Jump to content

So who are the biggest losers from today’s spending announcement


Recommended Posts

The retirement age has been put up to 66 because 'we're all living longer.'

 

However, statistics show that men in deprived parts of the country have 13 years less life expectancy than a man in a richer area, so with male life expectancy currently being quoted as being 79, that means the poor shmuck will die at 66.

 

Solves the pension problem nicely...

We're DOOMED, We're DOOMED!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn’t crying I was speaking hypothetically as I am still working
And I was replying figuratively ;)

but silly statements like “All benefit claimants are a drain on the economy” deserve an answer don’t you think?
I agree.

 

Unfortunately, it's a stereotyping issue, unlikely to improve anytime soon in the current climate. That "scrounging" stereotype which massmedia rams down our collective throats daily, at the behest of the Government, in pursuit of their dividing-and-conquering agenda.

 

And I am generally right-of-political-leaning, so me acknowledging the above goes to show some... ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the retirement age has been put up to 66 because 'we're all living longer.'

 

however, statistics show that men in deprived parts of the country have 13 years less life expectancy than a man in a richer area, so with male life expectancy currently being quoted as being 79, that means the poor shmuck will die at 66.

 

Solves the pension problem nicely...

Abandon ship !!! Abandon ship!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, yes, I knew someone would bring up the incapacity benefit claimants.

 

The people off sick with a "bad back" who can quite happily pop down the gym or do a few odd jobs for cash-in-hand payment. Or the people off sick with "stress" or "depression" who can be seen down their local every night having a laugh with their mates. Be honest, we all know people like that.

 

What the cuts have made clear is that a life on the sick sitting on your backside at home all day while the state funds your lifestyle is no longer an option. There may be a handful of genuine incapacity benefit claimants, but just because a disability prevents you doing some kind of job doesn't mean you're unable to do any job. Even someone in a wheelchair is capable of working in a shop or an office.

 

 

What is the option then?

Do you seriously believe that the government is going to find them all a job?

 

Not to mention all those in the public sector who are going to be thrown out of work by a government who wants "everybody who is capable, to work"

 

Carry on dreaming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the option then?

Do you seriously believe that the government is going to find them all a job?

 

Not to mention all those in the public sector who are going to be thrown out of work by a government who wants "everybody who is capable, to work"

 

Carry on dreaming.

It is not the governments responsibility to find anyone a job!.................it's down to the individual.This truth is little understood by many people unfortunately.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite right but its up to governments to provide the stimulus to provide the jobs in the first place

 

 

Exactly - like letting Forgemasters have the £80 million loan, which would create jobs, have us leading the world in that field and provide an estimated return of £500 million.

Germany, with a successful and rapidly growing economy, is now gearing up to take the lead instead - another failure by a UK government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly - like letting Forgemasters have the £80 million loan, which would create jobs, have us leading the world in that field and provide an estimated return of £500 million.

Germany, with a successful and rapidly growing economy, is now gearing up to take the lead instead - another failure by a UK government.

I'm sure the government would disagree on your simple explanation of that episode.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure the government would disagree on your simple explanation of that episode.

 

They were the facts printed at the time of the announcement - no one in The Con-Dems have disputed any of these findings.

 

They have said simply that they are not willing to make this loan at this time and the decision will be reviewed towards the end of this parliament (by which time, it will be too late).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.