Have UK Conservatives Waged A War Against The Poor?

Yes, fair point here.

 

The tories plan to establish slavery, without any demand that the masters pay the slaves enough to keep alive. You have to be quite a mug to go along with that unless you are a lounge-bar foreigner.

 

I have to say that's how it looks, yes. Certainly for those coming out of the government's own failed back-to-work-program, which effectively failed because of government restrictions on how these companies got paid.

 

To be fair, Thatcher would probably have got round to it eventually....if the poll tax hadn't ended her reign.

I don't think the welfare system as a whole is fit for the purpose, not just the JSA element of it....hasn't been for years, if not decades......but unfortunately, we now have generations, with a vote, being brought up with a sense of entitlement to have it all.....with someone else paying for it.....and equally unfortunately, there is no consensus to do anything sensible about it. We have come a long expensive way from the concept of the Welfare State as it was set up in 1948 when poverty was poverty (in Western terms).....while nowadays poverty just means not having the same as everybody else.

As someone born six months before the Welfare state came into being, and whose birth was paid for by grandparents, what we had then was a Welfare State....which provided enough to keep folk with a roof over their heads, food enough to eat, medical attention when necessary etc but not enough to make anyone view it as a lifestyle choice.....just as a safety net to ensure the basic needs of life while they looked for other work.......and enough to keep them ticking over reasonably healthily if they couldn't find that work.

However it has, in the years since, become little more than party political bribe to voters for their votes in elections.....and as expectations among voters, as to acceptable lifestyles, increase with every advert on the TV for every pointless brain-numbing games console, plasma TV, branded fashion item, medical miracle etc invented, designed, discovered and mass produced..we got the "relative poverty" definition....and that, imo, is where all the UK's problems lie.

If I was a politician, before I was introducing work-fare..and actually paying big business to access free labour......I'd be stopping working tax credits, child tax credits and every darn subsidy we hand out to employers who won't pay living wages.....but then I'd also be making sure that no company or wealthy individual could avoid tax by closing every flaming loophole we currently enshrine in tax law....if you make money from us directly.....then you pay your taxes for that income to us directly! And I'd not be paying benefits of any kind depending on the size of a family.......unless employers did it first.

What hacks me off more than anything is that we are not really being ruled by Governments we choose any more.......but by corporate entities who can blackmail us..because if we don't do what suits them, they will remove their head offices to another country which will. That is why the likes of Starbucks, Amazon, Google etc pay sweeties..or nothing in UK taxes......and that is because they divide their various cost centres into different companies......which sell their products to each other, to make a profit...resulting in the profit for taxation purposes ending up in the country they choose.

<rant on!>
(I have just moved home and am screaming at both BT and SSE atm)

Re my previous paragraph, to be fair, it's much the same with UK privatised Utility companies re regular,irritating urine extraction .....for example, SSE has said About 85% of a typical bill is made up of costs outside our direct control. ....but in actual fact they have a separate generation business as well as a retail business....and the fact that they operate it as a separate business does not negate the fact that SSE gets the profits the generation arm makes....and we are paying (through the nose) so SSE can pay themselves, at more than cost,to produce profit. to get electricity to my home. (and I'm not going to mention that it costs me the highest SSE rate in the whole UK, when I can look out of my window and see sodding windmills producing electricity to send South!)

Same as BT does....I was with Plusnet where I used to live......but had no phone line where I was going.......and believed I had to have a BT line before I could switch elsewhere, so went with BT for my line with a package which stopped me having to pay connection fees......but found out, when I had to hand Plusnet £30 to close off my Broadband, that Plusnet is a BT "stand-alone" Company.......so not only am I stuck with a phone/broadband provider I'd not have chosen in any other circumstances for the next 12 months.......but I sodding paid them £30 via Plusnet, for the privilege!

The UK is America-lite atm......but working hard to become America clone.....and I'm darn glad I'm 66 and not 26, because if Scotland doesn't get out from under in 2014.......I'd as soon be dead!
<rant off!>

.

 

Some great points here. Worth mentioning too, that the reason these new benefit directives are so harsh is because nobody is replacing JSA claims with genuine jobs. Companies are living in a time where the minimum workforce necessary to run their businesses is constantly declining because of technology anyway; add in a crippling recession, and the result is that even the jobs which are being offered do not pay enough wages. Companies are interested in their own profits and have no incentive to lose profits by paying unnecessary wages to staff they don't need. In these situations, the poor must look to government for help because there is no one else. However, what we see with these benefit cuts is that these people are not getting that help. They are being rejected both by the private sector and the public sector, so what are they to do?

