Misconceptions

Watch
Jaceur
Badges: 0
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#1
I would urge everyone to read this:

I will start on the ridiculous warfare between the left and right. People should have the ability to hold a belief and debate, discuss and argue those beliefs without raw emotion and irrational thought to enter in them - which is what often happens and people start attacking others with insulting words. For example, when liberals declare conservatives as "bigots" and when conservatives declare liberals as "libtards".

Okay, now that is out of the way I will begin. Left wing individuals often confuse right wing cuts as rejecting. When I say I would like to cut welfare, I don't say it because I think the poor should help themselves or I think they don't deserve the welfare, I say it because I believe it is inefficient and just ends up hurting the middle and working class via taxes or deficit. A majority of poor people are poor for a reason (hear me out) and it's not as hateful as you might think. The reason they are involves many issues:
  • Poorly educated
  • Mismanagement of money (lack of education)
  • Inability to land a job (lack of education and experience)
  • A poor economy

Simply, I believe throwing money at them will not improve their life but it will drag up the living costs for everyone else. I believe, as a right-wing advocate, that we should help them by solving the root issues.

So to sum up this paragraph: An opinion in the reduction of welfare is not ignorance or a want to increase my own wealth but simply a belief the current system is inefficient. Other opinions may vary but that's what I believe to be the current consensus.

My next point is that both the right and left will try to diminish the other persons argument by resorting to unintelligent tactics. Firstly, name calling - pretty self explanatory. Secondly, they make themselves seem far more intelligent and superior by sighing or rolling their eyes. Third, using an extreme point to make the opposing view obsolete. Fourth, by making the other person feel small and unintelligent like: "That's stupid". THIS should be kept out of political debate so that everyone's voice is heard and debated thoroughly. In relation to the previous point, DON'T make somebody who believes in removing aid or reducing taxes seem like a hateful person until they have fully explained their reasoning. On the other end of the spectrum, DON'T belittle someone else's opinion because it's "hippy-ish" or it's "propaganda" because this person may have more reasoning to add.

​So to sum up this paragraph: Political debate should allow intelligent and thoughtful conversation without someone being patronising and dismissing someone's OPINION as non factual or incorrect because it is an OPINION (unless of course you are using facts or past evidence).

Time for short and sweet (In terms of the extreme of each spectrum): Right wing (Capitalism) is the belief of social inequality (no or little distribution of wealth and people are considered worth more because of skills, experience or attribute to society) and private property. Left wing (Socialism) is the belief of social equality (everyone is worth the same, complete and equal distribution of wealth) and no private property. Ipso facto. Conservative and Liberal are different things, although conservatives tend to be right wing and liberals tend to be left (although this is different in countries like Russia and China). As are the phrases "Libertarian" and "Authoritarian".

And lastly, here is a little persuasion to join right-wing thought: I don't speak for everyone but when I'm talking about being on the right I'm talking about liberty and freedom. The idea that people should have a right to all the money they earn and spend so as they wish. My belief is that education and a good economy will help the poor more than anything, it may take time but in the long run I believe it is better. Right wing thought involves thinking about what is best for our overall economy and how that benefits everyone. I believe wealth is distributed totally unevenly but that's not thanks to Capitalism, it's thanks to crony Capitalism where the government are too entwined with the people at the top, pushing money towards them. Speaking of which, I believe our economy is too much of a push economy rather than a pull economy and so in that regard, we should remove the government from many fields where they don't need to be.

So to sum up this point: vote Conservative! or "None of the above"


*This text is poorly constructed and written since I'm pretty tired*
2
reply
King Hotpie
Badges: 15
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report 6 years ago
#2
Well obviously in the ideal world everyone would be able to find a job and nobody would need welfare, but that's just not what happens in the real world. Some people are poorly educated, lot's of people (young people especially) do lack experience and/or education, many people don't know how to manage money (and many people have very little money to manage, I might add) and there will be times of poor economy. That's exactly why we have a welfare system and that's exactly why it shouldn't be cut. Yes we should attempt to solve the root issues, but the poor should still be supported whilst we deal with them, and they'll never be fully dealt with anyway.
0
reply
Jaceur
Badges: 0
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#3
I understand what happens in the real world but how is stealing from other people going to help? And I said that giving money to people who don't have money doesn't mean they're going to use it to get them back into a stable condition. Every decision the government makes has opportunity cost since we don't simply have unlimited money, in fact we have close to no money, we have tons of deficit that will not be fixed by giving poor people money, it will make it worse if anything. It makes sense to try and help the next generation instead of punishing them.
0
reply
illegaltobepoor
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report 6 years ago
#4
(Original post by Jaceur)

A majority of poor people are poor for a reason (hear me out) and it's not as hateful as you might think. The reason they are involves many issues:
  • Poorly educated
  • Mismanagement of money (lack of education)
  • Inability to land a job (lack of education and experience)
  • A poor economy

Simply, I believe throwing money at them will not improve their life but it will drag up the living costs for everyone else. I believe, as a right-wing advocate, that we should help them by solving the root issues.

