MSE News: Thousands of tenants to get bedroom tax rebate

MissMoneypenny

sniggings wrote: »

I didn't say all pensioners were tory voters, but that the tory vote is mainly from pensioners, which is not the same thing.

The Labour vote use to be mainly in Scotland, without them, Labour would not have got into Westminster. Hence why took drastic action; all at the expense of their own voters (who they didn't really care about as long as they can get back into power).

princessdon

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

The Labour vote use to be mainly in Scotland, without them, Labour would not have got into Westminster. Hence why took drastic action; all at the expense of their oven voters (who they didn't really care about as long as they can get back into power).

The North East is pretty much the same. Labour could send out a blank sheet saying I'm promising nothing and they'd still win by a landslide. I expect it's the same in many areas that its historical voting.

sniggings

princessdon wrote: »

Voting is mainly pensioners. They vote more than any other group, natter which party. No party will ever risk the white haired vote, it's not a Tory thing, it's any of them.

I agree, but the tory part has more pensioner vote than others, and at least the labour party has said they will take some benefits away from the richer ones, which is more than the tories have said.

sniggings

gadgetmind wrote: »

With all due respect, if your CV is written anything like the above "sentence", then you will struggle to find work.



£71 for doing nothing sounds fairly reasonable to me. It's certainly an impressive hourly rate.

(And "if daft" and "just because" mean little to me.)

I've got a job thank you very much.

You know when someone has lost the argument, they turn into the grammar police, I'm polish I bet my english is better than your polish :rotfl:

sniggings

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

The Labour vote use to be mainly in Scotland, without them, Labour would not have got into Westminster. Hence why took drastic action; all at the expense of their oven voters (who they didn't really care about as long as they can get back into power).

sorry I'm not sure what you are saying here.

nannytone_2

princessdon wrote: »

The North East is pretty much the same. Labour could send out a blank sheet saying I'm promising nothing and they'd still win by a landslide. I expect it's the same in many areas that its historical voting.

its the same in all the pit towns of the north ,idlands/sth yorks, they vote lacour because they are labour voters.
most couldnt even tell you why the leader of the labour party is though!

ehrn i lived in lonfon, the borough of barking and dagenham voted 12 BNP councillors onto the council. if more had stood... they would also have been voted in. but it was a protest vote and no way would they vote anything other than labour at a general election.
i havve to say that NOTHING would ever make me vote BNP. but it did make the local party and MP ( Jon Cruddas) sit up and take notice for a while

sniggings

nannytone wrote: »

its the same in all the pit towns of the north ,idlands/sth yorks, they vote lacour because they are labour voters.
most couldnt even tell you why the leader of the labour party is though!

ehrn i lived in lonfon, the borough of barking and dagenham voted 12 BNP councillors onto the council. if more had stood... they would also have been voted in. but it was a protest vote and no way would they vote anything other than labour at a general election.
i havve to say that NOTHING would ever make me vote BNP. but it did make the local party and MP ( Jon Cruddas) sit up and take notice for a while

both sides have voters that vote the same way no matter what, to pick out just the labour voter is unfair.

This is why we here about the middle ground so much, as they are only a few vote to aim for, the swing voters, both labour and the tories would love to be more extreme but they can not because of these swing voters, so a relative small number of people are determining the direction of all the parties, so we end up with neither a true labour party or a true tory party.

regbrown

jeez some really unpleasant folk in this thread. This is not about party politics or even politics, its about being a decent human being towards others.

I have no qualms with the policy in general if its applied fairly and does not target the disabled. Any maggot want to tell me that the disabled would qualify for the extra payment should realise they shouldn't damn well have to.

This policy should not affect the disabled, full stop. this policy should not affect parents with joint custody, this policy should not affect those who would gladly take a smaller home but there are non available.

I am so sick to the back teeth of repugnant people justifying a repugnant policy and I have previously voted conservative in every election. Having seen how this bunch treat the disabled, I will never vote for them again. The previous conservative govts actually introduced DLA but this bunch are not conservatives, they are truly unpleasant slime.

Indie_Kid

gadgetmind wrote: »

Pensioners don't have the option of working to pay their own way rather than claiming benefits for every this, that and the other.

Perhaps they are trying to frighten those who do have this option into exercising it?

Disabled people don't have the option of working, nor do carers. But both groups of people are subject to the bedroom tax. My mum cares for a disabled lady and the council put her into a 2 bedroom bungalow, so she has a room to store her medical equipment. She has to pay the bedroom tax.

Disabled children aren't affected by the bedroom tax. But disabled adults are. It's wrong. Neither group should be affected.

sniggings

regbrown wrote: »

jeez some really unpleasant folk in this thread. This is not about party politics or even politics, its about being a decent human being towards others.

I have no qualms with the policy in general if its applied fairly and does not target the disabled. Any maggot want to tell me that the disabled would qualify for the extra payment should realise they shouldn't damn well have to.

This policy should not affect the disabled, full stop. this policy should not affect parents with joint custody, this policy should not affect those who would gladly take a smaller home but there are non available.

I am so sick to the back teeth of repugnant people justifying a repugnant policy and I have previously voted conservative in every election. Having seen how this bunch treat the disabled, I will never vote for them again. The previous conservative govts actually introduced DLA but this bunch are not conservatives, they are truly unpleasant slime.

well said.

but I doubt anything will change, they have already said if they get back in they are going to cut another 12 billon from welfare, JSA is only 5 billion, so they other 7 billion will have to come of the disabled or those working and on housing benefit, to cut 7 billion off only housing benefit will be impossible as if they do what they say and stop housing benefit for the under 25s, they will only save around 200 million, not 7 billion, so god knows where the rest will come from, and that 7 billion is based on stopping ALL JSA, so it will be more than 7 billion :rotfl:

Labour may have spent too much, but most of it was because of the EU problems and the rest was at least spent on the schools and hospitals, not as the tories do, cut taxes for the rich, so yes labour spent too much, but at least it went on the people that needed it.