 

I think that's what you should do. He's actually right.

The Anglo-Saxons were invited over by Vortigern, King of the Britons (of what is now England and Wales) to help the Britons defeat the Picts (of what is now Scotland).

 

I can see from whence you come.and I don't disagree...the likes of zero hours contracts, for example...are nothing more than a method of removing people from the jobless figures. And jobs are as rare as hobby horse's droppings in many areas.......but the cost of moving elsewhere to find one is prohibitive (having just moved, I know to my cost.). But what is "enough wages" in this brave new world?

The Government seems to think "enough", for a single person under 25 on JSA is less than the full amount paid in weekly rent for a one bedroom Council House up here..and for over 25s it increases to just under the full rent of a 2 bedroom house......so starting from that as a basis........a 40 hour week at minimum wage would be bringing in about 3.5 times JSA at over 25 rates.....which seems fair enough to me for a single person, tbh. This 60% of median income under which one is considered " in poverty" is a complete and utter crock of crap, imo.

 

She wanted basically to create a situation where people had to take scraps of pay to be able to exist. That was her intention. In order to achieve this she allowed mass unemployment paid for by Scottish oil. She also reduced the amount of benefits people could get, both the under 25's and I think it was her who changed the criteria on which they grew so that in real terms those on JSA get a lot less than they did in her time now and pensioners also suffered, put right by the labour government's pension credit. Remember we had no minimum wage then. Both in the Thatcher era and the coalition of now the poorest 10% are the people who saw their share of the wealth falling the most.

Why it did not work was because people became very depressed being unemployed and found it impossible to live on JSA being used to having a salary. Unions then advised them to go to their dr for their depression and then to claim Incapacity Benefit which many did. The Thatcher Government was also keen on putting areas into 'managed decline' expecting everyone to get on their bike. They did not invest in these areas and many have now become generational dole places like some estates in inner cities where children have not had a chance but instead have been pulled into gang culture and an alternative lifestyle.

I could not live on what is it something like £65 per week and having to pay water rates out of that as well and if I had an extra bedroom because the kids have left home or I am no longer allowed a small room to keep my disability equipment having to survive on around £50 a week. How is someone supposed to be able to eat and keep warm, pay their water rates, buy new clothes and everyday necessities like washing up liquid, soap and toilet paper on that amount. I think we are moving back very near to absolute poverty. So many people dependent on food banks and given that they came to my area looking for donations, it is not because the food they give is so delicious.

Well you were certainly fortunate to have grandparents to pay for your birth. There was of course massive unemployment in the interwar years - the Jarrow hunger marches were caused by that. There was also concern about revolution - communism. Social democracy was where the difference was found looking for a step by step redistribution to a more equal society. The fear that if not and soldiers returned from WW2 to a similar situation to what they had found after WW1 was the basis that held together the idea of social democracy until Thatcherism. It was clear that Capitalism went through processes which hurt the working man, who it mainly was in those days and that ways had to be found to protect them and insure against the 5 'Giant Evils' of 'Want, Disease, Ignorance, Squalor and Idleness'.

This is not a time I have ever given any real research to. However I think you are giving an over glamorous position and although we had moved on a bit since Victorian times, having got rid of most if not all work houses, and for a time between the wars some people saw a real rise in their standard of living, many people still suffered the 5 Giant evils Beverage mentions. Arguably they are part and parcel of unregulated capitalism.

What I would say was different before the war and really up to probably the 70's is that people felt ashamed to be asking for help and did everything they could to avoid it, often not claiming benefits they were entitled to. When Universal unemployment Benefit was brought in it was expected that people would be on the 'dole' for about 6 weeks before they found a new job and using Kenysian economics it was the responsibility of the Government to provide full employment. That was one of the keystones on which the system worked. Thatcher changed that. When people became unemployed because of her closures and were unable to find any work, when the government was unwilling to invest in areas which has lost their ability to provide a living for the people there, including areas of the big cities, signing on lost it's negative connotation.

again this comes from Thatcherism. The me, me, philosophy. The, I am what I own psychology. Earlier on people were interested in the word 'integrity' and improvement meant as much being able to get freedom simply to be who you are, to get away from the very real alienation which Marx noticed came from the workplace. Of course it was then followed on by New Labour and now by the coalition and that is directly what has us in the situation we are in now where we are at the level of inequality there was in victorian times and where similar to the Workhouse, people are likely going to need to work full time for their jobseekers allowance, though in this instance it will likely cost others their job.

