Chancellor George Osborne to slash an extra £10 billion from the welfare budget

Chancellor George Osborne Chancellor George Osborne

The Government is to press ahead with plans to slash an extra £10 billion from the welfare budget by 2016-17, on top of the £18 billion cuts already under way, Chancellor George Osborne will say on Monday.

Mr Osborne has secured the agreement of Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith to the savings, which he said in his March Budget would be necessary in order to avoid additional cuts in other Whitehall departments.

Among the payouts which look set to be targeted is housing benefit for the under-25s, who Prime Minister David Cameron has previously said should live with their parents if they cannot afford to fund their own home.

Mr Duncan Smith is understood to have initially resisted the cuts proposal, arguing that savings should be found by means-testing benefits such as free bus passes and winter fuel payments for wealthy pensioners.

But in a joint article on Monday, he and Mr Osborne said they have reached agreement that the savings can be found without touching the universal benefits for pensioners.

"We are both satisfied that this is possible and we will work together to find savings of this scale," they wrote, rejecting the alternative options of cuts to economically-productive spending, higher taxes, or more borrowing and debt.

The announcement, to be spelt out in Mr Osborne's keynote speech to the Conservative Party conference in Birmingham, will set the Tories on collision course with their Liberal Democrat coalition partners.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg told his own party's conference last month that he would not allow "wild suggestions" of a £10 billion cut in welfare, while Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander told delegates: "We simply will not allow the books to be balanced in a way that hits the poorest hardest".

Mr Osborne will say that a further £16 billion of savings must be found in 2015/16 alone to meet his target of balancing the nation's books within five years, and he will make clear that sums of this magnitude cannot be found simply by increasing taxes on the rich.

Both the Chancellor and Prime Minister David Cameron indicated that the rich will be expected to "pay their fair share" towards deficit reduction, but ruled out the introduction of a "wealth tax" such as the mansion tax on expensive properties favoured by the Lib Dems.

In Monday's speech, Mr Osborne will argue that while the Government should not attempt to balance the budget on the backs of the poorest, it is an "economic delusion" to think it can be balanced on the wallets of the richest. It is wrong to have a welfare state where those who live on benefits can be better off than those who have a job, he will argue.

Comments(63)

pitbullboxing says...
12:02pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Fast running out of ideas I think. I agreed with the initial welfare cuts (and even that has been handled badly). Time to look elsewhere I think ,for funds.

PM says...
1:30pm Mon 8 Oct 12

A simple strategy to turn the working poor against the workless poor .It may grab a few headlines but it's not a solution to get the economy moving again and only new jobs will reduce the welfare bill long term. I listened to Osborne's speech and I'm still convinced he hasn't got what it takes to do the job.

Sankey says...
2:09pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Welfare has neen out of control for years with millions riding on the backs of those who strive in life. Yes we need new jobs PM but only by encouraging enterprise in this country will we get them. Do you know the word enterprise was not mentioned once by Millband in his hour long speach. Lots of empty talk about fairness but as you have rightly said jobs and the private sector are what will bring fairness them not bigger state spending on welfare as you seem to want. I believe the vast majority of people in britain do not want a declining country where you are a fool to go out to work. THis is what Labour are proposing with their union bosses more welfare bigger state and let future generations take the hit.

Sankey says...
2:17pm Mon 8 Oct 12

I thought it was very clever positioning by the Tories and once the dust settles next few weeks Labour will be seen as a return to the bad old days of union power and the Tories are the party of those who want to better themselves in life. Most people today are not tribal in voting most of the big political parties have small memberships these days. The striver will be the majority of the population I believe and the Tories are open to this Labour have retreated to their home base of welfare and unionised state employees. My only disappointment is I would like to have seen more from osbourne on public sector reform.

pitbullboxing says...
3:04pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Make no mistake , as bad as this coalition is , the country should never see another Labour government. What we need is a viable alternative to the big three.

chasmcn says...
3:13pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Sankey wrote:
I thought it was very clever positioning by the Tories and once the dust settles next few weeks Labour will be seen as a return to the bad old days of union power and the Tories are the party of those who want to better themselves in life. Most people today are not tribal in voting most of the big political parties have small memberships these days. The striver will be the majority of the population I believe and the Tories are open to this Labour have retreated to their home base of welfare and unionised state employees. My only disappointment is I would like to have seen more from osbourne on public sector reform.
Why not slash Trident that would save a few billion ,who now are we aiming at a pile rocks in Afghanistan .In 2010 we were all in this together the only people to have a tax cut are the rich which is always what the tories look after .you are fooling your self sankey if you think the tories care for the ordinary folk .
To get people off benefits you need to create growth in the economy when he came to power he inherited growth its him that took us back into a recession , Where are all the business leaders that wrote a letter to the Times telling us that Osborne is the man .At this moment they are all sat £750 billion pounds as they dont see any growth in the economy to invest in,So he comes up with more austerity .He tells us how the poor have to pay i have not heard how the rich are going pay .

