Labour Party politics

[Badger11]

Yep, this is where even though our politics are far apart we fundamentally agree on this. As do most I think.

Interested to know your solution from your side though.

I guess the question to ask is how many of these low wage earners actually need taxpayers money to get by?

Don't get me wrong I sympathise with anyone on a low wage (been their). But there is a big difference between want and need.

Do middle class people need Child Support?

Of course people on low income will say yes they need tax support but in the past they never got it it's only been in the last 30-50 years that governments have adopted this policy.

It all goes back to how you define poverty and I don't agree with how governments do that and include mobile phones and foreign holidays.

Absolute poverty is another thing entirely.

At some point we are going to have to tackle the benefits system, Labour has completely ducked the issue. That doesn't mean that these people are lazy scroungers but we have to have a reset, how far and how deep is up to others.

 

[georgenorman]

I guess the question to ask is how many of these low wage earners actually need taxpayers money to get by?

Don't get me wrong I sympathise with anyone on a low wage (been their). But there is a big difference between want and need.

Do middle class people need Child Support?

Of course people on low income will say yes they need tax support but in the past they never got it it's only been in the last 30-50 years that governments have adopted this policy.

It all goes back to how you define poverty and I don't agree with how governments do that and include mobile phones and foreign holidays.

Absolute poverty is another thing entirely.

At some point we are going to have to tackle the benefits system, Labour has completely ducked the issue. That doesn't mean that these people are lazy scroungers but we have to have a reset, how far and how deep is up to others.

"The poor you will always have with you" [Matthew 26:11]

 

[silvertop]

Anyone with a mortgage is living beyond their means so that don’t wash. At any moment loans can be called in. Many abuse food banks and as above not means tested. I have an aunt and uncle who use one. Have full pensions and no mortgage in a 500 k house. Don’t use false figures and look at car leasing and who does. Look at who has two or more holidays a year. Look at the flash TV and phones, kids with high end clothes , toys, bikes etc. do the research as I would say less than 50% would get these benefits if they were checked. One that 2TK actually wanted to go for was benefits. Who stopped him, his own party MPs. Protecting their vote base instead of the uk economy. If he had balls and followed it through he would still be PM and possibly my thought as someone to vote for at a GE. He bottled it end of. It’s all about votes and positions so wake up and observe; don’t just see!

Precisely why there is a triple lock state pension which all parties treat as a third rail.

 

[silvertop]

This is the insanity of our welfare state. The taxpayer is effectively subsidising the corporations for keeping wages low.

From the other angle, wages are the biggest cost of most businesses.

Absent that "subsidy" those corporations would not engage as many staff and unemployment would be higher.

Or they would go bust.

 

[silvertop]

"The poor you will always have with you" [Matthew 26:11]

Yes, but a civilized country does not adopt a laissez fair attitude to their plight as that always hurts you elsewhere in crime, health etc.

 

[georgenorman]

Yes, but a civilized country does not adopt a laissez fair attitude to their plight as that always hurts you elsewhere in crime, health etc.

What would you do about the widespread abuse of the welfare system?

 

[silvertop]

What would you do about the widespread abuse of the welfare system?

While they will vary size in relation to wealth and priorities, every country has a welfare system of some sort. No one adopts the "let them starve" attitude you appear to (ironic you would choose a biblical reference to make your point). But...

Where there is humans + money there is corruption. It is unavoidable.

The objective must be to focus welfare correctly and minimize the leakages.

Trouble is, it is a pesky enemy to fight. Like illegal immigration and tax fraud, never sufficient resources and blaggers as slippery as eels and as cunning as foxes.

Like you I am no expert. I suppose prioritize those benefits with the least detectable fleecing.

 

[ASCPFC]

While they will vary size in relation to wealth and priorities, every country has a welfare system of some sort. No one adopts the "let them starve" attitude you appear to (ironic you would choose a biblical reference to make your point). But...

Where there is humans + money there is corruption. It is unavoidable.

The objective must be to focus welfare correctly and minimize the leakages.

Trouble is, it is a pesky enemy to fight. Like illegal immigration and tax fraud, never sufficient resources and blaggers as slippery as eels and as cunning as foxes.

Like you I am no expert. I suppose prioritize those benefits with the least detectable fleecing.

