The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Any Tories care to defend this?

Scroll to see replies

Despite being a massive believer in Conservatism, and incredibly anti-welfare (I believe taxes are far to high in this country for middle class to wealthy people), I do have to admit this is wrong. Sick and disabled people have to be supported financially; these people have no possibility of undertaking a job of any sort, and it's only right we help them. But in general, the other welfare cuts the government has made have been excellent. It is your responsibility, if mentally and physically capable, to get skills that are valued by employers. If you do not have them, you simply did not work hard enough, and hence you do not deserve to have the same standard of life as others. In general, it's unfair to make hard-working wealthy and middle-class people provide for those who have not worked as hard as them (work referring to jobs that involve critical thinking and learning not just turning up to work everyday). People do not understand that the reason we have so called poverty in this country is not because the minimum wage is too low; in fact it is perfectly fair for someone with no skills, but we have it because those in low income families insist on having the things that more hard working families enjoy. Ie eating from m&s, having iPhones, having TVs. Everyone is quick to forget that, that lifestyle is a privilege, not everyone is automatically entitled to them.
Original post by Mathematicus65
Despite being a massive believer in Conservatism, and incredibly anti-welfare (I believe taxes are far to high in this country for middle class to wealthy people), I do have to admit this is wrong. Sick and disabled people have to be supported financially; these people have no possibility of undertaking a job of any sort, and it's only right we help them. But in general, the other welfare cuts the government has made have been excellent. It is your responsibility, if mentally and physically capable, to get skills that are valued by employers. If you do not have them, you simply did not work hard enough, and hence you do not deserve to have the same standard of life as others. In general, it's unfair to make hard-working wealthy and middle-class people provide for those who have not worked as hard as them (work referring to jobs that involve critical thinking and learning not just turning up to work everyday). People do not understand that the reason we have so called poverty in this country is not because the minimum wage is too low; in fact it is perfectly fair for someone with no skills, but we have it because those in low income families insist on having the things that more hard working families enjoy. Ie eating from m&s, having iPhones, having TVs. Everyone is quick to forget that, that lifestyle is a privilege, not everyone is automatically entitled to them.


What you forget though is the Conservative Government have been hitting disabled people more than any other group in the country.

Lets take for example the most severe disabled people in our country. They had a care in the community package which was set up by Margret Thatcher. This was called the Independent Living Fund. David Camerons Government devolved the ILF to local councils which in turn dismantled it and used the funding from it to fund their other services. In the end ILF users had their care hours reduced by up to 60%.

Then there is the Bedroom tax which has been deemed illegal yet has caused poverty & misery to loads of vulnerable people.

The whole ESA & PIP testing system has ended up costing the Government up to £200 a test and the cuts which the disability benefit changes have ended up costing the Government more money rather than saving money.

In terms of disability care services and welare this Conservative Government has failed and made things worse.
Original post by infairverona
I'm not surprised, they should've waited. Too much controversy around all this 'The DWP made me kill myself!!!!!!' rubbish for this to be passed right now.


People committing suicide is a load of "rubbish" now?
Original post by TheGuyReturns
People committing suicide is a load of "rubbish" now?


Is that what I said? No. Don't twist words. I said people claiming they have committed suicide because of the DWP is rubbish - which it is.
Original post by infairverona
Is that what I said? No. Don't twist words. I said people claiming they have committed suicide because of the DWP is rubbish - which it is.


http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/welfare/2015/09/disabled-man-killed-himself-over-benefit-cut-coroner-rules
Original post by TheGuyReturns


This man had recurrent depression and was on anti ds when he died - that's what killed him, not DWP.
Original post by infairverona
This man had recurrent depression and was on anti ds when he died - that's what killed him, not DWP.


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/more-80-suicide-cases-directly-5634404
Original post by TheGuyReturns


I haven't seen a story so far where other factors haven't had a huge impact on how the person died. A lot of these people were already mentally ill and doctors or coroners say the cut in benefits 'triggered' them - I don't know how familiar you are with mental health, but 'triggers' are not the cause of the death in that case. Anorexic people for example are 'triggered' by people talking about what diet they are on, and this can cause their illness to get worse, but that's the illness - it's not the fault of the person talking about their diet. It's still the fault of the mental illness itself, and anyone with mental health issues can be triggered by various things. Someone who has depression, with one of the most common symptoms being a feeling of helplessness or like there's no way out, will obviously find a cut in their benefits more sensitive than someone who is not depressed. They may be triggered by having their benefits cut, but their illness has killed them, not the benefits cut.

And some of them like take David Clapson in that article: "They included David Clapson, 59, a former soldier from Stevenage. He was a diabetic who was found dead in his home last July after his benefits were slashed and he did not apply for hardship payments." Why didn't he? Take some responsibility for yourself if you're on welfare, people aren't going to come round ladling it out to you.