Sankey says...
3:15pm Mon 8 Oct 12

I agree pitbull. All three parties arte completely out of touch with the population. Labour though don't seemed to have learned their lession and seem to think just repreating the words "one nation" will get them into power. Its clear to all the damage brown, balls and milliband did to the economy. Before they are allowed a sniff of the reigns again we need to know what has changed. It seems to me just the label on the tin has changed.

frankly says...
3:16pm Mon 8 Oct 12

It may raise a few eyebrows and i support labour.But i agree some, not all, of todays under 25s, get pregnant for its benefits, and top of their list is a rent free home.And then some, WHO DONT fit into the neighbourhood of the house given, then cause problems for decent home owners or those working to pay for one or who rent one...We knew when young, that if you started a family,you did stay at home, or worked to pay rent or mortgage.Theirs too many now who want everything but give nothing

Sankey says...
3:24pm Mon 8 Oct 12

The trouble with you Chasmcn is you see the world through the prism of tribal politics. Look where we are today and see beyond the party politics which is all hogwash anyway and in reality none of them have the answers. For me the state is too big and unreformed it spends large amounts of money but does not deliver. Our economy is based on delivering pizzas. Nothing less than a revolution is required cutting back the state and welfare, reducing taxes, investing in infrastructure and our developing our manufacturing industry. Not one of the parties is doing all of those as far as I can see. The truth is they are probably incapable and just rely on sloganising. The Tories are the least worst option as far as I can see, Labour if Balls was ever unleashed would bring the country to ruin within 3 years.

chasmcn says...
3:30pm Mon 8 Oct 12

So we are to have no Manison Tax but a person over 35 or a married couple on a low wage living a in a rented 3 bedroom house and are in receipt of housing benefit are to lose £11 a week or more.

From April 2013, if you live in council accommodation or other social housing and are assessed as having at least one extra bedroom in your house, your Housing Benefit could be reduced by:

14% if you have 1 extra bedroom
25% if you have 2 or more extra bedrooms .

frankly says...
3:31pm Mon 8 Oct 12

i often wonder, when i read these threads, how many posters are on benefits, considering that we get replies 24/7..No need to ask me, i am retired so i am on a paid for retirement pension

chasmcn says...
3:41pm Mon 8 Oct 12

frankly wrote:
i often wonder, when i read these threads, how many posters are on benefits, considering that we get replies 24/7..No need to ask me, i am retired so i am on a paid for retirement pension
My day off and i have worked for 35yrs and claimed unemployment benefit once for six weeks back in 1981 after i came out of my apprenticeship and my employer would not pay me the going rate so i left.

frankly says...
3:54pm Mon 8 Oct 12

well done chas, same as me, out of work about six months in 1980 with a wife and three kids to keep..slight difference then though, the handouts were not as easy got as now, so after a lot of effort i took other jobs, and kept my low paid last one until i retired..enjoy your day off

Sankey says...
3:59pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Great speach by Eric curbing the council tax increases and high executive pay on councils. Bad news for Marie Rimmer.

Sankey says...
4:05pm Mon 8 Oct 12

chasmcn wrote:
So we are to have no Manison Tax but a person over 35 or a married couple on a low wage living a in a rented 3 bedroom house and are in receipt of housing benefit are to lose £11 a week or more.

From April 2013, if you live in council accommodation or other social housing and are assessed as having at least one extra bedroom in your house, your Housing Benefit could be reduced by:

14% if you have 1 extra bedroom
25% if you have 2 or more extra bedrooms .
Whats wrong with that Chas?

chasmcn says...
5:00pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Sankey wrote:
chasmcn wrote:
So we are to have no Manison Tax but a person over 35 or a married couple on a low wage living a in a rented 3 bedroom house and are in receipt of housing benefit are to lose £11 a week or more.

From April 2013, if you live in council accommodation or other social housing and are assessed as having at least one extra bedroom in your house, your Housing Benefit could be reduced by:

14% if you have 1 extra bedroom
25% if you have 2 or more extra bedrooms .
Whats wrong with that Chas?
its people who are working on a low wage being thou no fault of their own penalised why dont the employers pay a decent wage then people dont need benefit to pay their rent . Their empolyers are the ones living in the mansions paying no tax paying crap wages mostly to people part time as its the only job available yet they are losing out .

