The War on Disabled People is an Invitation to Fight Back

[down'n'out]

I thought maybe worth a link to:-

 

Ed Miliband to wage war on George Osborne over benefit cuts

 

Labour set for Commons showdown as church leaders and charities protest at assault on welfare

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/dec/08/ed-miliband-george-osborne-welfare

[Simon7685]

If they were a minority Govt, I think a lot of the policies would still have gone through, as it would be highly unlikely that everyone else would have voted against everything. Politicians being politicians, deals would have been done and it wouldn't have taken more than 30 pieces of silver to buy most of them after all.

 

Antone are you sure the deficit has been bigger than it currently is, over 1 trillion pounds?

 

In 1997 the debt stood at 352 billion when Uncle Gordon got the boot hadn't it risen to around 850 billion, even after flogging the gold reserves and despite one of the biggest boom times the country had seen? I agree with a lot of Labours values but not their economic values for one minute. They managed to bust us in the 70's and nearly did it again this time, even after inheriting a budget surplus in 97. Can they really be trusted not to do it again, especially with Mr Balls in charge of the coffers?

[antone]

 

Antone are you sure the deficit has been bigger than it currently is, over 1 trillion pounds?

 

In 1997 the debt stood at 352 billion when Uncle Gordon got the boot hadn't it risen to around 850 billion, even after flogging the gold reserves and despite one of the biggest boom times the country had seen? I agree with a lot of Labours values but not their economic values for one minute. They managed to bust us in the 70's and nearly did it again this time, even after inheriting a budget surplus in 97. Can they really be trusted not to do it again, especially with Mr Balls in charge of the coffers?

 

Well, I seriously recommend reading the HuffPo link that CD posted above. It doesn't make sense to talk about the deficit in terms of absolute numbers, or to make a direct comparison in absolute numbers to other countries. The video showing Osborne's apparent ignorance of the fact that, as a proportion of income, we have the lowest deficit in the G7 is pretty instructive. Did he genuinely not know this, or was he hoping that no-one else would notice the deception?

 

Anyhow, I'm loathe to compare the ways countries operate to families or companies, but as a crude example, if my income is £20,000 annually and I owe the bank £10,000, I'd be worried. If my income is £1,000,000 and I owe the bank £50,000, I'd be a lot less worried. In other words, it only makes sense to compare deficits against income. In 1997 the deficit was 42% of GDP - that's what the Tories left. It's now about 35%. So if it wasn't a crisis the day before the 1997 election, why is it a crisis now?

 

As to whether they can be trusted, well, I'm not here to advocate one party over another. But they didn't "bust" us between 1997 and 2010, if the concept of "busting" a nation state can be said to mean anything at all. And by prioritising deficit repayments, the Tories have artificially prolonged the recession, thereby perpetuating the problem they claim to be trying to solve. Who could possibly have guessed that pursuing policies that depress the economy and make people poorer might lead to increases in the deficit?

 

CD feels this is deliberate. I don't know, it might just be ignorance. But it sure as heck isn't clever. Well, unless it actually is deliberate, in which case yes, it's clever, because it's working and people are buying it. That would make make it simply evil.

[Simon7685]

I haven't got round to reading the link yet but I will.

 

I do take your point about the numbers game and how it can be masaged to suit a certain point of view. I still don't think I would trust Ed Balls to be in charge of the finances though, having said that I don't think Osborne is up to the job either but I definately couldn't see Ed not making a balls up, pardon the pun.

[down'n'out]

They managed to bust us in the 70's and nearly did it again this time,

 

OBR head rebukes Osborne: the UK was never at risk of bankruptcy

 

In the weeks after he took office, George Osborne justified his austerity programme by claiming that Britain was on "the brink of bankruptcy". He told the Conservative conference in October 2010: "The good new`s is that we are in government after 13 years of a disastrous Labour administration that brought our country to the brink of bankruptcy."

It was, of course, nonsense. With its own currency, its own monetary policy and the ability to borrow at historically low rates, the UK was never at risk of bankruptcy.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2012/12/obr-head-rebukes-osborne-uk-was-never-risk-bankruptcy

[Surfer01]

I thought maybe worth a link to:-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/dec/08/ed-miliband-george-osborne-welfare

I would take this with a pinch of salt as it is just another way for him to get his name into the press. I don't think that they or any other government would have done it much differently.

If we didn't have a deficit, why are we still borrowing such huge sums of money?

[citizenB]

OBR head rebukes Osborne: the UK was never at risk of bankruptcy

 

In the weeks after he took office, George Osborne justified his austerity programme by claiming that Britain was on "the brink of bankruptcy". He told the Conservative conference in October 2010: "The good new`s is that we are in government after 13 years of a disastrous Labour administration that brought our country to the brink of bankruptcy."

It was, of course, nonsense. With its own currency, its own monetary policy and the ability to borrow at historically low rates, the UK was never at risk of bankruptcy.

 

Not wishing to spill blood, but why have the Labour Party not denied this statement. If the UK's finances were in good shape.. they should be able to say !

