Tory welfare cuts

[loraward]

We know the tories want to cut £12bn off the welfare bill but there aren't any specifics yet.

 

For some that will be a reason to vote for them and for others it will be a reason not to vote for them. They have made some claims though, max benefits cut from £26K to £23K. £23K looks to me to be a little on the high side for doing nothing, might as well pay them £23K for doing something.

[apelike]

There is a whole raft of women born before April 1953 who miss out like this, but gulled into a false sense of security by the blatent Tory lie that 'no one will miss out.'

 

But isn't that also down to the equality act and bringing a woman's pension in line to that of men?

[davebrmm]

12 billion of welfare cuts to come under tories. Who will lose out,

1. The disabled.

2. The pensioners

3. Those with children.

 

Cameron wouldn't deny that disabled people would be affected, so remember this when you vote on Thursday.

 

But not the muslims and the scroungers who will get the red nutters back in power glad I,m old

 

---------- Post added 05-05-2015 at 22:51 ----------

 

Get rid of the Royals and all the hangers on, should save us a few bob

 

What about the worlds scroungers and unmarried mothers with a dozen kids who are sucking us dry

[RonJeremy]

But not the muslims and the scroungers who will get the red nutters back in power glad I,m old

 

---------- Post added 05-05-2015 at 22:51 ----------

 

 

What about the worlds scroungers and unmarried mothers with a dozen kids who are sucking us dry

 

Oh dear. You're about to get rounded on by all the left wing nutters on here.

 

I've got a seat and BIG bowl of popcorn.

[Anna B]

But isn't that also down to the equality act and bringing a woman's pension in line to that of men?

 

No, nothing to do with it.

 

It's about having 2 classes of pensioner. Those born after 6th April 1953 will get £150 per week pension, those born before 6th April 1953 will get 115 per week.

 

Cameron says no one will be worse off because the shortfall will be made up with Serps and /or pension credit. But that's a lie. There are many, many, many people who will only get the basic £115 with no additions. Men and women.

 

The difference in the two amounts, (£35 every week, or £140 every month) adds up to nearly £42,000 over 20 years. Which in my case is a lot of money I won't be getting.

[*_ash_*]

No, nothing to do with it.

 

I thought you mightn't agree with that

 

 

but more importantly...

 

 

It's about having 2 classes of pensioner. Those born after 6th April 1953 will get £150 per week pension, those born before 6th April 1953 will get 115 per week.

 

Cameron says no one will be worse off because the shortfall will be made up with Serps and /or pension credit. But that's a lie. There are many, many, many people who will only get the basic £115 with no additions. Men and women.

 

The difference in the two amounts, (£35 every week, or £140 every month) adds up to nearly £42,000 over 20 years. Which in my case is a lot of money I won't be getting.

 

Be thankful you're closer in today's times. I'm a bit younger than you, but I expect pensions to be drying up by the time I reach this figure of 'retirement age'.

 

The young of today don't have a hope in hell of having this generous pension system we have today.

 

(not far off same with the NHS/benefits system while we're at it*)

 

-

 

How's that for being more downbeat than you Anna!!

 

 

*all the biggest outgoings, and even with the same % nibble as the smaller outgoings on government expenditure, makes for a lot of money.

 

Eventually there will be a Labour/Cons coalition, and when they get together, they can really start to hack into the very big one - pensions. Coalition or not, pensions will go down, and be much later years. It's inevitable.

Edited May 5, 2015 by *_ash_*

[Anna B]

I thought you mightn't agree with that

 

 

but more importantly...

 

 

 

Be thankful you're closer in today's times. I'm a bit younger than you, but I expect pensions to be drying up by the time I reach this figure of 'retirement age'.

 

The young of today don't have a hope in hell of having this generous pension system we have today.

 

(not far off same with the NHS/benefits system while we're at it*)

 

-

 

How's that for being more downbeat than you Anna!!

 

 

*all the biggest outgoings, and even with the same % nibble as the smaller outgoings on government expenditure, makes for a lot of money.

 

Eventually there will be a Labour/Cons coalition, and when they get together, they can really start to hack into the very big one - pensions. Coalition or not, pensions will go down, and be much later years. It's inevitable.

 

Then don't you think you should be doing something about it? Honestly, we are so complacent inthis country. We seem to accept anything they care to throw at us without complaint.

 

Go backto the 1920s and 30s and your average working man was a powder keg of rightious indignation, and was prepared to fight hard to get things changed.

[*_ash_*]

Then don't you think you should be doing something about it? Honestly, we are so complacent in this country. We seem to accept anything they care to throw at us without complaint.

 

Go backto the 1920s and 30s and your average working man was a powder keg of rightious indignation, and was prepared to fight hard to get things changed.

 

I wrote a response but lost it in the 3am cut off!

 

Will respond tomorrow

[-Boomer-]

For some that will be a reason to vote for them and for others it will be a reason not to vote for them. They have made some claims though, max benefits cut from £26K to £23K. £23K looks to me to be a little on the high side for doing nothing, might as well pay them £23K for doing something.

 

So why work in TESCOS for the NMW then when you can pick up litter for £23K? And who are you to say what people should earn anyway? If that's your game maybe we should be like Denmark where a solicitor and other top skilled salaries only earn around £10K pa more than a shop assistant.

Edited May 6, 2015 by -Boomer-

[loraward]

Oh dear. You're about to get rounded on by all the left wing nutters on here.

 

I've got a seat and BIG bowl of popcorn.

 

That's sad that you take pleasure out of watching someone get berated and abused by the lefties.

 

---------- Post added 06-05-2015 at 07:05 ----------

 

So why work in TESCOS for the NMW then when you can pick up litter for £23K? And who are you to say what people should earn anyway? If that's your game maybe we should be like Denmark where a solicitor and other top skilled salaries only earn around £10K pa more than a shop assistant.

 

More to the point why work for Tesco when you get get £23K for watching morning, afternoon and evening TV.

 

Why Socialist Scandinavia Has Some Of The Highest Inequality In Europe.

 

That's according to Credit Suisse's weighty Global Wealth Report 2014. It's a finding that's likely to seriously surprise some people. The top 10% of wealth holders in three Nordic countries (Norway, Sweden and Denmark) hold between 65 and 69 per cent of those nations' wealth.

 

Read more: http://uk.businessinsider.com/why-socialist-scandinavia-has-some-of-the-highest-inequality-in-europe-2014-10#ixzz3ZKsb89KU