so which one for the axe?

[darmstadt]

Why does it have to be benefits that are cut? I would like to see MPs salaries halved. Health and safety removed. And QE spent on tax cuts. This would enable the economy to grow and get rid of the deficit that way.

And cut bodyguards for Tony Blair too.

Do you think that would improve the standard of government in this country?

As the government are so keen on privitisation ,outsourcing, PFI and so on as 'apparently' they bring savings, then why not themselves? Surely they should be showing an example

[vetran]

Because the country needs the housing stock. Wrinklies already have it all. Why can't they share a little with the young?

maybe the wrinklies built enough for themselves, the youngsters should do the same.

when I was a kid houses were cheap to buy because there were lots spare or not wanted much.

[VectraMan]

So in effect penalising anyone who decided to buy their house, why should they have to sell up?

It was in fact NI I was more or less on about, but still the point stands why should anyone get less because they've prepared for their future while others don't.

Well yes, but you can say the same about all sorts of things. Why should anyone pay more tax just because they worked harder at school and got a better job? How is that fair?

If benefits are to pay for people that can't support themselves, why are we giving them to someone who's sitting on a half a million pound house? That money will just end up in the pockets of their children when they die, even if their children are lazy scroungers who've never worked hard or done anything right in their lives. Is that fair?

[The Spartan]

Well yes, but you can say the same about all sorts of things. Why should anyone pay more tax just because they worked harder at school and got a better job? How is that fair?

If benefits are to pay for people that can't support themselves, why are we giving them to someone who's sitting on a half a million pound house? That money will just end up in the pockets of their children when they die, even if their children are lazy scroungers who've never worked hard or done anything right in their lives. Is that fair?

Because it belongs to them, maybe when they bought it all those years ago they had no idea it'd be worth that much in years to come. It may end up in the pockets of their children but not before inheritance tax is no doubt paid on it, other than that have you ever considered that they may have a sentimental attachment to their home?

I'm not saying anyone should pay more tax for working harder, it's just the way the current system works not that I agree with it.