They are the one thing which Labour did to try and offset deregulation. Without them people would just be less able to cope. I was listening to RT the other night. Don't know if this is true or not but they had the worst 5 or 10 companies. Walmart came out as the worst paying the lowest wages while giving those at the top the highest and making the biggest profit and being massively subsidised by the state. When people are working through a Government job scheme at M&S for instance, M&S will likely get a subsidy for taking them on. Have you any kind of idea the squalor and deprivation your ideas have. These extras including housing benefit are the only thing that keeps us from ghettos and massive civil unrest like the 2011 riots amplified ten times.

In a global financial world where Britain makes about a third of its GDP through financial services I think this would just make us bankrupt. The deregulation and reliance on Financial markets was what was brought in by Thatcher and with it in reality the end of democracy as politicians need to answer to those with the cash not the people. That is why rather than finding out the needs of people politicians just have little focus groups in areas they cannot rely on and then make their election promises on what those people want.

I think they do already pay part of national insurance from which JSA was supposed to come but just leaving people with no benefits would lead to starvation and extra stealing as a need.

Yes indeed. The have us. The question is how do we get out?

Ah well done! I hope you are happy in your new home.

American 'light' maybe. They seem to be taking a long time finding out what is happening to them but then the media has them hooked to the system. My daughter is 32 and has three children. She being very optimistic believes the worst of what is on the horizon will escape her but she is very afraid for her children's future. She is scared enough already I just let her think that.

 

It's not Scottish oil. It's British oil, found by British workers in British workers.

 

It's off the coast os Scotland even thought bLair moved the maritime border north of Dundee in 1999, sorry old chap, your mess is of your own making! It's ours!
But we would be charitable and show our Christian values, our human values something totally alien to the behaviour shown to many nation through out the history of your parasitic aristocracy you are proud to cring
too!

But your mess is yours to resolve!

Have a nice day, were all going up the sun shine mountain.....

Highlander

 

Wouldn't it be nice for everyone to pay just there just dues which make society what it is, to care for those that require the basics for life. Economic policies to benefit the nations of the uk?
What right has anyone to charge for water?
What right has anyone to live off the backs of those needing to heat instead of freezing to death.
What right has tesco's to pay no tax!
What right has vodaphone to pay no tax.
Isn't it ironic that Starbucks offered to pay 10million in tax, even they were ashamed of the legalised corruption of tax laws of both the Tory and new labour governments.
Top shop, so many, there is no need for austerity measure, only corporations company's paying there just dues.
Thank god that we have a choice, no longer the status quo, we have opportunities and choices in 2014 unlike those south of the border who now have no national health service, little by little the parasites are leaching onto the life's blood on the English nation.
All the previous English nations gains for their nation from clement attlee nye bevin etc given away through ignorance of the facts and media lies.
Hopefully some one in England will stand up for the rights of the English nation.

Regards
Highlander

 

UK parliamentary pay: Party leaders taking MPs back 200 years

The paralysis that is British parliamentary democracy took a further excruciating nosedive this week with all three party leaders 'agreeing' that MPs should have their real pay levels reduced!

Our elected representatives must show, it seems, that they are prepared to suffer, to stand by impoverished workers queuing for food handouts, while the rich loot the nation.

When looked at alongside party leaders' 'consensus' that bankers should not be jailed, that fraudulent debts must be paid, that energy cartels must never be broken up and that law-abiding citizens must be prepared to die for the mistakes of the bankers, Cameron&#8217;s, Clegg&#8217;s and Miliband's unanimity on key policies show Britain's' spellbound political leaders think Britain is a one-party state.

