2015 Election season ..........stuff it in here.

[Buce]

They've said there'll be £12 billion cuts in welfare. They don't have be specific to know that if you're on benefits you're going to be worse off.

Then why won't they be specific?

Could it be that while the public may support cuts on perceived 'benefit scroungers', they might take a different view of cuts to disability payments, for example?

[Webbo]

Then why won't they be specific?

Could it be that while the public may support cuts on perceived 'benefit scroungers', they might take a different view of cuts to disability payments, for example?

Because you don't win votes telling people you're going to be worse off.

[BlueSi13]

So I'm the fool, but you haven't fallen hook, line and sinker for the Tory scare tactics?

I think Milliband has a plan up his sleeve and I don't think he's planning on working exclusively with anyone. If you think about it he has no choice, working with the SNP shows Scottish voters they can vote SNP and still get a labour government but with more focus on Scotland. This could permanently end labours chances in Scotland. It would also kill the labour vote in England too.

Milliband either plans to lead a minority government on an issue by issue basis, or he's playing the long game thinking that instability and a new election will result in a stronger Labour Party if he stands by his beliefs through thick and thin. Throw in a potential leadership change for the Torys and possibly lib dems and he could be much stronger.

That's all speculation, but watching him today, I think he knows the worst thing he can do is sell out and end up like the lib dems this time around.

He must have an absolute doozy of a plan up his sleeve then because if he doesn't work with the SNP then he doesn't get into power (barring a staggering shift in the polls north and south of the border) it's as simple as that.

 

I also couldn't give a flying fig what the Conservatives say regarding the coming Labour-SNP alliance, everybody who doesn't plan on voting Labour or the SNP will be absolutely terrified of the prospect of having Miliband and Balls presiding over the UK economy whilst being ruled over by Sturgeon and Salmond at every turn.  I'll say it again, if England votes for this we are truly truly lost.

[BlueSi13]

Milliband took Boris apart on Andrew Marr. First time i've seen Ed in that situation in complete control.

 

To be fair I think a five year old could have Johnson completely flustered and bamboozled!  Fair play to Miliband though, probably his first victory in a head to head clash since being Labour leader.

[BlueSi13]

Just watched the Sturgeon interview on BBC...nothing but endless buzzwords and empty rhetoric...divisive passion politics at it's most banal.  

 

One day, our grandchildren will study UK politics in History lessons and will pinpoint devolution as the moment when it all went wrong. 

[sphericalfox]

 

what a stitch up! Tory PR fail.

 

https://sturdyblog.wordpress.com/2015/04/27/small-business-letter-to-the-telegraph-an-attempt-to-defraud-the-electorate/

[Voll Blau]

Just watched the Sturgeon interview on BBC...nothing but endless buzzwords and empty rhetoric...divisive passion politics at it's most banal.  

 

One day, our grandchildren will study UK politics in History lessons and will pinpoint devolution as the moment when it all went wrong. 

 

Personally thought she was impressive. Didn't lose her cool and answered honestly. More interested in talking policy and looking to the future than slating her opponents and what they've done in the past. Wouldn't mind a bit more of that from high profile politicians.

[The Horse's Mouth]

[Strokes]

I had included a line about Labour's use of the Private Finance Initiative (PFI), but deleted it as the post was too long already. I disagree with some of your rhetoric (if you expand public services, you need to pay more people to deliver them). However, I do agree with your criticism of PFI being a more expensive way of funding public investment and have criticised this Labour policy in the past (though this policy has been continued by the Tories).

 

Labour should have selectively increased taxes to fund this investment. Instead, they took the view that voters wouldn't stand for that, as the public insist on low taxes and high quality public services / investment, a logical impossibility.

 

The same problem of deceit over tax and spending plans is continuing at this election. Labour is pretending to be as austere / "fiscally responsible" as the Tories by talking about cuts in "current spending". However, they intend to spend significant sums on public investment but do not include this in "current spending". That spending is a good idea, but it's a shame they feel the need to conceal it, believing the electorate just want to hear about "cutting the deficit". If anything, the deceit on the Tory side is even greater, though. The Tories plan for massive spending cuts to balance the budget by 2019, but most of the cuts are unidentified: £13bn of unidentified spending cuts across unidentified departments, plus £12bn of welfare spending cuts, of which only £2bn has been identified. Meanwhile, they've announced that they're going to spend an extra £8bn on the NHS, again without saying how they're going to fund this! The Tory party, more pork pies than Melton Mowbray!

