Blue Labour

Conrad

Masomnia wrote: »

As far as I can see Blue Labour is just going back to the founding principle of hand ups rather than hand outs; a safety net for those in need, without money for nothing. A welcome development for me.

For years I've shouted at the TV every time the usual line is trotted out; "welfare abuse happens amongst a tiny minority".

A very significant proportion of welfare tenants we deal with could very easily work. The excuse making culture has been ruinous for folk like this that have simply slipped easily into dependency and slowly become detached from the world of work and making responsible choices.

[Deleted User]

I think that people should remember that one of the biggest welfare reforms was the change to esa and that all began under labour,and that one of the biggest welfare reformers was james purnell,one of the worst in recent times has been IDS his plans either dont work or wont work,they are so badly thought out and executed,the bedroom tax being a good example it wont save a penny,benefit cap another as it only affects a small number,and UC which is in meltdown,it was supposed to be trialled in 4 mbc`s ended up being trialled in one town and even then only certain postcodes in that town

grizzly1911

woodbine wrote: »

UC which is in meltdown,it was supposed to be trialled in 4 mbc`s ended up being trialled in one town and even then only certain postcodes in that town

It will no doubt be hailed a great success and rolled at pace leaving someone else to pick up the pieces.

Iain Duncan Smith: cut welfare to fund police and Forces

Iain Duncan Smith has offered to cut Britain’s welfare Bill by up to another £3  billion annually to protect spending on the Armed Forces and police,



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/spending-review/10083049/Iain-Duncan-Smith-cut-welfare-to-fund-police-and-Forces.html


Meanwhile overseas aid is ring fenced again. I guess it is being hit by inflation, a weak pound and flat GDP.

Thrugelmir

grizzly1911 wrote: »

Meanwhile overseas aid is ring fenced again. I guess it is being hit by inflation, a weak pound and flat GDP.

When our politics resorts to concerns over the "bedroom tax". Yet other people share one room and a communal toilet. Shows how conceited we've become as a race.

Generali

I have no idea if this is true or not but mates from Yorkshire tell me that in a lot of the old mining communities there are plenty of people basically sitting about and waiting for the mines to reopen and complaining bitterly in the meantime.

If this is true, and I have no idea whether it is, then perhaps the welfare state is holding people back in their lives and indeed is scarring communities.

In the SE I have certainly seen similar: people who can't afford to take a job because the benefits they claim no longer exist and for whom taking a week of work means risking a life of gentle poverty for a rather harsher form.

My belief is that a smaller welfare state is better for all including those people who are claiming benefits.

Brassedoff

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

The way to do that is through educating the public of the necessities of immigration, combined with eliminating the very small percentage of cases of immigrants abusing the system which give rise to genuine (although vastly overblown) concerns.

Educate, inform, and ultimately expose the anti-immigration case for the tissue of lies that it is.

So, sorry to the 1,000,000 18-24 year olds who could with the right schemes be trained to take up those jobs you so enthusiastically welcome immigration to take? Why not train our youth instead of paying benefits?
Does that make me a racist or realist?

The deal with the need of a bigger armed forces and Police by slashing the stupidly generous overseas aid pot a.k.a African Preseidents Car Leasing Scheme.
Does that make me a racist or realist?

There are very few jobs thst cannot be covered by this nations population. Did the Victorians or Edwardians out source the invention of the TV, Telephone, Railways, Iron, then Steel shipping, Antiseptic, the camera, Tarmac, Concrete...... The list goes on.

This nation needs no more than 58,000 top line immigrants, the rest of the jobs can be taken by our unemployed and students.

As for benefits, I have been a firm believer that it should be based on what you put in, but again, a credit in tax if you take out private insurance. It will mean if you need it, you will be overhead by your own policy to give you a damn site more than the current hand outs.

Dexters_Indignation

58,000 top line immigrants

That is a lot of tight rope!

Generali

Interesting piece about UKIP targeting Labour:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/30/ukip-gunning-labour-ed-miliband

Am I right or is this just confirmation bias? I said that it's not possible that UKIP are only taking votes from the Tories. Out of 7,000,000,000 people there is at least 1 that agrees with me.

alleycat`

Generali wrote: »

Interesting piece about UKIP targeting Labour:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/30/ukip-gunning-labour-ed-miliband

Am I right or is this just confirmation bias? I said that it's not possible that UKIP are only taking votes from the Tories. Out of 7,000,000,000 people there is at least 1 that agrees with me.

Given an alternative that, appears, to actually be paying attention rather than spinning the usual "party lines", it shouldn't come as a huge shock to every party that they will lose votes to these people.

The major parties all have the same problem.

They are detached from what a large proportion of people see as "reality" and they don't have anyone with an ounce of charisma to make up the difference.

Generali

alleycat` wrote: »

Given an alternative that, appears, to actually be paying attention rather than spinning the usual "party lines", it shouldn't come as a huge shock to every party that they will lose votes to these people.

The major parties all have the same problem.

They are detached from what a large proportion of people see as "reality" and they don't have anyone with an ounce of charisma to make up the difference.

2 weeks ago only an idiot (me) would imagine that UKIP was taking votes from anyone other than the Tories.

Today the same idiot reckons that there are a large number of people who "aren't racist but..." in the UK and a lot of people who think like that vote Labour.

Despite having made, and lost, a few quid in my time, I've lived in some of the poorest parts of London and I reckon I understand the politics of white working class Londoners pretty well.

I would never lump them all in together because that would be simplistic and ridiculous but there is a large minority who hanker back to a time when all the neighbours were the same as them and they all thought the same way, ate the same food and spoke the same language.

A decent proportion of those people vote Labour which is why places like Lambeth and Wapping vote Labour: the minority vote can't carry the day because they're a minority! UKIP could really put the cat amongst the pigeons in places like that. It's not necessarily that Conservatives would win the seats, more that the psephological calculations go out of the window.