Sankey says...
5:22pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Employers living in mansions paying no tax what purile class hatred nonsense.

Clearly Chasmcn you have never run a small to medium business and put your house on the line. Not everybody who is an employer lives in a mansion in fact I think you might find a lot are paid less than the employees they are struggling to keep in work. This clearl;y shows the Labour mindset of hatred of enterprise which is why there are no jobs and the country is drowning in debt.

And what is a mansion? I think you will find it quickly trickles down to become a house tax. E.g you own your own house you are taxed on it in addition to council tax.

chasmcn says...
6:06pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Sankey wrote:
Employers living in mansions paying no tax what purile class hatred nonsense.

Clearly Chasmcn you have never run a small to medium business and put your house on the line. Not everybody who is an employer lives in a mansion in fact I think you might find a lot are paid less than the employees they are struggling to keep in work. This clearl;y shows the Labour mindset of hatred of enterprise which is why there are no jobs and the country is drowning in debt.

And what is a mansion? I think you will find it quickly trickles down to become a house tax. E.g you own your own house you are taxed on it in addition to council tax.
you best watch this tonight

Dispatches | Secrets of Your Boss's Pay | Channel 4

With the chiefs of British business now taking home 180 times the average working wage in the UK, Dispatches follows the former Greggs chief executive Sir Michael Darrington as he launches a campaign to halt corporate greed.

chasmcn says...
6:06pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Sankey wrote:
Employers living in mansions paying no tax what purile class hatred nonsense.

Clearly Chasmcn you have never run a small to medium business and put your house on the line. Not everybody who is an employer lives in a mansion in fact I think you might find a lot are paid less than the employees they are struggling to keep in work. This clearl;y shows the Labour mindset of hatred of enterprise which is why there are no jobs and the country is drowning in debt.

And what is a mansion? I think you will find it quickly trickles down to become a house tax. E.g you own your own house you are taxed on it in addition to council tax.
you best watch this tonight

Dispatches | Secrets of Your Boss's Pay | Channel 4

With the chiefs of British business now taking home 180 times the average working wage in the UK, Dispatches follows the former Greggs chief executive Sir Michael Darrington as he launches a campaign to halt corporate greed.

Sankey says...
6:17pm Mon 8 Oct 12

There is excessive pay and greed in some sections of the corporate world Chasmcn no doubt and I don't need to watch the uber left wing channel 4 to know that. But I think you will find the vast majority of employers are moderately paid and struggling to keep afloat and provide work. Wheras your comic book image is of them all wearing top hats and watering the workers beer while smoking cigars is as purile as it gets. Try starting a business in the post Labour government landscape and you might find out some harsh realities.

Sankey says...
6:36pm Mon 8 Oct 12

There is also greed in the public sector chasmcn. The police inspector Noman Bettison is to retire on £90k pa at age 55. Pensions such as that are common place in the public sector and I would like to bet the St Helens council executive's are in this sort of league. At least the chief's in the private sector earn that money in the free market and we have a choice whether to buy that companies products. Not so with the public sector.

pitbullboxing says...
6:49pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Bloody hell I've worked in both sectors and believe me the greed is worse in the public sector!

chasmcn says...
6:51pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Sankey i agree i have no argument about that i think carol hudson is over paid ,As for Bettison he should lose his pension ,his knighthood and other public awards as for me that's what hillsborough 96 people had died and those in change would lose their careers and pensions so they covered it up .If you are receiving 180 times your employers salary and the govt is giving your employee benefit to pay his or her rent then the govt is subsiding your business .

Sankey says...
7:10pm Mon 8 Oct 12

I agree some of the greed in big private corporations (particularly in financial services) is obscene. But really that is a matter for the shareholders they approve chief executive pay. To be fair it’s not always as simple as that of course as much of the stock is owned by institutions not individuals. But at the end of the day we have a choice don’t like a company’s executive pay don’t buy from that company. But in the public sector we have no choice. Also a good chief executive in the private can and will go elsewhere and tend to be on short 3 to 4 year deals. A council executive would never earn a fraction of that money elsewhere and they tend to stay in the job for life irrespective of performance they are very rarely sacked other than something monumental and national headlines such as the Rochdale grooming case. Otherwise year after year these guys take the money paid for by pensioners and hard working low paid families. But generally I agree with your point there’s something rotten in our society I am by nature in favour of reward and aspiration but in certain sections those rules don’t apply in both public and private sectors at the upper tiers.

chasmcn says...
7:25pm Mon 8 Oct 12

1.2 million people who are working earning a low wage and need housing benefit will lose money because they have brought families up and now live in a 2 or 3 bedroom house that has a spare bed room i think that is wrong ,400,000 under 25 who are working will lose housing benefit all together and most likley their homes next april this is being done so people will find better jobs ??????

people in low paid jobs are looking for a better job its natural but in this recession its madness to take money from the poorest members of our society every penny they earn goes into the local shops ,etc they don't earn enough to save so the poorest sections of country will be hit by this stupid ill thought out policy

Sankey says...
8:31pm Mon 8 Oct 12

So do we leave welfare alone then in your view ?

