Tories toughen their image with hard line on benefits

[d000hg]

The nasty party continues to push the one area of society that has no means to push back, the poor.

What is so horrific about having to do something for your benefits?

[scooterscot]

Public Pensions + £144 billion
National Health Care + £130 billion
State Education + £89 billion
Defence + £47 billion
Social Security + £113 billion
State Protection + £32 billion
Transport + £19 billion
General Government + £14 billion
Other Public Services + £83 billion
Public Sector Interest + £50 billion
Balance + £-1 billion
Total Spending = £719 billion

When bond rates to go up, that'll put a spanner in the works that may benefit payments pail in comparison.

We had not had a public sector the size of India in the first place perhaps our pension payments would not be so ridiculous.

With the NHS, I'd like to see a heath care system similar to that of Germany. A sliding scale, the more you earn the more you pay. I thought that was what NI was for in the first place?

What is state protection?

Transport is pitiful.

General Government, £14,000,000,000 my goodness what on earth for?

[vetran]

Not only that but such a scheme would cost more. If jobseekers are made to work then they're no longer job seekers. So you'll have to pay them a minimum wage.

Why would you have to pay minimum wage? They are still job seekers you are just giving them 'free' training. Now its a fine balance, if they are exploited then that is bad and we should police that, but currently they are better off not working or are working illegally.

Half those on the pilot failed to turn up and had their benefits cut, yet no real examples of hardship were uncovered.

Also do you think its fair to write them off when they have been unemployed for TWO years? No get them back to work.

My Niece who has just come back from abroad where she was working as a nanny and she has 3 job offers in the first week(qualified to GCSE level only). Recounted a story of her friend who is claiming JSA and just filled in the weekly form saying oh yes I have applied for 3 jobs etc. yet she was lying.

My sister in law has 4 job offers on the go and 2 jobs admittedly one in a supermarket. Again only qualified to GCSE level. There appears to be no shortage of bottom end jobs in the south east.

[d000hg]

With the NHS, I'd like to see a heath care system similar to that of Germany. A sliding scale, the more you earn the more you pay. I thought that was what NI was for in the first place?

The more you earn, the more you DO pay. It's called taxation.

[scooterscot]

What is so horrific about having to do something for your benefits?

You can't have two people doing the same job with one on minimum wage and other on benefits, unless both incomes are the same.

To quote our glorious leader "it's morally wrong".

[fullyautomatix]

WHS.

Cut down on immigration?
Cut back on the work shy?
Help to Buy is about helping people to buy?
Tough on banks?
Help small businesses?
Be tough on Europe?

Come back Gordon, you were more believable than this lot.

Its not easy to satisfy you is it ?

Immigration : New Labour opened the floodgates with HSMP and Tier 1 visa enabling millions to flood in from India/Pakistan etc with fake degrees and bring down the IT market here in UK. Conservatives have put a stop to that nonsense.

Work shy: Universal credit will do that. Its putting a stop to all those entitled generation types who only want to work 16 hours a week and pocket 60K per anum equivalent in income.

HTB: Its daft I agree, but Labour were even worse

Tough on banks : Why ?

Help small businesses : They have got the economy back on track.

Tough on europe: At least they are offering us a referendum, Labour would never have.

[scooterscot]

The more you earn, the more you DO pay. It's called taxation.

No I'm talking about health insurance. The amount I pay is determined by the amount I not only earn, but my family status.

[doodab]

You can't have two people doing the same job with one on minimum wage and other on benefits, unless both incomes are the same.

To quote our glorious leader "it's morally wrong".

Why not? It's perfectly acceptable to have some useless layabouts getting £56.80 a week and others getting a basic salary of £66,396.

[scooterscot]

Why would you have to pay minimum wage? They are still job seekers you are just giving them 'free' training. Now its a fine balance, if they are exploited then that is bad and we should police that, but currently they are better off not working or are working illegally.

Half those on the pilot failed to turn up and had their benefits cut, yet no real examples of hardship were uncovered.

Also do you think its fair to write them off when they have been unemployed for TWO years? No get them back to work.

My Niece who has just come back from abroad where she was working as a nanny and she has 3 job offers in the first week(qualified to GCSE level only). Recounted a story of her friend who is claiming JSA and just filled in the weekly form saying oh yes I have applied for 3 jobs etc. yet she was lying.

My sister in law has 4 job offers on the go and 2 jobs admittedly one in a supermarket. Again only qualified to GCSE level. There appears to be no shortage of bottom end jobs in the south east.

Don't disagree, there's always going to be dishonest people among us.

In answer to you question minimum wage is nearly always going to be more than benefits. It's exploitation otherwise without police. The whole point of this is to cut back the cost, whereas I think it's actually going to end up increasing state spending.

[scooterscot]

Why not? It's perfectly acceptable to have some useless layabouts getting £56.80 a week and others getting a basic salary of £66,396.

eh?