If you think us Tory voters are bothered about the detail within the welfare cuts then I'm afraid you are mistaken, the detail only matters if it is accurate.

Labour seem to be funding all of their pledges through the mansion tax but having listened to ed talk about it, he is a little unsure on the details.

[Vacamion]

Another poll out in Scotland today showing the SNP on 54% :blink: That would give them all but three seats with the Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems sharing one each. Think a few people in the latter parties there might be soon be regretting the panda's in Edinburgh Zoo jokes.

This poll had a higher than usual set of "don't knows".

"Don't know" is usually code up here for "I oppose independence but can't be arsed arguing with shouty zealot fuds with blue painted faces".

Whilst the Sturge has played a blinder, and whilst we expect the SNP to hammer Labour here, I remain convinced that support for Indy/SNP remains a minority view.

[Guest]

 

Terrible chat up line

[Danno]

Sex crime waiting to happen.

[Alf Bentley]

Fantastic demolition of another dishonest Tory stunt by the ever-impressive (and Tory-sympathising) Andrew Neil:

 

Why are people so worried about the SNP holding a Labour government to ransom? I'm more concerned about the Tories being held to ransom by the Melton Mowbray Porkie Pie Party. 

 

[Alf Bentley]

He must have an absolute doozy of a plan up his sleeve then because if he doesn't work with the SNP then he doesn't get into power (barring a staggering shift in the polls north and south of the border) it's as simple as that.

 

Disagree with you there, mate. I'd agree that it's highly unlikely that Labour (or the Tories) will win an absolute majority, but just look at the seats figures projected by the polls (with 323 required for an effective majority)....

Approximately: Con 275, Lab 275, SNP 45, LD 30, DUP 9, UKIP 4, SDLP 3, Plaid 3, Green 1, Others 5

 

Even based on the current polls, Lab + LD + SDLP/Plaid/Green = 312, only 11 short of a majority without the SNP....a tiny shift and we could have a Labour-led majority with no SNP involvement

Likewise, of course, Con + LD + Ulster Bigots + Farage Saloon Bar Reactionaries = 318.....a tiny shift and we could have a truly nasty extreme-right government....but would the Lib Dems tolerate that? Probably not.

 

All on a knife-edge where small shifts could matter a lot, but the Tories probably need a slightly bigger shift than Labour do....

 

They've said there'll be £12 billion cuts in welfare. They don't have be specific to know that if you're on benefits you're going to be worse off.

If you think us Tory voters are bothered about the detail within the welfare cuts then I'm afraid you are mistaken, the detail only matters if it is accurate.

 

Neither of you obviously care which welfare benefits get cut, but let me push you to make a choice.

 

Here are 2 different breakdowns of "welfare" provided by the independent Institute for Fiscal Studies: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29898083

- Working age benefits; Personal social services; other pensions; public service pensions

- Older people; unemployed & low incomes; sick & disabled; families with children

 

The Tories have already explained where £2bn of their £12bn welfare cuts are going to come from, but where would you take the other £10bn from?

- Would you raid the pensions that people have paid into in good faith?

- Would you attack benefits for children or the sick/disabled, or social services for the elderly?

- Or would you go after those scumbag scroungers who find themselves unemployed, claiming tax credits to support their families or benefits to support low pay?

 

Seriously, we all know that it would mainly be the latter - though not entirely, the bedroom tax heavily targeted the disabled, after all.

 

However, after the welfare cuts made in 2010-15, would a further massive £10bn of cuts still be possible in 2015-20?

 

Maybe another target of hatred is required, alongside the "welfare scroungers": perhaps the tax-evading self-employed?

I'm self-employed myself. Even so, just as we all "know" about all those benefits scroungers, we all "know" about all the tax-cheating self-employed, don't we?

 

Why not target them/us? Builders, I.T. consultants, painters & decorators, translators, web site designers, everyone knows we're just as crooked as the benefits scroungers, taking cash in hand payments and underpaying tax.