But, since it's clearly not the public&#8217;s, whose interests does Britain's one party serve and how did it come to pass that MPs are no longer allowed to set their own wages? For the answer to both these questions, one has to travel back in time to 2008 and pick over the bones of the year's two big stories: the MPs&#8217; expenses scandal and the largely-London-led international bank bailout.
Who dares wins - SAS steal a government hard drive

It's strange how easily the nation has forgotten the 'hero' behind the raid that landed a hard drive containing all the private expenses of British MPs on the desk of the editor of the establishment's Daily Telegraph, William Lewis, precipitating the 2008 'MPs&#8217; expenses scandal'.
http://rt.com/op-edge/british-parliamentary-democracy-paralysis-190/

 

Please, there is no need for austerity, corporations paying there just due, instead of paying nothing.

Debt of the uk 100 percent of GDP.

Waken up and smell the coffee.

Highlander

 

Btw what do you think about the desintegration of UK? It would be a good move or not?

 

Mmm...... With all due respect to your good self, we have not had a choice for the past three hundred years, now we can get back that which was taken.
I don't see it as a disintegration I see an opportunity to benefit our nation.
We want our rights to set the agenda, as we as a nation see's fit. Nothing to do with a good or bad move, it's our right.
Rights you have and use through your political processes.

Regards
Highlander

 

At the end of the day, it is easier to pursue individuals that make up 0.0001% of total wealth than chasing corporations. Conservatives are allied with corporations. Why do you think corporation tax revenues will decrease according to Osbourne. The budget deficit can be solved by changing the way corporation tax is calculated. When companies pay more out in dividends than corporation tax then something is wrong.

Just think about it for a second. Who earns the most money? Individuals or companies? Companies. Who pays the most tax in proportion to their income. Individuals or companies? Individuals. The tax system is biased. It promotes companies that have huge amount of wealth and power and therefore exert their influence on the government. Banks are the number one source of evil. We bailed them out instead of letting them fail hence we took on their toxic debt which has been written off on the governments behalf. lol that's why the UK debt is so high. Instead of bailing them out we could have used the money to invest into the economy by expanding companies, investing in infrastructure, buying an energy company or two

 

The UK's debt is about 75% of GDP - and the Left are to blame.

 

Please remove head from rectum, even you should see the light!

Not left, not right, those that steal are those that dictate to the government.

Highlander

 

It's proof that Old Tories such as Cameron, actually do despise the poor.

Nothing new there, lol

 

I always have a little chuckle when people expound the idea of free market capitalism. Have you noticed they always add that little caveat "within the bounds of law" So you want to enjoy the benefits of not caring about others and as little government as possible whilst keeping a government to protect your ill gotten gains!. Free market capitalism works on a frontier where you can go out, grab a piece of land, work hard and build a life for yourself. but in a small place like the UK where 1/5 of the land has been owned by the same people for a thousand years (if i recall correctly) and 0.6% own 69% of the land, then obviously you are going to have inequalities which no amount of hard work will even out. I was born on a council estate, I worked bloody hard at school and could only afford to do a open university degree (twice) because my mum and dad needed me to be earning at 16 to keep bread on the table. I feel I have achieved quite a lot but when I see Cameron and Osbourne on the tv talking about hard working families it makes me cringe they have never known hunger or want. Yes I would of loved free market capitalism when I was 18 because me and a few of the boy's would of been around to TAKE what we wanted from the weak, inbred, ruling class!

A hundred years ago the best of their generation fought a war for the ruling elite. That ruling elite realised after the war that huge changes were necessary or there would be revolution within the UK. it so nearly came to that in the 1920's but in a lot of respects I believe the threat of WW2 staved of the redistribution of wealth. But after WW2 the ruling elite could do no more, there had to be and was a massive redistribution of wealth though the welfare state. It has taken nearly 70 years but finally the ruling elite have got back to where they think they belong. The Prime Minister, Chancellor and Mayor of London all come from the same university.

They are slowly demonising the welfare state. (which my father and grandfather fought for)
They are demonising the working poor
They are demonising people who cannot get a job
They are subsidising big business through tax credit's.
They are demonising immigration
They allow huge tax evasion to continue.
They allow the banking sector to steal with impunity.

They tell us we should "aspire" but what your average working man really aspires to is security of employment. A chance to work for a reasonable wage in reasonable conditions and know that if you work well, keep your nose clean that job will be there for life.

But we are told by those who worship greed that the "global economy" means the luxury of security of employment will never return.

 

The ruling elite hate the working poor - it's why they allow mass immigration to the UK.

gives them a great excuse to denigrate their own people.