Sankey says...
10:03pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Chasmcn watch 999 what’s your emergency this week about welfare in Blackpool and boozing up the weekly giro. That can’t be kindness welfaresim leads to misery and destroyed life’s often generation after generation. I am sure St Helens has the same issues as Blackpool. A cruel government would just let these people rot which Labour did for 13 years.

Harrybradbury says...
11:16pm Mon 8 Oct 12

I,ve been reading the comment,s on this topic of cutting the welfare bill by a further 10 billion,but to me the main cut,s will effect the already disenfranchised,and lead to a great deal of suffering and misery for those effected.Now i know Osbourne,s speech was like liquid gold to the party faithful,but do they ever think of the long term effect,s of these policy,s,i can see a massive backlash of civil disorder,as people with no hope and no prospect,s take to the street,s,removing their benifit,s will be the trigger as people have nothing else to lose.
The crime rate will rocket as people with no money will turn to burglary,and theft,you will see social breakdown on a huge scale,as the status quo is being turned on it,s head,but it,s the bottom of society that is expected to pay the price.
I don,t see any solution to our present problem,s as we have been badly let down by our political pygmies over the last five decades who have failed to plan on every aspect of our country,s future,for short term political convenience,i dread to think of the true price we are going to pay for this neglect,if Britain was a buisiness we would have been bankrupted many year,s ago,but we are now selling what,s left of the family silver,B.A.E. system,s if it goes,myself i fear we are past the point of no return,and fast heading for third world status.

chasmcn says...
7:49am Tue 9 Oct 12

Sankey wrote:
So do we leave welfare alone then in your view ?
The Tories are attacking people who are not workshy they are working receiving a low wage not idle sat on the dole i agree cut their money if making no effort to get a job a part time job even but i see no sense in cutting the housing benefit to a part time worker on a low wage they have change the rules you need to have 32 hours now to qualify not 16 and yes i support the welfare state taking it away will result in the plebs rioting ,stealing,etc like harrys letter above but that's the norm with a Tory govt .i suppose you wont be happy till we are back to the workhouse and the church giving parish relief ,doffs my cap to you sankey putting my clogs on iam off to my job happy that my contributions from my pay mean i live in a safe society for the moment .

pitbullboxing says...
9:10am Tue 9 Oct 12

Maybe people are just fed up with socialism? You can't force somebody into voting for a party that gives their money away willy nilly? I could be wrong , but I think Labours days may be over for a good while.

Sankey says...
9:15am Tue 9 Oct 12

When Clinton cut welfare in the states it had a dramatic effect crime reduced and people went back to work. Here in the UK I agree there is a tranche that is unemployable plus there are few jobs. I agree with Harry successive governments have put in us this mess going for short term political popularity at the expensive of the long term future of the country and the chickens have well and truly come home to roost. Chasmcn I would rather have the workhouse than those poor benefits people in Blackpool. What I think will happen if they cut benefits is crime will go up but at the same time many young people coming through will choose a productive life of employment rather than the choice of the last 10 years sit on a life of benefits. But whatever you talk as if there is a choice, the country has run out of money we simply cannot go on paying generations and millions of people to do nothing.

Bill Bradbury says...
10:03am Tue 9 Oct 12

Hi everyone been out of the country for a month and I appear to have missed some interesting debates on the usual topics will the usual responses from the faithful on this site.

Not much to add on this one as all views have been covered and cousin Harry is roughly along my view of the way things are.

Just to put things in perspective to show how lucky we are, I was in Odessa in the Crimea -Ukraine- and was told that they cannot have health inusrance and have to pay for any medication and hospital treatment at a rate the majority of the population cannot afford. As a result the average age for men at death is 60 and 70 for women.
Despite all our problems, travel makes you feel lucky to be living here-even in St.Helens.

As to the party conferences, two I have missed just the usually twaddle promising everything and doing nothing.

PS Grills Class on Cunard-wall to wall Tories, some really extreme right-wing views. Surprised they let me in!!!

