Politics, politics, politics

[scaramanga]

They are trying to sneak through the tax credit changes, by making the cuts to universal credit, which is the system they plan to fully replace tax credits with eventually. As usual with any kind of budget/spending review, more detail emerges in the time after the announcements.

There's no sneaking about it.

The manifesto was to drastically reduce the welfare bill, the public (like it or not) voted for those changes, they tried to bring it forward and are now having to push it back again.

They're still the same cuts the country voted for.

 

[the dza]

There's no sneaking about it.

The manifesto was to drastically reduce the welfare bill, the public (like it or not) voted for those changes, they tried to bring it forward and are now having to push it back again.

They're still the same cuts the country voted for.

There are working-class Tory voters who will disagree with you. Many of them thought the £12B 'welfare' cuts were coming to the 'shirkers' and people who didn't work, rather than people who worked but got low pay i.e. them.** Once they realised that this wasn't what they actually voted for, Tory backbench MP's started to panic and Osborne has had to backtrack. But it's sneaky because he has still applied the cuts to the system that they want to eventually replace tax credits with. This will be made very clear soon enough.

**EdIt: they got the impression the cuts weren't aimed at them because of Cameron, Gove et al repeatedly assuring them that their tax credits were safe. Nothing sneaky there...

 

[scaramanga]

There are working-class Tory voters who will disagree with you. Many of them thought the £12B 'welfare' cuts were coming to the 'shirkers' and people who didn't work, rather than people who worked but got low pay i.e. them.**

If someone votes for a manifesto they haven't read then they have no right to complain.

It was quite clear that welfare cuts were coming across the board. In fact, I'm sure I remember people bleating about it on this very thread. Only a very small proportion of the welfare cuts were ever aimed at dossers.

I'd be interested to hear just how many people voted Conservative but would have voted another way if they'd had the relatively minor comprehension skills required to understand the manifesto.

Once they realised that this wasn't what they actually voted for, Tory backbench MP's started to panic and Osborne has had to backtrack. But it's sneaky because he has still applied the cuts to the system that they want to eventually replace tax credits with. This will be made very clear soon enough.

The only panic was over the timing when it was made clear (although it should already have been) that cuts were being made faster than the increase in the disgusting waste of money that is the "living wage".

 

[Gilzeantoscore]

There are working-class Tory voters who will disagree with you. Many of them thought the £12B 'welfare' cuts were coming to the 'shirkers' and people who didn't work, rather than people who worked but got low pay i.e. them.** Once they realised that this wasn't what they actually voted for, Tory backbench MP's started to panic and Osborne has had to backtrack. But it's sneaky because he has still applied the cuts to the system that they want to eventually replace tax credits with. This will be made very clear soon enough.

**EdIt: they got the impression the cuts weren't aimed at them because of Cameron, Gove et al repeatedly assuring them that their tax credits were safe. Nothing sneaky there...

Have no sympathy for these types. Hope they get everything coming their way. That teach'll them. Alf Garnett lives!

 

[the dza]

If someone votes for a manifesto they haven't read then they have no right to complain.

It was quite clear that welfare cuts were coming across the board. In fact, I'm sure I remember people bleating about it on this very thread. Only a very small proportion of the welfare cuts were ever aimed at dossers.

I'd be interested to hear just how many people voted Conservative but would have voted another way if they'd had the relatively minor comprehension skills required to understand the manifesto.


The only panic was over the timing when it was made clear (although it should already have been) that cuts were being made faster than the increase in the disgusting waste of money that is the "living wage".

The Tories continually refused to answer where specifically the £12Bn in cuts to welfare were being made, and senior Tories such as Gove and Cameron specifically said that it wouldn't be from Tax Credits.

Anybody on low wages who ends up worse off because they voted Tory has no right to complain, I agree on that. They should have known that the wool was being pulled over their eyes. I'd love to know the percentage of the electorate who reads the manifesto of the party that they wish to vote for. I suspect, in percentage terms, it's in the single digits.

 

[Baleforce]

anyone who doesn't read all of them (and by that I mean the 3 serious party's yeah good point, 2 serious party's, ha ha yep, Corbyn, only one to read really) shouldn't be allowed to vote

there should also be some kind of test

we rightly don't let people drive until they prove capable, having a say in govt shouldn't be any different

 

[scaramanga]

The Tories continually refused to answer where specifically the £12Bn in cuts to welfare were being made, and senior Tories such as Gove and Cameron specifically said that it wouldn't be from Tax Credits.

Any quotes from Cameron? Don't know why Gove got involved, it's nothing to do with him.