It's important that we give tax cuts to those earning more than £150k because they are the entrepreneurs and the wealth creators, people worth much more than cvnts like us. Charge them less in tax and they'll actually stay in the country and pay more into the Treasury, that's the way it works, isn't it? The "trickle-down effect".... Yes, we won't manage to squeeze the full £10bn out of the welfare-scrounging dole-mongers, geriatrics and cripples....let's attack those tax-evading/avoiding self-employed, too.

Let's do like we do to the unemployed, demand that the self-employed produce evidence weekly of their strategies to gain new business. Let's call them into the tax office at short notice to inspect their books - and impose tax penalties if they don't attend, or even if they do attend, but miss out a box on a 12-page form. Cvnts! We're all cvnts, stealing from the meritorious Tory rich! Nasty party? What "nasty party"?

 

The pie ain't growing, the rich need more and we need an extra scapegoat. 

[Webbo]

That's a he'll of a rant for half one in the morning.

Imo there's a difference between trying to give less money to the govt that you've earned yourself and claiming money that you haven't earned.

Btw how come everyone with a spare room is disabled?

[MooseBreath]

I reckon Alf's been on the shandy. But is he a happy drunk or an angry drunk? Could read that post either way, but I'm edging towards the latter. He did seem to get genuinely upset by his totally made up story about targeting the self-employed, which we all know us more likely to happen under labour than anyone else anyway.

As for welfare cuts, I think we should look abroad to see where savings can be made. Plenty of developed countries provide very happy lives for their citizens without spending a fraction on welfare of what we do, so clearly it can be done. In many cases handing out cash benefits does more harm than good. We're still among the generous hand out givers in the world. Let's change that.

[Strokes]

People might feel a little more inclined to pay taxes if the benefit system wasn't quite so lucrative. Perhaps Alf you should pop round my house for a beer/tea/coffee, to watch my neighbours and see if you can tell the difference between those working and those not. If you think the cuts have affected the welfare dependant to any extremes, you might want to take a closer look.

If I get a chance for a cash in hand job, I wouldn't hesitate.

[Buce]

That's a he'll of a rant for half one in the morning.

Imo there's a difference between trying to give less money to the govt that you've earned yourself and claiming money that you haven't earned.

Yeah, damn those sponging disabled cvnts claiming money they haven't earned - get a job, or starve. And do they really need their own home? What's wrong with house-sharing? Maybe they could time-share their wheelchairs: after all, half the time they're not really using them, and the money saved could go towards tax-relief for wealth-creators

[Guest Bilo]

Yeah, damn those sponging disabled cvnts claiming money they haven't earned - get a job, or starve. And do they really need their own home? What's wrong with house-sharing? Maybe they could time-share their wheelchairs: after all, half the time they're not really using them, and the money saved could go towards tax-relief for wealth-creators

 

You can't expect these billionaires to live in the extravagance they've all earned, completely without exception, with a 45% tax rate - fvck it, bring back serfdom and then they won't have to pay taxes at all!

[leicsmac]

I reckon Alf's been on the shandy. But is he a happy drunk or an angry drunk? Could read that post either way, but I'm edging towards the latter. He did seem to get genuinely upset by his totally made up story about targeting the self-employed, which we all know us more likely to happen under labour than anyone else anyway.

As for welfare cuts, I think we should look abroad to see where savings can be made. Plenty of developed countries provide very happy lives for their citizens without spending a fraction on welfare of what we do, so clearly it can be done. In many cases handing out cash benefits does more harm than good. We're still among the generous hand out givers in the world. Let's change that.

 

Yeah, I look at those old peeps not far from where I live pushing their barrows and looking for cardboard to sell for food because the developed country I live in doesn't have much of a welfare system at all and I am actually amazed at how happy they look.

 

By extension that's also reason why the kids are under so much pressure here in school - you've got to go to a good university so you can get that office drone job and you can look after your parents after they retire, as pension plans aren't exactly massive over here either.

 

So, in a way, the (lack of) welfare system here fvcks both old and young people.

[The Railway Man]

You can't expect these billionaires to live in the extravagance they've all earned, completely without exception, with a 45% tax rate - fvck it, bring back serfdom and then they won't have to pay taxes at all

 

Not perfect, but better than the 40% they paid under Labour.