[Surfer01]

See this link which is also posted in the Bear Garden.

[Lady Lou]

And this:

The British have no fight in them http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/09/british-have-no-fight-in-them

[Crazy Diamond]

Not wishing to spill blood, but why have the Labour Party not denied this statement. If the UK's finances were in good shape.. they should be able to say !

 

Who'd have listened, in the hysteria of global the economic meltdown? This isn't news, some - many - of us have been trying to be heard for years but with the Murdoch press on the side of the Tories, what chance did we have to be listened to?

[happyhamm3r]

For what it is worth, Labour Libs and Cons are all the same, that's why you get the same results you been getting for the last fourty years, the I vote this or that cause my Dad did.

One day this country will wake to find it is run by say Muslims, then you know what's what. It could also be any other faith, I know I'll be called racist, but that's because if you stand up and say anything for your own kind, this is what happens.

 

Going back to my original question, the Brits have lost the will to fight a cause, our forefathers will be spinning in their graves to see how easy Government and Foreigners find this place easy to take advantage of. But who pays in the end, Indigionsness people do that who.

[osdset]

Some say that the British have lost their backbone, apathy reigns. But I believe the reason is we do not have any effective way to force change, peaceful demonstration's are in the main ignored as are petitions and letters, the only thing we had fighting our corner was the trade union movement and Thatcher put paid to that.

 

So other than mass civil unrest what's left?

[estellyn]

I don't think it necessarily is apathy. We have a country of people who haven't been taught critical thinking skills - yes some have developed them anyway, but the rest believe what they see on the news and read in the newspaper. Sadly there has been a concerted effort by the government and media to convince people that their poorer, disabled and immigrant neighbours are responsible for the economic problems - 'taking money from strivers' pockets'. People read and believe, and so aren't blaming the government, but are blaming innocent citizens. Clever propoganda campaign, but will only get the government so far - the media are starting to turn - slowly but surely.

[worried33]

having read this I can say its the first time I wish someone would die.

 

http://welfarenewsservice.co.uk/archives/3014

 

This man is a cancer, I mean saying the poor have the least to risk, going on about taking risks (as he was an investment banker), the poor have their means of survival at risk every day, they have no buffers. All this workfare and kicking the ill of benefits, this is the guy behind it all.

[worried33]

Hellooooooooooooooooooooo???? Is anyone actually reading anything linked here?

 

the coffers were NOT depleted. There was NO "spending spree". And while we're at it, there was NO note saying "there is no money left" left behind when the tories got in, come on people use your brains here!

 

The deficit is a myth. The "need" for austerity is a myth, and ideological, not based on facts nor proper economics.

 

Come on, who do you believe, the Daily Mail or:

 

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

+ The International Monetary Fund

+ The Office for Budget Responsibility

+ Her Majesty's Treasury

+ The Office for National Statistics

... oh, and the current Chancellor of the Exchequer, finally trapped in his own lies?

 

I post the link again:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ramesh-patel/growth-cameron-austerity_b_2007552.html

 

Please read it if you haven't yet. If that doesn't open your eyes, nothing will, but repeating the old lies won't make it true, not now, not ever.

 

I worked this out a while ago, its pretty clear the economy is been deliberatly kept in recession to allow them to push through the current policies.

The author missed as well that the long term aim will be to get wages down, workfare is going someway to achieve that, and eventually the paid jobs that are created I suspect will have desperate people taking them for below min wage cash in hand.

[worried33]

I thought maybe worth a link to:-

 

 

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/dec/08/ed-miliband-george-osborne-welfare

 

yeah because now the latest cuts are targeted at working claimants, its not so politically incorrect to oppose now.

 

I think labour have opposed most cuts since the election but was political suicide to defend the unemployed.

[worried33]

If they were a minority Govt, I think a lot of the policies would still have gone through, as it would be highly unlikely that everyone else would have voted against everything. Politicians being politicians, deals would have been done and it wouldn't have taken more than 30 pieces of silver to buy most of them after all.

 

Antone are you sure the deficit has been bigger than it currently is, over 1 trillion pounds?

 

In 1997 the debt stood at 352 billion when Uncle Gordon got the boot hadn't it risen to around 850 billion, even after flogging the gold reserves and despite one of the biggest boom times the country had seen? I agree with a lot of Labours values but not their economic values for one minute. They managed to bust us in the 70's and nearly did it again this time, even after inheriting a budget surplus in 97. Can they really be trusted not to do it again, especially with Mr Balls in charge of the coffers?

 

simon you have to think of it as a %, and also account for inflation.

 

eg. if I had a debt of 10 thousand pounds to me that would be a huge debt I couldnt burden and would have to default on.

 

Whilst to a millionaire it would be pocket change.

 

Its % not absolute numbers to look at.

[brassnecked]

For what it's worth Tory Liebore. LibDum, none of them give a damn about us so long as their elongated snouts can slurp gravy from the Eurotrough.

[antone]

For what it is worth, Labour Libs and Cons are all the same, that's why you get the same results you been getting for the last fourty years, the I vote this or that cause my Dad did.