So far I haven't seen a single news story that has convinced me of a direct correlation between benefit cuts and death. There are always other factors or mental illness involved.
Reply 88
Avatar for sw651
sw651
3
Original post by SmallTownGirl
I'm going to tell you why you're wrong:

I am on ESA.

1. I pay for my bus and train fares
2. I get free prescriptions but if I were not disabled I wouldn't need the meds anyway so...
3. Free healthcare is available to everyone in this country
4. I pay for my food
5. I get some housing benefit, I pay for the rest and some council tax
6. I pay for my gas, electricity and water
7. What support?
8. What other perks?


Then why do we pay for it if you don't need it?
Reply 89
Avatar for TeeEm
TeeEm
19
David-Cameron.jpg
Original post by sw651
Then why do we pay for it if you don't need it?


What do you think YOU are paying for that I don't need?
Reply 91
Avatar for sw651
sw651
3
Original post by Quantex
If I remember correctly pensions are over £70 billion/year and constitute around 50% of welfare spending. ESA is less than £5 billion. Care to explain how I am completely wrong?

Any changes to pensions would hit middled aged professionals as its their future state pensions that will be reduced or their retirement age pushed back.


It's proportional! There are more old people than there are on regular benefits. And you know why we give old people pensions? Because a majority have worked their arses off. You are wrong about welfare spending. In entirety it is almost 698 billion. It makes up 10% maximum. Also ESA is not the only benefits, overall we spend over 40 billion in benefits. Stop drawing up stats which support your argument and ignoring the truth.
Reply 92
Avatar for sw651
sw651
3
Original post by SmallTownGirl
What do you think YOU are paying for that I don't need?


Stop changing the question. You have just claimed you pay for almost everything you need. Why do you need benefits then?

And I do acknowledge you are disabled, and as such should get benefits for that.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Dopesmoker
if you're in the 20% tax bracket and voted for the Tories, you f***ed up big time


Considering tax credits haven't been cut and over a million have been taken out of income tax, your username seems highly appropriate for your viewpoint.
Reply 94
Avatar for sw651
sw651
3
Original post by scrotgrot
Figures circa 2012
Sources: Guardian, Telegraph, DWP

Spend:
State pensions: £74bn
ESA: £3.6bn

Caseload:
State pensions: 9.2m
ESA: 2.3m

Per claimant:
State pensions: £8,065
ESA: £1,565

Remember everyone, never trust a Tory. They'll lie about anything.


I referred to ESA as a single argument point. But see my answer to Quintax.
Original post by sw651
Stop changing the question. You have just claimed you pay for almost everything you need. Why do you need benefits then?

And I do acknowledge you are disabled, and as such should get benefits for that.


WTF? The poster I replied to said that people on ESA got all that stuff free and then were given their ESA. When I say 'I pay for...' I mean 'I pay for... with my ESA.'
Original post by Squirrel777
I have hated the lords since day 1. Whether they vote in favour or against the government (Labour or Tory) is a spit in the face of democracy. Like the EU cabinet, they are nothing more than unelected privileged elitists. I have and always will oppose the idea of the lords, no matter the situation.


But it's okay when Cameron and the Conservatives try and stuff it full of their puppets in order for their legislation to pass?

Take Andrew Lloyd Webber, who despite having not bothered to vote for the past 2 years (as a member of the HoL), suddenly found himself in London voting with the Government for the Tax Credits cuts in October 2015.
Reply 97
Avatar for sw651
sw651
3
Original post by SmallTownGirl
WTF? The poster I replied to said that people on ESA got all that stuff free and then were given their ESA. When I say 'I pay for...' I mean 'I pay for... with my ESA.'


Ohhhhhh. Apologies. I didn't realise. To be honest my issues isn't with benefits. It's with the way it is shared out
Reply 98
Avatar for jgjog3
jgjog3
4
Original post by Squirrel777
That is the lowest rate, most earn far more than that and on top of that they are all eligible for free travel, prescriptions, healthcare, food, housing, energy, support and many other perks. Do not play the victim card. 100 quid including free everything is a dream for many many people


No we were on benefit during hard time. We got much much less. And we are a family of 6, head of household: a self employed single mum.

Yes they are meagre. And it's a shitty life. I'm talking from experience.
Original post by TheArtofProtest
But it's okay when Cameron and the Conservatives try and stuff it full of their puppets in order for their legislation to pass?

Take Andrew Lloyd Webber, who despite having not bothered to vote for the past 2 years (as a member of the HoL), suddenly found himself in London voting with the Government for the Tax Credits cuts in October 2015.


No it is not ok. The lords should be scrapped, every Tory, Labour and Liberal democrat who sits in there. Even if it was on a policy I supported I would still oppose their ruling as democratic process sits in my top 3 most important policies (which is why I have always been opposed to the idea of the EU and the lords), you will never find support from me to the lords.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you