Loads are literally obvious fraudsters, on both welfare fraud and illegal immigration. Volunteer for one day in a food bank or in say classes for immigrants or something. It won't take five minutes for someone with common sense to see the blatant abuse. There will be some genuine people. Maybe you'll enjoy it.

You'll have people turning up to both in a Mercedes.

 

[georgenorman]

While they will vary size in relation to wealth and priorities, every country has a welfare system of some sort. No one adopts the "let them starve" attitude you appear to (ironic you would choose a biblical reference to make your point). But...

Where there is humans + money there is corruption. It is unavoidable.

The objective must be to focus welfare correctly and minimize the leakages.

Trouble is, it is a pesky enemy to fight. Like illegal immigration and tax fraud, never sufficient resources and blaggers as slippery as eels and as cunning as foxes.

Like you I am no expert. I suppose prioritize those benefits with the least detectable fleecing.

Where have I ever said "let them starve". You do like putting words in peoples' mouths don't you. Meanwhile, you would do f-all about benefits abuse and continue to give cars to people who say they can't get about.

 

[silvertop]

Where have I ever said "let them starve". You do like putting words in peoples' mouths don't you. Meanwhile, you would do f-all about benefits abuse and continue to give cars to people who say they can't get about.

You said the poor will always be there. It is not a leap to say they are a natural and normal facet of society and should not be helped with government aid thereby voicing Victorian liberalism. You even cited the biblical quote oft cited by 19th century advocates for that cause.

And presumably you made that comment about all benefit claimants being gifted fancy cars to put words in my mouth to make a point. The difference is that I did not say I supported benefit fraud or that I do not think abuse should be curtailed. In fact, quite the opposite. What I actually said was that we must have welfare and there will always be fraud given the availability of money and the existence of humans, but curbing abuse requires resources we do not have and techniques beyond my ken.

That's rather different to your selective interpretation.

 

[georgenorman]

You said the poor will always be there. It is not a leap to say they are a natural and normal facet of society and should not be helped with government aid thereby voicing Victorian liberalism. You even cited the biblical quote oft cited by 19th century advocates for that cause.

And presumably you made that comment about all benefit claimants being gifted fancy cars to put words in my mouth to make a point. The difference is that I did not say I supported benefit fraud or that I do not think abuse should be curtailed. In fact, quite the opposite. What I actually said was that we must have welfare and there will always be fraud given the availability of money and the existence of humans, but curbing abuse requires resources we do not have and techniques beyond my ken.

That's rather different to your selective interpretation.

Again! Where did I say “fancy” cars? If at midnight a few grand was distributed to everyone, within a few days (if not earlier) some would be penniless and some would have multiplied their money, so yes, the poor will always be with us. Pursuit of the sort of policies that you champion would just mean that there are even more poor.

 

[silvertop]

Again! Where did I say “fancy” cars? If at midnight a few grand was distributed to everyone, within a few days (if not earlier) some would be penniless and some would have multiplied their money, so yes, the poor will always be with us. Pursuit of the sort of policies that you champion would just mean that there are even more poor.

They would have multiplied their money and thereby added to the nation's wealth; or blown the money and... thereby added to the nation's wealth.

Economists have proposed just that for those very reasons. However, I suspect they were just models and not really serious proposals for actual welfare reform.

At least I hope so.

Btw, I have championed no policy on welfare.

If I have, please direct me to that post.

 

[georgenorman]

They would have multiplied their money and thereby added to the nation's wealth; or blown the money and... thereby added to the nation's wealth.

Economists have proposed just that for those very reasons. However, I suspect they were just models and not really serious proposals for actual welfare reform.

At least I hope so.

Btw, I have championed no policy on welfare.

If I have, please direct me to that post.

So you agree that the poor will always be with us?
I was of course referring to your general support of left-wing policies, which of course will sooner or later impoverish people.

 

[ASCPFC]

Labour picks Camden leader to stand for Keir Starmer's old seat

Sagal Abdi-Wali will contest Holborn and St Pancras for Labour on 8 October.

www.bbc.com

The candidates frankly sound awful. Binface should go there.

 

[Spindle]

You can't make it up.

Labour = Islam

Constituency is 45% non white and 20% Muslim.

 

[HKOwen]

You can't make it up.

Labour = Islam

Constituency is 45% non white and 20% Muslim.

I just don't get why muslims would cozy up to a gay Jew whatever the perceived short term benefits.

If the Greens don't see a red flag then heaven help them.