The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Bornblue
Conservatives to justify their savage warfare cuts try to comfort themselves by telling us that cutting the support and benefits that our most vulnerable people rely on to feed and sustain themselves is really kind because it 'frees them from a cycle of dependency' or some crap like that.
And therefore that being cruel and taking away the support and safety net is really 'kind' and helping the poor.

You couldn't make it up.


they are giving with one hand and then taking a lot with the other to avoid backlash!

it's disgusting they are still hitting those at the bottom disproportionally.
Original post by SotonianOne
Newspaper-publicised deaths have been in single-figures and all of those suffered some sort of mental health or had another deficiency which made them vulnerable, in one case including that person from Leicester who even the GP didn't know he was "vulnerable" so it's not the Government's fault.

The "numbers" of people who have died as a direct result of welfare cuts are pure speculation and have never been released, but may be on the way with that IDS petition.



The lack of cycling lanes also kills people, so does the lack of proton beam therps. If we had unlimited money we could solve these problems, but we don't.




I don't know, should they? Are they already not doing the most they can? I don't understand the context of the question, charities do what their budget allows them to do, they can't do "more" or "less"


I'm not sure what you mean in your 2nd point.
Original post by dtin
I'm not sure what you mean in your 2nd point.


Cycling lanes?
Original post by SotonianOne
Cycling lanes?


No, the other one.
Original post by dtin
No, the other one.


Well your question was whether I think charities should do more

Are they not already doing the most (at capacity)?
Original post by SotonianOne
Well your question was whether I think charities should do more

Are they not already doing the most (at capacity)?


It's a very broad issue, my original point did not take into account that they probably already are.
Also what did you mean by 'proton beam therps'?
Original post by guntby
Because it's a Green constituency, the only one in England.

Give it a couple of decades and the Green Party might be as popular as Labour and the Conservatives, just as the Labour party was a movement that initially had any hardly any seats in the early 1900s, then went on to become one of the main parties and in many cases beat the Tories.

Appalling class divide and social inequality (which still exists in my opinion) was a problem then. The problem now is climate change.


No they won't, Labour were more like UKIP when they started.
Original post by Lil-Sonic
The Tories are only doing what is best for Britain and putting the great back into Great Britain,


how? by killing off the poor?
Original post by Bill_Gates
how? by killing off the poor?


Mandate the unemployed to join the armed forces.
Original post by Lil-Sonic
Mandate the unemployed to join the armed forces.


lol to just sit around?
Original post by Bill_Gates
how? by killing off the poor?


Yes. I am doing my bit for Britain by volunteering for the firing squads.

Are you contributing or just scrounging?
Original post by SotonianOne
Yes. I am doing my bit for Britain by volunteering for the firing squads.

Are you contributing or just scrounging?


lol by sitting on TSR all day brah?

Sure.
Original post by Bill_Gates
lol by sitting on TSR all day brah?

Sure.


And you're not going to contribute to Great Britain by volunteering to an SS Tory Firing Squad?

How incredibly rude, unpatriotic and scroungeful.
Not looking forward to the austerity budget in July :frown:
Original post by Lil-Sonic
Mandate the unemployed to join the armed forces.


SO.... spending to create jobs. Sound dangerous Keynesian. Osborne outlawed spending don't you know.
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
SO.... spending to create jobs. Sound dangerous Keynesian. Osborne outlawed spending don't you know.


Transferring the welfare JSA budget into the defence budget is simple opportunity cost, not extra spending.

Plus I doubt it's armed forces, more like territorial.
Original post by SotonianOne
Transferring the welfare JSA budget into the defence budget is simple opportunity cost, not extra spending.

Plus I doubt it's armed forces, more like territorial.


It would cost no extra due to the fact that they will still recieve JSA as a proper wage of 54 pounds a week.

It will also be the normal force.
Original post by guntby
It's a matter of voting for promises you dislike the least, so that hopefully ones you think are even worse won't happen. Also it's first past the post, not proportional representation. All you can do is vote for which of the two main parties you think is the lesser of two evils (unless you're fortunate enough to live in Brighton).


Only someone who has the capacity of a 5 year old in economics would vote green
There shoudlbe no law and no government just a state run economic administration the whole world should;d be one commonwealth and everybody should have part time roles in work through a proper education.
Original post by Paladian
There shoudlbe no law and no government just a state run economic administration the whole world should;d be one commonwealth and everybody should have part time roles in work through a proper education.


interesting :tongue:

Latest

Trending

Trending