Sankey says...
12:59pm Tue 9 Oct 12

I think Osborne made a lot of sense in his speech. Ed Balls want to borrow more to put a stimulus in the economy. As Osborne said that would raise interest rates and consumers would hold back knowing tax rises are to come and would save the money. All that would do is put the country deeper in the mess. The other matter which politicians can’t say is that with America in recession, the markets in the Far East largely closed to us and Europe in depression where would the stimulus go? except internal inflation and our international competitiveness. If we had the money and Labour had not wasted it and those overseas markets were booming then there would be an argument for a government stimulus. In my opinion this is not a recession but a fundamental restructuring of our economy and it’s only by competitive trading will we get out of it. And it will be a slow process there are no magic wands as some would have you believe.

chasmcn says...
7:20pm Tue 9 Oct 12

Sankey wrote:
When Clinton cut welfare in the states it had a dramatic effect crime reduced and people went back to work. Here in the UK I agree there is a tranche that is unemployable plus there are few jobs. I agree with Harry successive governments have put in us this mess going for short term political popularity at the expensive of the long term future of the country and the chickens have well and truly come home to roost. Chasmcn I would rather have the workhouse than those poor benefits people in Blackpool. What I think will happen if they cut benefits is crime will go up but at the same time many young people coming through will choose a productive life of employment rather than the choice of the last 10 years sit on a life of benefits. But whatever you talk as if there is a choice, the country has run out of money we simply cannot go on paying generations and millions of people to do nothing.
Did you miss the part were i say these people are working and having their benefits cut ,you do know that people who work can also claim benefits this govt is attacking them for having poor paying jobs the person you meet every day on the till in the supermarket ,the cleaner at work the shop assistant the low wage who need help to pay their rent .you say there is no money left but there was enough money to give every millionaire a tax cut of £40,0000 i bet Osborne and Cameron enjoy their tax break while the office cleaner will at lest £11 a week worst off .

Seeing as you brought Clinton into the debate here is what he planed

Clinton's original plan was one part tough love and one part expanded resources. Able long-term welfare recipients would be compelled to work, but additional resources for job training, wage subsidy, and child care, as well as waivers in hardship cases, would make welfare reform an improvement on the lives of the poor, not just a cruel reduction in benefits.

keepitreel says...
7:44pm Tue 9 Oct 12

the problem with a lot of workers is the minimum wage,in LONDON the have to pay a living wage so why not in ST HELENS?,the major supermarkets earn billions in profits but only pay the lowest wages they have to or in some supermarkets ( aldi,netto ) the workers are self employed and on fixed contracts,make everyone get paid a living wage this would take a lot of workers of the benifit system and increase the tax revenue and spending power,hit the profits of the big boys and make going to work worth while.

chasmcn says...
7:50pm Tue 9 Oct 12

pitbullboxing wrote:
Maybe people are just fed up with socialism? You can't force somebody into voting for a party that gives their money away willy nilly? I could be wrong , but I think Labours days may be over for a good while.
So guess you wont be voting labour if you ever were a labour supporter if you think blair or brown were socialist and the last labour govt was socialist you are entitled to your view i suggest you look at Attlee's labour govt of 1945 in fact all politicians should go and look at that govt ,they had far bigger debt then this coalition govt to deal with and in 5 years achieved more then any govt has ever achieved for its people that was socialism at work comrade

Sankey says...
7:57pm Tue 9 Oct 12

Attees government nationalised everything which was a disaster and led to the industrial relations problems of the 1960's and 70's and loss of competiveness which lead to the deindustrialisation that we are still suffering from today. In fact that is the real cause of the credit crunch 50 years later. We are spending too much and don’t have enough income to pay for it because the manufacturing and heavy industry has been exported.

pitbullboxing says...
8:34pm Tue 9 Oct 12

chasmcn wrote:
pitbullboxing wrote:
Maybe people are just fed up with socialism? You can't force somebody into voting for a party that gives their money away willy nilly? I could be wrong , but I think Labours days may be over for a good while.
So guess you wont be voting labour if you ever were a labour supporter if you think blair or brown were socialist and the last labour govt was socialist you are entitled to your view i suggest you look at Attlee's labour govt of 1945 in fact all politicians should go and look at that govt ,they had far bigger debt then this coalition govt to deal with and in 5 years achieved more then any govt has ever achieved for its people that was socialism at work comrade
That's exactly why I wont be voting for anybody in the next election. I know that may be an insult to the people that fought hard for a vote , but the way I look at it my best protest is not to vote. How will you be voting if you don't mind my asking? and were you disappointed with the last Labour government?

pitbullboxing says...
8:36pm Tue 9 Oct 12

Socialism is fundamentally flawed though. Capitalism has fed and clothed more people than socialism ever will. Not that I endorse that either though.......