So to sum up this paragraph: An opinion in the reduction of welfare is not ignorance or a want to increase my own wealth but simply a belief the current system is inefficient. Other opinions may vary but that's what I believe to be the current consensus.
Lets apply your Conservative thought to the group of people who will receive 12 billion of welfare cuts if the Conservatives win the next election.

Disabled people.


Lets pick a few good examples.

A) Man who has Schizophrenia who is clinically insane.
B) Women who has Emphysema.
C) Man who has Dwarfism and cannot walk.
D) A Carer who works a 16 hour job and looks after her disabled friend.

Education.

Even if all 4 people got a skilled trade education where jobs where abundant they would still have major problems getting into work.

A) This person would do unacceptable things in the workplace.
B) This person would struggle walking short distances.
C) This person would struggle reaching shelves.
D) This person could only secure 16 hours of work.

Money Management

A) You could have a degree in finance but still make mistakes based on your insanity.
B) There are things such as telephone banking and internet banking but when the modern world demands you to be on time for work mobility becomes a problem.
C) Small people struggle in a world where all ATM consoles are made for big people. It also can be hard enough using a computer or mouse because these are designed for much bigger people.
D) As a Carer its usually hard to find time to deal with financial things because your busy 247 caring for your loved one or friend.

Job Hunting.

A) Majority of employers will not employ people with mental health problems or cog-native disorders.
B) Majority of jobs need someone who is physically mobile and can move around.
C) The workplace is a big persons world and the majority of workplaces would have to be completely turned upside down to accommodate a person of small stature.
D) Carers are yet limited to only securing a small contract.

To sum this up I do indeed think that your consensus is put together in complete ignorance and you are quite happy to ignore the exact people who have endured the most welfare cuts and will endure more welfare cuts proportionally targeted at the disabled than any other group if the Conservatives get into power.

SO DO NOT VOTE CONSERVATIVE!
1
reply
illegaltobepoor
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
Report 6 years ago
#5
(Original post by Jaceur)
I understand what happens in the real world but how is stealing from other people going to help? And I said that giving money to people who don't have money doesn't mean they're going to use it to get them back into a stable condition. Every decision the government makes has opportunity cost since we don't simply have unlimited money, in fact we have close to no money, we have tons of deficit that will not be fixed by giving poor people money, it will make it worse if anything. It makes sense to try and help the next generation instead of punishing them.
The reason why you have tax in Capitalism is to ensure the poorest have the means to live. When the poorest suffer things such as revolts happen. They have been happening since the dawn of man.

Have you ever heard the statement: "The Peasants are revolting".
0
reply
Jaceur
Badges: 0
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#6
Did I mention disability benefits? No. You're trying to single me out as being hateful and ignorant of these people when I'm not.

I would also state that charities are far more efficient at helping disabled individuals than the government are. I would be far more appreciative of a system that showed where and which charities my paycheck would be going to and it would make tax evasion and avoidance a much bigger guilt trip. And if you are thinking that Labour will be a better alternative, it would seem that a decrease in tax actually led to MORE tax revenue and of course we know what happens to the next generation when we run a huge deficit. You're missing my underlying message here: The way we are operating is destructive and not sustainable, we cut back now or we face having to have bigger cuts (or worse default) in the future. Then who's going to help the poor and disabled? Because the middle class will barely be able to scrape by themselves.

So you pretty much proved my point about people claiming I have ignorance of worse of individuals. I have complete knowledge of a huge number of poor and disabled people living in the conditions that they do but I think that Labour and Conservative governments put them there with welfare and poor education.
0
reply
illegaltobepoor
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#7
Report 6 years ago
#7
(Original post by Jaceur)
Did I mention disability benefits? No. You're trying to single me out as being hateful and ignorant of these people when I'm not.


I would also state that charities are far more efficient at helping disabled individuals than the government are..

If that is the case then why was a disabled diabetic solider found dead in his flat next to piles of CVs with no food in his stomach and his need insulin not refrigerated?


Perhaps its worth mentioning you can only get 3 days of food from a food bank and vouchers are limited! Do you expect the disabled to put thin air into their mouths?


