Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

We SHOULD cut welfare spending! Watch

  • View Poll Results: Should we cut welfare spending?
    Yes
    210
    56.30%
    Leave it as it is
    82
    21.98%
    No-increase welfare spending
    81
    21.72%

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    I'm considering those who don't work at all especially
    You think unemployment is "a free ride"? You naive fool.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by trianglehate)
    I haven't been misled by the media, yes the lower class younger people do get a substantial amount of financial support, but you're missing the point. If they live in an area where they are disadvantaged by means of education, housing and so forth, they are unlikely to progress onto university level.

    And I'm not making a generalisation, I come from a working class background and have grown up on a council estate. But I see so many other people my age who just think there is nothing for them. It angers me because much more could be done to prevent the rich/poor divide.

    This can only happen if the government doesn't make cuts, and I want evidence that the last time was 1921 because the amount of cuts councils in the UK are making is ridiculous, as are these austerity measures.
    The cuts aren't happening in the right areas, the councillors still get taxis and chauffeur-driven cars at taxpayers expense


    Don't even think of the millions that could be save by a few tweaks to public sector pensions

    You might think cuts are happening but in reality spending is still on the increase overall
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by trianglehate)
    I haven't been misled by the media, yes the lower class younger people do get a substantial amount of financial support, but you're missing the point. If they live in an area where they are disadvantaged by means of education, housing and so forth, they are unlikely to progress onto university level.

    And I'm not making a generalisation, I come from a working class background and have grown up on a council estate. But I see so many other people my age who just think there is nothing for them. It angers me because much more could be done to prevent the rich/poor divide.

    This can only happen if the government doesn't make cuts, and I want evidence that the last time was 1921 because the amount of cuts councils in the UK are making is ridiculous, as are these austerity measures.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ER-Labour.html
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    The cuts aren't happening in the right areas, the councillors still get taxis and chauffeur-driven cars at taxpayers expense


    Don't even think of the millions that could be save by a few tweaks to public sector pensions

    You might think cuts are happening but in reality spending is still on the increase overall
    I already mentioned about the taxis and chauffeur-driven cars at taxpayers expense, it's ridiculous.

    Yes spending is still on the increase but again, in the wrong areas! Lets take HS2 for example, why on earth are we spending 32 BILLION pounds on a rail connection we don't need? Let's ask David Cameron, because it was his party who approved the plans. It begs the question, there are cuts which are hitting the lower classes hard, yet somehow as a country we can afford to spend that amount of money so the MPs, bankers and so forth can have 20 minutes slashed off of their rail journey between Birmingham and London. It's not as if they pay for their rail fare anyway!

    As I've mentioned before, the social divide in this country is a complete joke. Now, tell me what response you have to that.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    You think unemployment is "a free ride"? You naive fool.
    How dare you! I will refrain from insulting you- I refuse to stoop to that level

    For this lady it certainly is : http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...e-trashed.html
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MostUncivilised)
    Ha! What a charmingly naive creature you are, my dear. I have a fair amount of exposure to "tax efficient" structures, for various reasons, and very few people on £150,000 and over a year, actually pay that rate.

    There is a reason they have salaries paid into personal service companies (no national insurance! Normal expenses like transportation and housing classed as business expenses to effect tax deductability! How equitable! Only if you can afford the right accountants, obviously), remuneration poured into deferred payment schemes and offshore tax structures. There is a reason they take funds out of cash points with cards accessing overseas accounts directly, so that HMRC never has a look in.

    Clearly, you're not moving in the right circles if you're paying anything more than a few % tax on anything exceeding £150,000.



    Why indeed? Why not cut aircraft carriers and contract payments to ATOS instead of kicking terminally ill cancer patients onto the scrapheap?
    Now what you're talking about is illegal acts. There are big differences between Tax evasion and tax avoidance. You pick on the acts of 1 or 2 individuals and paint all hardworking entrepreneurs, doctors, lawyers, small business owners and anybody else who gets off their fat asses to go to work with the same brush.


    This is similar to me pointing out 1 absurd family such as this one: (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...OTHER-way.html) and saying anybody who claims benefits are the same.


    Tax efficient structures don't apply to WAGES (which is another word for a salary) which I clearly mentioned in my post that you responded to. Personal service companies eventually would declare dividends where additional taxes and income tax is applied.

    Now, I guarantee I have seen more of the world than you have and I assure you I am far from naive.

    Nobody is talking about kicking terminally ill cancer patients onto scrap heaps. We are talking about the £26 Bn Labour wasted on computer blunders and £18 Bn wasted on ID card blunders again by Labour. We are talking about £57 Mn on benefits for dead people and an additional £2.6 Bn wasted on fraudulent benefits claims and errors in calculation. Oh, by labour again.

    See a pattern anyone?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Haha, only you could provide evidence from the Daily Mail.

    Probably one of the most indiscreet right-wing, political papers in the UK
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    How dare you! I will refrain from insulting you- I refuse to stoop to that level

    For this lady it certainly is : http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...e-trashed.html
    Every post you make is insulting.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    That's why need less people claiming benefits for most of their working age life and then claim a pension using the NI contribution credits for claiming benefits
    Yeah totally agree, if you are on a qualifying benefit then your contributions are treated as paid
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    The cuts aren't happening in the right areas, the councillors still get taxis and chauffeur-driven cars at taxpayers expense
    This is a red-herring, insofar as the major source of local authority funding is the central government, which has the prerogative to ring-fence and earmark grants (in fact, all the cuts to local authorities of which I'm aware come from exactly that sort of funding, that goes directly to local services, education, etc).

    In line with Tory ideology, councils will be forced to rely in much greater proportion on user-pays systems and council tax levies; a poll-tax by stealth. This will hit Britain's poorer locales much harder, creating a two-tier Britain.

    But hey, I shouldn't be surprised. It is expressly-stated Tory policy to ensure that the poor are only provided with services commensurate with their means, and that the central government has no role to play in correcting and ameliorating regional differences and historical disadvantages.

    Don't even think of the millions that could be save by a few tweaks to public sector pensions
    That's quite a bold proposition, considering those pensions are the private, contractually-acquired property of civil servants. And Tories accuse socialists of spending other people's money. Cheek, I'll give you that (though some would call it rank hypocrisy)

    You might think cuts are happening but in reality spending is still on the increase overall
    That's simply indicative of Tory incompetence and their almost complete inability to get a grip on the macroeconomic steering wheel. Increases in debt under the pro-cyclical Tory economic policy were predicted by many, and turned out to be 100% true.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by trianglehate)
    I already mentioned about the taxis and chauffeur-driven cars at taxpayers expense, it's ridiculous.

    Yes spending is still on the increase but again, in the wrong areas! Lets take HS2 for example, why on earth are we spending 32 BILLION pounds on a rail connection we don't need? Let's ask David Cameron, because it was his party who approved the plans. It begs the question, there are cuts which are hitting the lower classes hard, yet somehow as a country we can afford to spend that amount of money so the MPs, bankers and so forth can have 20 minutes slashed off of their rail journey between Birmingham and London. It's not as if they pay for their rail fare anyway!

    As I've mentioned before, the social divide in this country is a complete joke. Now, tell me what response you have to that.

    hmm it's true there is a big gap but people need to be encouraged to NOT depend on the government. We need a smaller government which has super low taxes for the poorest and ensures the poorest working man is better of than the benefit scrounger who chooses not to work

    People need to stop expecting the government to give them things, people said 'cameron took my EMA'
    I thought how is it your money? -you didn't work for it,you didn't have to work say 60 hours a week to keep a roof over your head and pay your bills without government support like a lot of the working class do

    Many people misused the EMA tbh

    We need to increase the number of jobs by having incentives for employers to pay - NI holidays and incentives for people to WORK and spend- ie low income taxes for those under 60k
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    Every post you make is insulting.
    Not in any way
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    No.



    Who the hell are you to say what a poor family needs?
    So how much do you think is enough? And why should anybody earning over £150,000 work if they are going to end up working for the government? Where's the inspiration and motive coming from?

    And I am nobody to say what a poor family needs. It's the government who says it. You should look at the list and tell me what's on the standard rates list that is absolutely necessary. And if you are so against the VAT for the poor, why don't you stand against the abolition of it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ~Duke)
    So how much do you think is enough? And why should anybody earning over £150,000 work if they are going to end up working for the government? Where's the inspiration and motive coming from?
    This doesn't make sense.


    (Original post by ~Duke)
    And I am nobody to say what a poor family needs. It's the government who says it. You should look at the list and tell me what's on the standard rates list that is absolutely necessary. And if you are so against the VAT for the poor, why don't you stand against the abolition of it?
    words fail me.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    Who the hell are you to say what a poor family needs?
    Perhaps Duke is no pseudonym. Probably has a Victorian mentality; send 'em all to the work house.

    Solidarity with one's fellow citizens, consideration for their dignity, a bit of forbearance from those of us who are lucky enough to enjoy secure employment, good jobs or inherited wealth.... all that be damned because a right-wing ideology says that more money in the pockets of richer people is axiomatically desirable, no matter the human carnage that results.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ronove)
    Can you actually tell us how much you have to be earning to have 70% of it to go out as tax?
    Income above 150,000 is taxed at 50%. Then, add on the other taxes, NI, VAT, Council Tax etc cumulatively amounting to close to 70%.

    Unless there is an incentive for personal gain, nobody would want to work. The job creators i.e. employers have to have something in it for them to want to hire and grow their businesses. And that is a financial return.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Scots King)
    Yeah totally agree, if you are on a qualifying benefit then your contributions are treated as paid
    Except that it was Maggie who started the shift away from contributions-based payments.

    And I can't disagree with her logic; every benefit claimants contributions are deemed as paid in the aggregate, by all their fellow citizens and for the benefit of all. Anyone of us may need to use the system at some point or another.

    Equally, almost no-one would choose to stay on benefits voluntarily, unless imprisoned by a poverty of opportunity and imagination. Not having seen the world, not knowing what's out there, they are trapped by circumstance and their own world view.

    These people, having around £70 a week of discretionary income and a pretty bleak life, should be empathised with, not attacked. It takes a certain mean-spiritedness to do so.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MostUncivilised)
    Perhaps Duke is no pseudonym. Probably has a Victorian mentality; send 'em all to the work house.

    Solidarity with one's fellow citizens, consideration for their dignity, a bit of forbearance from those of us who are lucky enough to enjoy secure employment, good jobs or inherited wealth.... all that be damned because a right-wing ideology says that more money in the pockets of richer people is axiomatically desirable, no matter the human carnage that results.
    Words fail me in front of his kind of naked class hatred.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    hmm it's true there is a big gap but people need to be encouraged to NOT depend on the government. We need a smaller government which has super low taxes for the poorest and ensures the poorest working man is better of than the benefit scrounger who chooses not to work

    People need to stop expecting the government to give them things, people said 'cameron took my EMA'
    I thought how is it your money? -you didn't work for it,you didn't have to work say 60 hours a week to keep a roof over your head and pay your bills without government support like a lot of the working class do

    Many people misused the EMA tbh

    We need to increase the number of jobs by having incentives for employers to pay - NI holidays and incentives for people to WORK and spend- ie low income taxes for those under 60k
    You say people shouldn't be encouraged to depend on the government, but surely most things in the UK are government controlled? The NHS, our education system, housing etc. This isn't the USA where we pay for private healthcare, but this is why we pay taxes to use such services.

    I agree with you that incentives such as EMA were being misused, but it was wrong of the Conservatives to completely abolish it. People genuinely relied on that money for educational purposes and another incentive should have been put in place. For people to not be so dependent on the government, more needs to be done to get those who are perfectly able to work, in employment. There are far too many people who are unemployed when they could be working. But the government has allowed for this to happen, as many people say 'I'm better of on benefits than going out to work 30 hours a week.'

    It's not so much the fact of HAVING to increase jobs, there are plenty of jobs available. It's the fact of British citizens thinking they're too good to be, let's say for example, a cleaner.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    This doesn't make sense.




    words fail me.
    What part of it doesn't make sense to you?

    Common, put a little thought into your responses so I can understand where you stand and perhaps present my views pragmatically and in easier language if you need me to. Your one-liners though erudite in the Labour party aren't helping encourage discussion on the topic at hand.
 
 
 
Poll
Which web browser do you use?
General election 2017 on TSR
Register to vote

Registering to vote?

Check out our guide for everything you need to know

Manifesto snapshots

Manifesto Snapshots

All you need to know about the 2017 party manifestos

Party Leader questions

Party Leader Q&A

Ask political party leaders your questions

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.