chasmcn says...
8:47pm Tue 9 Oct 12

So the nationalised industry's were rubbish . Sankey if so why were they sold off cheaply and a Tory PM say that you are selling the family silver .How Atlee can be blamed for the credit crunch in 2008 is beyond belief .

chasmcn says...
9:41pm Tue 9 Oct 12

pitbullboxing wrote:
chasmcn wrote:
pitbullboxing wrote:
Maybe people are just fed up with socialism? You can't force somebody into voting for a party that gives their money away willy nilly? I could be wrong , but I think Labours days may be over for a good while.
So guess you wont be voting labour if you ever were a labour supporter if you think blair or brown were socialist and the last labour govt was socialist you are entitled to your view i suggest you look at Attlee's labour govt of 1945 in fact all politicians should go and look at that govt ,they had far bigger debt then this coalition govt to deal with and in 5 years achieved more then any govt has ever achieved for its people that was socialism at work comrade
That's exactly why I wont be voting for anybody in the next election. I know that may be an insult to the people that fought hard for a vote , but the way I look at it my best protest is not to vote. How will you be voting if you don't mind my asking? and were you disappointed with the last Labour government?
i will always use my vote was i disappointed in the last labour govt yes they offered crumbs of socialism ,but followed too many neo-libreal policy's in my view brown admits now they sucked up to the city of london too much being scared to regulate the banking system after Thatcher deregulate it was a massive mistake .Milliband says he will do this split the banks up and stop the casino banking .i liked the investment in the NHS and education we now under this govt have the lowest money spent on education since 1953 ,I enjoyed my mortgage going down with labour handing over the interest rates set by the bank of england rather then a political tool like Tories used it, so for 13yrs of my mortgage i paid a lot less and was felt well off to afford nice things in life not scraping by paying my mortgage like i was under the tories for the first 10 years of it ,i wish the labour party was more left wing renationalisation of the utility's of water ,power and gas these life essentials should be controlled by the state and the profit going back into the country .

Capitalism has fed and clothed more people than socialism ever will

why was socialism born if this comment is true why did nations have to take up arms to gain freedom for their people you live in a country that has benefited from socialism the rights we have come from our fore bears fighting for them

socialist created the NHS and the welfare state that benefits everyone in work or out of work when all the rights we have now are gone what do you think the world will look like ?

Harrybradbury says...
9:43pm Tue 9 Oct 12

I suspect something more fundamental is happening,and everything is interlinked,with the slow death rattle of the E.E.C and steady decline of the U.S.A to the growing influence of Russia and China,to me this is evolving into a change of the whole world order,with all the danger,s that carry,s with it,put the festering sectarian divides growing across the middle east into the mix,and the world as we know becomes dangerously unstable,and one flash point could set off a chain reaction.
We are already seeing China flexing it,s muscle against it neighbour,s in the China sea,s over ownership of island,s, but really it,s the oil and gas beneath them,and China as a old score to settle with Japan,but the Phillipine,s and others are just a irritation for now,and they have formed a alliance with Russia over Syria,sooner or later they will test the U.S.resolve,knowing that a lot of this is Bushes legacy for entering two unnecessary war,s, and the fact they owe China 2 trillion dollar,s so somewere down the line something as got to give.
Our problem is small by comparison,but the seismic plates are pushing against each other here,and across Europe,what was that song,"There will be trouble ahead" "Sweet Dream,s".

chasmcn says...
9:55pm Tue 9 Oct 12

well you know what ended the last depression harry the WWII. i just hope that's not the way we end the one we are in now.

pitbullboxing says...
10:11pm Tue 9 Oct 12

You know the welfare state and the NHS , they require money , that doesn't come from money fairies. Socialism is great - until you run out of other peoples money!

pitbullboxing says...
10:12pm Tue 9 Oct 12

I do believe Milliband will break up the banks though. After he has learned to fly using paper wings.

pitbullboxing says...
10:14pm Tue 9 Oct 12

This is a good read. American , and I don't agree with all of it but still , worth a read.
http://www.wnd.com/2
008/11/81349/

pitbullboxing says...
10:30pm Tue 9 Oct 12

I liked the investment in the NHS too - until I found out that whiston was 3 trillion pound in debt , and all the good people who had volunteered there at WRVS and the like were shown the door with not even so much as a pat on the back. how very socialist!