One day this country will wake to find it is run by say Muslims, then you know what's what. It could also be any other faith, I know I'll be called racist, but that's because if you stand up and say anything for your own kind, this is what happens.

 

Going back to my original question, the Brits have lost the will to fight a cause, our forefathers will be spinning in their graves to see how easy Government and Foreigners find this place easy to take advantage of. But who pays in the end, Indigionsness people do that who.

 

It has nothing to do with Muslims, foreigners, or giant green lizards from the planet Zog. The situation we're in right now is a direct consequence of the actions taken buy our elected representatives.

[estellyn]

It has nothing to do with Muslims, foreigners, or giant green lizards from the planet Zog. The situation we're in right now is a direct consequence of the actions taken buy our elected representatives.

 

Antone - first time poster who says something provacative - has troll written all over it.

[LaughingGirl]

It has nothing to do with Muslims, foreigners, or giant green lizards from the planet Zog. The situation we're in right now is a direct consequence of the actions taken buy our elected representatives.

 

Can you prove that?

 

I agree that a huge part of the problem is that people believe everything they read in the red tops (and the black tops in the case of the Daily Fail). I stopped reading the user comments on the Sky and Daily Mail website a year ago, because they make my blood boil.

 

I also agree with Assisted Blonde - it feels like the situation has gone so far that the only thing that will change it is civil unrest.

Edited December 12, 2012 by LaughingGirl

[Crazy Diamond]

simon you have to think of it as a %, and also account for inflation.

 

eg. if I had a debt of 10 thousand pounds to me that would be a huge debt I couldnt burden and would have to default on.

 

Whilst to a millionaire it would be pocket change.

 

Its % not absolute numbers to look at.

 

That is completely spot on.

 

One of the most thought provoking of these, IMO, is related to charity. In%, poorer people give massively more to charity than richer ones.

 

This is the most recent study on this, US based.

 

The UK-based research is much older (2001), but the conclusion can be drawn that this is an ongoing situation and therefore not a societal fluke.

[happyhamm3r]

It has nothing to do with Muslims, foreigners, or giant green lizards from the planet Zog. The situation we're in right now is a direct consequence of the actions taken buy our elected representatives.

 

I actually think it does, we have lived abroad for many years, in the EU and on the wall in the British consulate was a letter saying No British national living in that country cound not use there NHS. Our NHS has a limited amount of founds in it. Only last night on the News London British whites where now in the minority, How can this be fair,when we are doing the worlds countries disabled before we do ours. I think we should only look after the ones who have lived generations on the British Isles. So yes I do think it does have everything to do with Goverment and Foreigners.

Edited December 12, 2012 by citizenB

[Crazy Diamond]

It has nothing to do with Muslims, foreigners, or giant green lizards from the planet Zog. The situation we're in right now is a direct consequence of the actions taken buy our elected representatives.[/quote

 

I actually think it does, we have lived abroad for many years, in the EU and on the wall in the British consulate was a letter saying No British national living in that country cound not use there NHS. Our NHS has a limited amount of founds in it. Only last night on the News London British whites where now in the minority, How can this be fair,when we are doing the worlds countries disabled before we do ours. I think we should only look after the ones who have lived generations on the British Isles. So yes I do think it does have everything to do with Goverment and Foreigners.

 

Nonsense.

 

a)

in the EU and on the wall in the British consulate was a letter saying No British national living in that country cound not use there NHS.

British nationals can and do use other countries' health services, the system is called the reciprocal agreement within EEC countries, the documents used to be an E111, it's not an EHIC card but does the same thing: Any UK resident can have the same level of treatment in any member country as the locals, and the bill gets sent to the DWP in Newcastle.

 

b)

Our NHS has a limited amount of funds in it

... Only because their funds are being strangled pre-privatisation, it doesn't matter who uses it, it's all about the funding. There is no reason the NHS couldn't get UNlimited funding apart from the determination of this government to finish the job thatcher started. If the politicos would stop treating the NHS as a money-making (or losing) scheme and instead treat it as it is meant to be: free healthcare at the point of access equally for everyone, the NHS wouldn't be dying right now. But oh no, it has to be profitable! Not just self-sufficient, mind, no, make a profit. Well, b***x to that.

 

c)

Only last night on the News London British whites where now in the minority

Oh, I was wondering how long it would be before that came up. So what? Are you saying that non-white Brits have fewer rights to healthcare than the white ones?

 

d)

How can this be fair,when we are doing the worlds countries disabled before we do ours.

That sentence doesn't even make sense, so I won't try to decipher it.

 

e)

I think we should only look after the ones who have lived generations on the British Isles.

How many generations? a generation is 25 years, so what are we talking about here? Does that mean that Prince Phillip can't get treated on here any more? (not that I necessarily would disagree with this particular one, lol) Or his children, foreign mongrels that they are? for that matter, how far do we go back as far as the royals are concerned, bloody germans...?

[osdset]

how far do we go back as far as the royals are concerned, bloody germans...?

Bloody Norman's ?