 

[scaramanga]

anyone who doesn't read all of them (and by that I mean the 3 serious party's yeah good point, 2 serious party's, ha ha yep, Corbyn, only one to read really) shouldn't be allowed to vote

there should also be some kind of test

we rightly don't let people drive until they prove capable, having a say in govt shouldn't be any different

If only people who understand economics voted, there would be no left wing.

 

[the dza]

Any quotes from Cameron? Don't know why Gove got involved, it's nothing to do with him.

I left this page open, but then didn't reply coz I was watching the telly. Originally, you asked "any quotes?" and then with a few seconds on google, I found the Gove one:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...ichael-gove-deny-cut-manifesto_n_8367926.html

Listen to him say it on the BBC "We are going to freeze them for 2 years, we are not going to cut them."

Cameron did his bit on Question Time pre-election, but it's my mistake, he didn't say specifically that he would not cut tax credits, he just didn't say specifically that he would, only a garbled response about child benefit. My mistake.

I searched for an IDS quote on where the £12BN cuts were coming from; IDS just refused to say where the £12BN in welfare savings would be made (you'd think he might know).

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...2bn-welfare-cuts-will-come-from-31198699.html

Asked why he could not disclose the cuts, he said: “We would have to have done the work on it. That’s why. We would have had to reach agreement as to exactly where those are... as soon as we’ve done the work and had it modelled we’ll let everybody know what that is.”

In March of this year the Institute for Fiscal Studies challenges the Conservatives over their planned cuts and said the Chancellor should spell out exactly which benefits would suffer.

“But it is now almost two years since he announced his intention of cutting welfare spending by £12bn. Since then the main announcement has been the plan not to cut anything from the main pensioner benefits,” Paul Johnson, the Institute’s Director, said.

“We have been told about no more than £2bn of the planned cuts to working-age benefits. And, remember, apparently the ‘plan’ is to have those £12bn of cuts in place by 2017-18. It is time we knew more about what they might actually involve.”


Obviously, working-class Tory voters were unwise to vote for them and think that their Tax Credits were not going to be hit. But with neither Cameron nor IDS stating explicitly where the savings were going to be made (funny how they would only be able to "do the work" on that after the election result was in), and a senior politician like Gove outright saying they were not going to be cut, I guess you can understand how they were duped.

 

[scaramanga]

I left this page open, but then didn't reply coz I was watching the telly. Originally, you asked "any quotes?" and then with a few seconds on google, I found the Gove one:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...ichael-gove-deny-cut-manifesto_n_8367926.html

Listen to him say it on the BBC "We are going to freeze them for 2 years, we are not going to cut them."

Cameron did his bit on Question Time pre-election, but it's my mistake, he didn't say specifically that he would not cut tax credits, he just didn't say specifically that he would, only a garbled response about child benefit. My mistake.

I searched for an IDS quote on where the £12BN cuts were coming from; IDS just refused to say where the £12BN in welfare savings would be made (you'd think he might know).

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...2bn-welfare-cuts-will-come-from-31198699.html

Asked why he could not disclose the cuts, he said: “We would have to have done the work on it. That’s why. We would have had to reach agreement as to exactly where those are... as soon as we’ve done the work and had it modelled we’ll let everybody know what that is.”

In March of this year the Institute for Fiscal Studies challenges the Conservatives over their planned cuts and said the Chancellor should spell out exactly which benefits would suffer.

“But it is now almost two years since he announced his intention of cutting welfare spending by £12bn. Since then the main announcement has been the plan not to cut anything from the main pensioner benefits,” Paul Johnson, the Institute’s Director, said.

“We have been told about no more than £2bn of the planned cuts to working-age benefits. And, remember, apparently the ‘plan’ is to have those £12bn of cuts in place by 2017-18. It is time we knew more about what they might actually involve.”


Obviously, working-class Tory voters were unwise to vote for them and think that their Tax Credits were not going to be hit. But with neither Cameron nor IDS stating explicitly where the savings were going to be made (funny how they would only be able to "do the work" on that after the election result was in), and a senior politician like Gove outright saying they were not going to be cut, I guess you can understand how they were duped.

So only Gove (hardly known for accuracy in what he says) claimed they wouldn't be cut?

IIRC, no parties were detailing their financial plans before the election. IMO that's wrong, they should all be as detailed as possible, but equally, I wouldn't expect one party to disadvantage themselves by being the only one to detail their plans.

I don't think it's much of a stretch of the imagination to see a scenario where middle class Labour voters would have been equally put out by increases to the already disgusting higher and additional tax rates.

 

[parklane1]

There are working-class Tory voters who will disagree with you. Many of them thought the £12B 'welfare' cuts were coming to the 'shirkers' and people who didn't work, rather than people who worked but got low pay i.e. them.** Once they realised that this wasn't what they actually voted for, Tory backbench MP's started to panic and Osborne has had to backtrack. But it's sneaky because he has still applied the cuts to the system that they want to eventually replace tax credits with. This will be made very clear soon enough.