[Webbo]

Yeah, damn those sponging disabled cvnts claiming money they haven't earned - get a job, or starve. And do they really need their own home? What's wrong with house-sharing? Maybe they could time-share their wheelchairs: after all, half the time they're not really using them, and the money saved could go towards tax-relief for wealth-creators

Why is it always about the disabled?

[The Railway Man]

Yeah, I look at those old peeps not far from where I live pushing their barrows and looking for cardboard to sell for food because the developed country I live in doesn't have much of a welfare system at all and I am actually amazed at how happy they look.

 

By extension that's also reason why the kids are under so much pressure here in school - you've got to go to a good university so you can get that office drone job and you can look after your parents after they retire, as pension plans aren't exactly massive over here either.

 

So, in a way, the (lack of) welfare system here fvcks both old and young people.

 

What an absolutely horrofic thing to put children through, instead they need to be showered with other people's money.

 

That will work as well as it has here, half the country would be sink estates by 2050.

[Alf Bentley]

 

I'm mainly a happy drunk, Moose, though not always, as demonstrated by my late-night encounter with The Invisible a week or two back. Happy enough last night, though, and just mellowing out after 4 stressful days away looking after my Dad (90, now living alone with Parkinson's & mild dementia). I've got to call social services later to arrange another assessment for him, the scrounging layabout ( ), though he'll have to pay for most support he needs, as he has a good pension.

 

My "rant" was meant to be melodramatic rhetoric showing how the blanket condemnation of "welfare scroungers" could also be applied to the "tax-cheating self-employed". Out of interest, Strokes/Webbo, as you both seem to approve of "cash-in-hand" to evade tax, is it also acceptable to work and fraudulently claim benefits? I see them as roughly equivalent and don't approve of either, but maybe I'm a puritan?

 

Strokes, if your neighbourhood is full of dole scroungers, why the hell hasn't the Tory government done something about it over the past 5 years? They've made welfare cuts a priority, even down to the bedroom tax, yet they've been unable to stop people who could work idling on the dole?! That's a shocking failure by Cameron & co, if true. 

 

Here's some official data showing the welfare budget for 2016: http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/government_expenditure.html

So, the total welfare budget is £111.7bn, from which the Tories plan to cut £12bn. Shouldn't be too hard to slice off another 10%, eh?

 

But look at this welfare breakdown in the Mail (scroll down to pie chart). It's from 2014, but figures now won't be much different): http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/budget2014/article-2582849/BUDGET-2014-Welfare-spending-capped-100billion-stop-benefits-bill-ballooning-control.html

Even if you completely got rid of Jobseeker's (£5.2bn) & Income Support (£3.2bn), you wouldn't save £10bn. The biggest welfare spending was on Housing Benefit (£23.7bn), Disability Living Allowance (£13.7bn), Employment Support Allowance (£9.5bn) & Pension Credit (£7.2bn). No wonder that the Tories don't want to explain where their £10bn of welfare cuts will come from....it's obvious from these stats that they'd only be able to make such cuts by attacking the disabled, the sick and poorer pensioners, as those are the 2nd, 3rd & 4th largest categories of welfare spending!   

 

Of course, there's housing benefit, as the single largest category of welfare spending, but a large proportion of housing benefit goes to those in low-paid full-time or part-time work. Here's some analysis (dates from 2012, but I expect the proportion claiming HB while in work will have increased, as unemployment has fallen since then): https://fullfact.org/factchecks/one_in_eight_housing_benefit_claimants_unemployed-27479 

 

So, in addition to the disabled, the sick and poorer pensioners, the Tories obviously intend to attack those in low-paid or part-time work. No wonder they don't want to talk about it publicly! Trebles in the Eton common room, lads! Rah! Rah! Rah!   

 

Must work before I end up on the dole myself!

[leicsmac]

What an absolutely horrofic thing to put children through, instead they need to be showered with other people's money.

 

That will work as well as it has here, half the country would be sink estates by 2050.

 

Know you're being faceitious, but it's the obligation and lack of choice over here on that score that bothers me. There should be decent options available when things go wrong within families - in the UK there are, over here there's not.