Almost £4b more in cuts coming in the budget.

[Michaeldyn]

Oh for **** sake!

 

Back in the "old days" there were still people whining about how unfair things were even then...

 

... but those of us who wanted something better for ourselves got off our *****, studied hard, worked even harder, and made the best of the opportunities we had!

 

How much easier it would have been for all of us to sit at home all day feeling sorry for ourselves and moaning on an internet forum about how hard done to we were...

 

Most if not all low income are doing exactly that

[foxy lady]

Given the choice I think many women would love to be able to concentrate on looking after their household and children, instead of having to balance it with a full time job. I feel sorry for parents that both need to work to make ends meet and end up having to leave their children with childminders instead of looking after them themselves.

 

But when the choices were made to have a second holiday in Spain, eat out twice a week, go to the pub with your mates, buy a big flat screen TV and an I-phone for each of the kids, send the kids to uni, have 2 cars on tick, designer labels in the school uniforms etc etc.. All of a sudden you need 2 incomes to pay for it all

Edited March 13, 2016 by foxy lady

[Anna B]

I watched the Marr show and agreed with most of John McDonalds heartfelt wishes for improvements to peoples lives.

Where I would disagree with J M is his utter naivety on how to pay for the improvements.

He makes it all sound so simple,as though money can be magiced out of thin air (an unfortunate Socialist belief). The Tories know some of their policies are unpopular,like wage restraints,addressing the black hole of the benefits system etc etc,but realize we have a hard struggle in front of us that requires hard decisions and lots of dummy spitting.........I would hazard a guess that over 80% of people on this forum live a more affluent lifestyle than their parent and grandparents........yet it never seems enough for lots!

 

But it can. It's called 'Quantitative Easing.'

 

We may live more affluent lifestyles than our Parents and Grandparents, but will our children?

And will we, when we reach old age and realise that all the services we will inevitably need have gone?

[Eric Arthur]

But it can. It's called 'Quantitative Easing.'

 

We may live more affluent lifestyles than our Parents and Grandparents, but will our children?

And will we, when we reach old age and realise that all the services we will inevitably need have gone?

 

Not with endless QE they won't. I recall that you were asking about inflation recently. This would be a good opportunity for you to read up and join some dots.

[mossdog]

But it can. It's called 'Quantitative Easing.'

 

We may live more affluent lifestyles than our Parents and Grandparents, but will our children?

And will we, when we reach old age and realise that all the services we will inevitably need have gone?

..........but those services and the current standard of living were not available to our forebears years ago,and I would suggest they probably worked harder for less as well as enduring two world wars..........so could it be that our expectations are beyond our means to afford our dreams in todays world...........don't try to take the world on Anna,ask yourself what are YOU doing in your own street!

[ECCOnoob]

Given the choice I think many women would love to be able to concentrate on looking after their household and children, instead of having to balance it with a full time job. I feel sorry for parents that both need to work to make ends meet and end up having to leave their children with childminders instead of looking after them themselves.

 

Are you for real?

 

They CHOOSE to have children. They bloody pay for them.

 

If yummy mummy wants to stay at home and look after them full time, one of them needs to work hard enough to be able to afford it.

 

Are you going to suggest the rest of us taxpayers should subsidise their breading CHOICE for them somehow??

[alchemist]

It isn't a huge amount though says George. He told the Andrew Marr Show: "I think we can find those savings. Of course you can George, after all it doesn't affect you and all your cronies.

 

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/george-osborne-reveals-new-4billion-7548115

 

And yet they can still award themselves a payrise above inflation

[Anna B]

'The Disability benefits bill is due to be slashed by a further £1.2 Billion.

 

Those affected by the cuts will include 640,000 people who need help dressing and undressing, and using the bathroom.

 

It also emerged that Mr Osborne is planning a tax give away for middle class voters by raising the tax threshold to £43,000 for higher earners.'

(Saturday's Daily Mail.)

 

So he's taking money from the poorest, most desperately needy in society. Does that seem fair to you?

[Eric Arthur]

Look past the headline from which you drew your conclusion.

[Anna B]

Look past the headline from which you drew your conclusion.

 

I have drawn the correct conclusion. It's up to you to make your case, if you have one.

 

---------- Post added 13-03-2016 at 20:22 ----------

 

'The Disability benefits bill is due to be slashed by a further £1.2 Billion.

 

Those affected by the cuts will include 640,000 people who need help dressing and undressing, and using the bathroom.

 

It also emerged that Mr Osborne is planning a tax give away for middle class voters by raising the tax threshold to £43,000 for higher earners.'

(Saturday's Daily Mail.)

 

So he's taking money from the poorest, most desperately needy in society. Does that seem fair to you?

 

What other conclusion is there?