chasmcn says...
10:51pm Tue 9 Oct 12

pitbullboxing wrote:
You know the welfare state and the NHS , they require money , that doesn't come from money fairies. Socialism is great - until you run out of other peoples money!
Of course it does its a service why does the NHS have to make a profit its a service to keep the nation well and healthy funded out of the taxes we all pay well the plebs pay why have capitalist moved in to make a profit what money have we run out of ?.its the rich that dont pay their taxes

chasmcn says...
11:00pm Tue 9 Oct 12

pitbullboxing wrote:
I liked the investment in the NHS too - until I found out that whiston was 3 trillion pound in debt , and all the good people who had volunteered there at WRVS and the like were shown the door with not even so much as a pat on the back. how very socialist!
£3 trillion i thought the whole debt of the nation was a trillion, iam not ok with PFI but all partys are sign up to it so you best get used to it .WRVS Ah well when you have to make a profit you dont want people giving free tea and bekkies when you can rent out the space to a costa fortune cafe thats capitalism

chasmcn says...
11:08pm Tue 9 Oct 12

pitbullboxing wrote:
This is a good read. American , and I don't agree with all of it but still , worth a read.
http://www.wnd.com/2

008/11/81349/
explains the conversion i had with my friend who has just come back from San Francisco and could not get over the amount of beggers and homeless people living rough ,with my views i dont think they would allow me into america i would be a commie lol

Harrybradbury says...
11:42pm Tue 9 Oct 12

I bet Osbourne was glad he made his keynote speech yesterday,as his economic policy was soundly trashed by the I.M.F after it revealed our projected growth figures would only be minus 0.4.pc this year and minus 1.1pc in 2013 thus proving his much vaunted budget linked to his austerity measures as had the reverse effect to the one he desired,in fact he strangled what little growth there was,as these figures the biggest downgrade in any western economy proves,and still he persist,s with more austerity,when maybe he should be changing tact and go to plan B,but i fear he as left no wriggle room,and event,s are now out of his control as he bury,s his head in the sand,we all know Ball,s left a mess ,but he,s been in power for over two year,s now,and our borrowing and budget deficit is growing by the day,and the social security benifit,s are ballooning despite taking the axe to some of them and causing so much misery to many especially the disabled some of whom have committed suicide,but i suppose these are dispensable and a price worth paying,but he his wrong we are not all in this together,we don,t see any poor banker,s or energy bosses doing their bit or tightening their belt,s,in fact they are still crippling the country as long as they get their slice of the cake,the country can go to hell in a handcart.

Sankey says...
8:38am Wed 10 Oct 12

How can we get economic growth when we are so closely tied to europe which is in complete meltdown and america which is in a structural recession? Where do you think the growth will come us selling pizzas to one another? Ed Balls policy of borrowing more to throw at the economy would be throwing good money after bad. As Harry said in an earlier post this is a strutural change. Only by becoming more competative and trading our way out possibly against new markets (south america / far east growing 10%) will we recover.

Sankey says...
8:42am Wed 10 Oct 12

chasmcn wrote:
So the nationalised industry's were rubbish . Sankey if so why were they sold off cheaply and a Tory PM say that you are selling the family silver .How Atlee can be blamed for the credit crunch in 2008 is beyond belief .
They were rubbish even the Labour party is not talking of bringing them back. British Leyland that was good was it?

They destroyed britains industrial base something we are suffering to this day. The credit crunch was caused by a housing boom to create growth papering over the reality which was caused at Atlee's initialy policy in the 40's.

pitbullboxing says...
9:18am Wed 10 Oct 12

chasmcn wrote:
pitbullboxing wrote:
I liked the investment in the NHS too - until I found out that whiston was 3 trillion pound in debt , and all the good people who had volunteered there at WRVS and the like were shown the door with not even so much as a pat on the back. how very socialist!
£3 trillion i thought the whole debt of the nation was a trillion, iam not ok with PFI but all partys are sign up to it so you best get used to it .WRVS Ah well when you have to make a profit you dont want people giving free tea and bekkies when you can rent out the space to a costa fortune cafe thats capitalism
That's exactly why I'm voting for nobody. Because they are all the same! The rich do pay their taxes maybe not enough , but they pay more than most - and the people they employ will all pay taxes too. That's why I get more angry with benefit fraud than I do bankers. At least they bother to get up inn the morning.
Mate I don't disagree with everything your saying and you sound like a very good type of bloke. I'm just very very cynical - about every politician.