Your views are purely based on idealogy and not the real world. Political idealogy cannot feed people.


(Original post by Jaceur)
it would seem that a decrease in tax actually led to MORE tax revenue

This happens in the short term since people think they can get a 5-10% pay rise on every hour they do. However over time 5 years + that tax cut bribe wares thin.


During Thatchers time taxes where cut from 83% to 40%. Yet the rich say they need more tax cuts because their will to work more hours isn't there anymore.


Its short term and your solutions are short term.


Its like privatising energy & utility companies. Sure there are benefits in the first couple of years but look what happened 20-30 years later. Energy Cartels and huge extortion to customers.


(Original post by Jaceur)
You're missing my underlying message here: The way we are operating is destructive and not sustainable, we cut back now or we face having to have bigger cuts (or worse default) in the future.


George W Bush spoke your exact words however his terms in office resulted in a 1.3 trillion debt which was the combined result of huge tax cuts.


The next 30 Billion cuts will come exclusively from Austerity in the UK.


In the beginning of 2010 George Osborne said that there would be tax rises from 2015 and onwards. He lied. Now disabled people are being hit yet again because they are an easy target.


(Original post by Jaceur)
I have complete knowledge of a huge number of poor and disabled people living in the conditions that they do but I think that Labour and Conservative governments put them there with welfare and poor education.

You make it sound like unemployed disabled people don't have degrees, vocational qualifications or job experience. Its not education what prevents disabled people from getting into work. It is access to the means of production.


You need to remember that employers short list prospect candidates and 9 times out of 10 if a boss finds out a recruit is disabled they will remove them from the recruitment process.
0
reply
Jaceur
Badges: 0
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#8
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#8
I'll address the issues in order:

You're stating one example and haven't even shown me any evidence that it happened.

You're also thinking of just one charity which is food banks, there are plenty others that exist which could do with more funding.

Again you trying to diminish my opinion by making it seem realistic and refuting my points poorly by just calling it "ideology", also you're trying to make me seem totally out of touch with the real world. It's a good try but I'm not going to resort to this tactic.

Again you have no evidence to support this. Tax increase have been shown to decrease revenue (In 2009, 16,000 brits claimed to be earning £1,000,000 or above. In 2011 when the Tories put through a higher tax band only 6,000 claimed to be earning £1,000,000. The increase obviously led to more people migrating or avoiding tax entirely).

You're claiming all the rich said that. No. A small minority of the rich said that and so what? Of course they're going to drive for lower taxes, everyone who works wants lower taxes. As I said earlier, however, more rich will avoid tax if the tax band is higher and if the rich migrate because of higher taxes they have absolutely no incentive to move back.

The energy cartels exist due to lack of competition not simply because they're private. Not only this but it has no relevance to the point at all.

Again, no relevance. Bush didn't support the tax cuts with public spending cuts. I don't believe any party would cut on public spending simply because it's unpopular. IF you think Conservatives have cut on public spending you have no idea.

We haven't had Austerity at all. We've just had a decrease in the rate of growth of public spending. It's hard to really make excuses for a party with a budget that is so stupid and I'm only voting Conservatives myself simply because I believe all the other parties have an even more stupid budget. So put simply, Conservatives have done a bad job in "Austerity".
0
reply
Sephits
Badges: 1
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#9
Report 6 years ago
#9
Carers, many of whom are poor due to being unable to work as a result of caring due to social care cuts, save the government an estimated £119 billion a year in care costs. The suggested reduction in eligibility for Carers Allowance would save £1 billion and increase pressure on them, and the households they live in. There are 6.5 million self identified carers in the UK, and 40% have reduced their hours or given up work to care. If you want to get those people into work and off of welfare as many of them actually would like to do, then you're going to need to increase spending in social care instead of cutting it to enable them to go out into the workplace instead of being needed at home and you're going to have to get employers to actually want to hire them. If you want to get disabled people into the workplace, you're going to need to get employers to want to hire them over someone "able bodied" (bit of a misnomer with mental health issues) as many disabled people struggle not due to welfare or poor education but due to the attitudes and perceptions of employers.

If someone doesn't start investing in social care (and it won't be the poor who can't afford it) something is going to break - whether that's the economy as the number of carers increases along with the ageing population and number of disabled people not able to access social care, or people's mental health on a wide, wide scale. That, is punishing the next generation.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What is your favourite revision method?

Taking notes manually (65)
22.65%
Note taking apps (6)
2.09%
Flashcards (55)
19.16%
Revision guides (16)
5.57%
Past papers (133)
46.34%
Something else (let us know in the thread) (12)
4.18%

Watched Threads

View All