides-must-not-be-overlooked

Those cases are very bad as is the way the re-assessments have been done, I think the number of successful appeals shows that. But I still think the benefit system needs to be overhauled I'm not saying the government are going about it the right way just that something needs to be done.

donnajunkie

ukcarper wrote: »

Can you point to any cuts that have been bought in that effect people at the bottom.

i dont know every detail and am aware alot of it is just intent at the moment. it is that intent that i mainly argue against. however i am aware that over the last 2 years the amount of housing benefit someone can get has been reduced. as a result many people on jsa have a bigger increase in rent due than what they get as an increase in jsa.

donnajunkie

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

Because I don't believe that the majority of those affected are innocent nor that they don't distinguish between genuine & spurious cases. That's the standard excuse used by those who believe that those who are willing to work must support those who are not.

you dont think the majority are innocent. so you think the majority are workshy then? you dont believe that they dont distinguish when a cut is applied. any cut that is applied applies to everyone.

StevieJ

More Anarchy for QT

Lydon to join Question Time panel

ukcarper

donnajunkie wrote: »

i dont know every detail and am aware alot of it is just intent at the moment. it is that intent that i mainly argue against. however i am aware that over the last 2 years the amount of housing benefit someone can get has been reduced. as a result many people on jsa have a bigger increase in rent due than what they get as an increase in jsa.

The new talk by the Tories might well just turn out to be just that, pandering to the right of the party.

Regarded housing benefit in my are is is still possible to get a reasonable 3 bed house for less than the 3 bed LHA .

donnajunkie

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

I don't assume everyone is workshy -- saying that is just a smokescreen over a poor argument.

in the post i quoted you were describing why you think every unemployed person gets beaten to a job by a foreigner. you werent describing why the minority get beaten.

donnajunkie

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

If he's really that disabled he needs to appeal.

yes but he is just one example of why the current way of doing things is wrong. this is why people are silly to defend it.

donnajunkie

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

Who says that money is being taken away form those at the bottom (whatever that means). Is there someone suffering from malnutrition, or hypothermia ? Or is it a case of not having a five year old TV in perfect working order replaced by an HD Ready one, courtesy of the taxpayer ?

did you not hear camerons speech last week. it was all about targeting those at the bottom.

donnajunkie

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

Sure there are, because immigrants have filled the jobs that many of our unemployed should be doing if they were not a) workshy and b) benefiting from a ludicrous, irresponsible, socialist welfare regime which encourages the workshy not to work. That's the inconvenient truth that the left does not wish to hear.

foreigners get the jobs because they can be exploited easily. benefits have been around for a long time. mass immigration hasnt.