QUOTE]

tickle my balls with a feather, I have met a few who are disgusted that the cuts were going to effect them, how dare they.

 

[scaramanga]

tickle my balls with a feather, I have met a few who are disgusted that the cuts were going to effect them, how dare they.

Cutting people's benefits will disgust some, increasing taxes will disgust others and tinkling away the country's future by doing neither will disgust the rest.

Someone will be tinkled off whatever they do, so they might as well do what's best for the country and put up with the whining.

 

[parklane1]

Cutting people's benefits will disgust some, increasing taxes will disgust others and tinkleing away the country's future by doing neither will disgust the rest.

Someone will be tinkleed off whatever they do, so they might as well do what's best for the country and put up with the whining.

Of course people will moan if brick happens to them ( its a sign of the I'm all right Jack world we live in), the point is that a lot of Torys were up in arms that what they thought would effect the lower class ( in their eyes) would have effected them as well.

 

[the dza]

Bombs away!

I feel safer already.

 

[AuroRaman]

Good stuff. Firstly, that'll show the homegrown terrorists. Secondly, resources will be safe in our hands. YAY DEMOCRACY AND CAPITALISM!!

 

[Robspur12]

Bombs away!

I feel safer already.

* sigh* Governments will never learn- sadly. More children traumatised for very little gain. I wonder how many politicians would be so eager to go to war if they were going to send in their own children.

 

[Robspur12]

Disgusted at the pictures in the commons today, MPs laughing and joking in the lead up to the vote results. Should have been more sombre imho. Also disgusted at our charlatan Prime Minister referring to those opposed to Air strike as terrorist sympathisers. Made for good politics amongst the knuckle draggers and ultra right.I believe we will be drawn into a ground offensive. We are carrying out air strikes to enable the rebel groups to take out IS. Unfortunately they are more interested in taking out Bashar al Asad. So the Russians are bombing the rebels into oblivion and don't really care about IS because they have not targeted Asad. So when the air strikes inevitably fail because IS are holed up in their bunkers it will force a ground offensive probably after an IS cell has attacked another major European city. fudging madness

 

[glorygloryeze]

The end game for London, Washington and "The Coalition" has always been regime change in Syria. Bush and his gang said as much during the infamous "Axis of Evil" speech nearly 14 years ago now.
Whether Assad is a murderous despot or not is irrelevant: the fact he sticks two fingers up to Washington and wont toe their line is the real reason he is wanted out - the idea that he is wanted out because "he murders his own people" is my favourite buttplug.

Russia usually stand by Syria and Assad, so whether he ends up staying in Power will likely be very dependant on them imo...

 

[AuroRaman]

 

[scaramanga]

Disgusted at the pictures in the commons today, MPs laughing and joking in the lead up to the vote results. Should have been more sombre imho.

Why would people pretending to be sombre make you feel better? Personally, I'd rather they acted more naturally - gives them one less thing to worry about on a difficult day like yesterday.

Also disgusted at our charlatan Prime Minister referring to those opposed to Air strike as terrorist sympathisers. Made for good politics amongst the knuckle draggers and ultra right.

Is it untrue then?

Jeremy Corbyn described Hamas (terrorists) as friends:
http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...labour-leadership-foreign-policy-antisemitism

Both he and McDonnell have had plenty of involvement with the IRA (terrorists):
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...rbyn-and-John-McDonnells-close-IRA-links.html

That's two of their front bench in a 10 second Google search. They are terrorist sympathisers and they (like Milibland before them) are playing politics and opposing the government for political capital amongst those with diminished cognitive ability.

I believe we will be drawn into a ground offensive. We are carrying out air strikes to enable the rebel groups to take out IS. Unfortunately they are more interested in taking out Bashar al Asad. So the Russians are bombing the rebels into oblivion and don't really care about IS because they have not targeted Asad. So when the air strikes inevitably fail because IS are holed up in their bunkers it will force a ground offensive probably after an IS cell has attacked another major European city. fudgeing madness

Unfortunately, the opportunity to take out Asad and ISIS together disappeared when Labour played politics on this same vote last time. Then, there was a credible rebel uprising that we could have backed against both sides and had a pretty good chance of helping them win.

Labour went for the easy vote and since then those rebel groups have been all but destroyed and will almost certainly lose. The chance to fix Syria has long gone, we just have to do what we can to take out ISIS and hope the Russians can convince Asad that a democracy is a good thing (very unlikely). So a ground offensive is unlikely - most of the damage done to Al Qaeda was done with air strikes and drones. I can't see why the same can't be done here.