Harrybradbury says...
9:10pm Wed 10 Oct 12

Well i,ve watched all the party,s conference,s now,but to be truthful all three party,s could have used the same centre at the same time because even being illegal it seem,s a lab as been doing some genetic engineering and turning out pre programmed clones that are guaranteed to remain on message,and say absolutely nothing of note,but sound convincing,the best came today of Cameron saying he was minded to give us a referendum over europe,now i may be mistaken but all three party,s promised this old chestnut before the last election.
Maybe it would be better if the B.B.C. dusted off the old Jackanory chair,and let each leader tell us a fairystory as there could be more truth in them than the goggle gook we,ve been fed for three weeks,but i doubt they would be paid,and they can go back to their full time job,s telling us all "Porky Pie,s".

pitbullboxing says...
9:37pm Wed 10 Oct 12

Hear hear Harry!

Sankey says...
11:14am Thu 11 Oct 12

Yes spot on Harry. What happened to that referendum?

Sankey says...
4:29pm Thu 11 Oct 12

Borrow borrow borrow

What could possibly go wrong?

Harrybradbury says...
9:25pm Thu 11 Oct 12

Noticed that Cameron managed to slip in a Touchy feel good story about the para olympics saying people now don,t see a wheel chair but the person in it,well that,s fine,but failed to mention the tories mantra about people getting out of bed and doing a full day,s work deserve our full support,but apparently not if they worked for R.E.M.P.L.O.Y.who were trying to follow this advice but were cruelly thrown on the scrap heap,maybe they were the wrong type of disabled,but but the money spent on the opening and closing ceremonies could have kept them going for many year,s,and yet the chief whip in his last day in his job as international development minister gave £8 million to the president of Rwanda with another £8 million to follow in December while the E.E.C. and the U.S have frozen aid,our new development minister having cost the British tax payer south of £100 million plus in the rail fiasco, accept,s hospitality from this dictator,as she,s thinking of more way,s to dispose of our ever increasing aid budget,no wonder our R.E,M.P.L.O.Y worker,s feel aggrieved.How does this square with Cameron,s pledge to eradicate the budget deficit,maybe this is one for the Oxford debating society to solve,but i,m sure there is a good logical reason,a good opposition would cut them to bit,s on this,but they are just as inadequate,i rest my case.

chasmcn says...
12:05am Fri 12 Oct 12

I tell you who else dont see the wheelchair Harry ATOS in kicking them off disability

chasmcn says...
5:20pm Sun 14 Oct 12

surprise surprise gideon as got his sums wrong, his own office of budget responsibility he set up when he became chancellor to tell us how great a job he is doing have miscalculated how much the cuts and tax rises will take out of the economy ,they calculated that for every £1.00 of cuts that economic output would reduce by 50p but they have got this horribly wrong according to the IMF if the coalition carry on with austerity by 2015 he would of taken 76 billion out of the economy .The IMF calculation that austerity is taking between 90 to £1.70 out of the economy for every £1.00 cut, well done gideon , who needs bankers to wreak the country when we have you and the tory party.

Looking forward to Tuesday when the OBR gives us its reasons why they have got the economy wrong with consistently over estimated economic growth. In March they predicted growth of 0.8% for 2012 the IMF who gideon is fond of quoting say the UK economy will be -04%

Buster41 says...
5:42pm Sun 14 Oct 12

my strategy, sterilise the girls from 13-21 so they have to go to school college etc and have an education, as for the existing women who push them out for fun for money house etc then pay for 2 like it says 2.4 children after that no more, if the father aint working then take his benefits and if you dont declare who father is thats your own fault, dont start about children in poverty etc, they choose to have the kids so put them on trial for neglect, some people working cant afford to have kids because of mortgages etc, its the real world, you dont get things for free like this generation seems to think i heard 1 girl last week say to her mate "im happy im pregnant again those ba**ards cant try and make me work for another 7 years now" aint that the true statement they abide by.

Buster41 says...
5:46pm Sun 14 Oct 12

Buster41 wrote:
my strategy, sterilise the girls from 13-21 so they have to go to school college etc and have an education, as for the existing women who push them out for fun for money house etc then pay for 2 like it says 2.4 children after that no more, if the father aint working then take his benefits and if you dont declare who father is thats your own fault, dont start about children in poverty etc, they choose to have the kids so put them on trial for neglect, some people working cant afford to have kids because of mortgages etc, its the real world, you dont get things for free like this generation seems to think i heard 1 girl last week say to her mate "im happy im pregnant again those ba**ards cant try and make me work for another 7 years now" aint that the true statement they abide by.
in addition send all the lads who refuse do college etc on work experience like we used to, no pay but you had to do it, even cleaning streets, nobody under 21 should have benefits unless its a furthering oneself premium for staying in education. as for the elder people i truely beleive you get out what you put in so somebody whos worked 30 years and loses there job gets 3/4 of there pay after all how much have they paid in tax etc over the years, 100% more than the single mothers,drunkards, druggies.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree