I'm quite frankly bored of the "vulnerable" in this election. The parties seem to be so focussed on this minority of the UK population that they are have lost sight of the majority of people in this country.
Give us the key facts for the "vulnerables". Eg, for each party, tell us exactly how much somone on the average UK salary of £26,000 will be contributing to
Health
Social Care
Benefits
Education
Then move on an tell us how much better life with be for everyone else under their party.
i agree. its boring when nearly every news item is something about social care or health or schools. they get enough cash and always want more with some expert giving their two penceworth as well. where is the sleep smiley. the big issues are the eu and immigration plus the economy
It's the Tory philosophy to absolve themselves of any responsibility to do the decent thing to help create a caring society. that costs money. money they want to stay in there pockets. simple as that.
We can't just lump everyone who needs help together and accuse them of not making the effort to help themselves or there family's.
I saw a comment recently that sums this up perfectly.
You're playing Monopoly, One person is given all the properties except Old Kent Rd, they are also given 95% of the bank...You are expected to succeed with what is left, You fail, why? obviously it's because you are lazy
Some of us have spent a lifetime not claiming benefits and paying for the other three ourselves.
All parties want to buy votes by throwing money at the vulnerable victims. Pity that they are not encouraged to do more for themselves and get credit for it.[/QUOTE]
What victims in particular need encouraging . the homeless or the sick and terminally ill. or the people on min wage unable to pay there rent.
Well it's understandable really that after 5 years of relentless anti poor propaganda Some will either have been swayed by the propaganda, while others would have needed none in the first place (The eager to hate as I call them) into believing that people choose to be (as they like to put it) "on benefits"
that some even arrogantly proclaim that they "have never been on benefits" as though they actually believe that millions of people choose to be made redundant or lose their job for whatever reason, and that millions of others choose to become sick, or choose to have an accident which makes it impossible to work, others choose to be born with a disability, others choose to get a mental illness, or a terminal disease,
Those who are in low paid jobs are the ones to blame for needing to claim in work benefits and needing to be "subsidised" by the "hard working" tax payers,
Not their multi millionaire bosses, of course,
they aren't being "subsidised" by the "hard working" tax payers who are paying a huge chunk of their wage bill for them, (because the herd have not been instructed to look in that direction)
the person working hard and doing the best they can in a low paid job and who was stupid enough to allow their children to grow up get jobs and leave home,
They now 'deserve' to be punished, because they are low paid workers who have become spare room criminals,
and they don't understand that when the beloved leader says "we support those who work hard and try to do the right thing" and he then freezes any increase in their in work benefits for 5 years while at the same time fining them for spare room crime, he is actually "supporting" them.
and all of this is justified because there are a tiny minority of people from the millions who are reliant on the welfare system, who cheat that system,
and yet, when it's a tiny minority of the tiny minority of extremely wealthy people who cheat the tax system robbing us all of billions of pounds, "it's far too difficult to track them down, and it is of course very wrong to punish and to be critical of the many because of the actions of the few"
They do create wealth and jobs, but the situation we are facing is those at the top end of the income distribution scale have been keeping more of the profits for themselves. Billions has been squirelled away in tax havens when it could be circulating in the economy and helping to invest in our present and future needs.
The proportion of the economy that goes on wages has dropped in the last twenty years. It was at the highest during the seventies when half the 'pot' went in wages, and it is now down to around thirty percent. Basically the rich have hot richer and the poor poorer.
The proportion of the economy that goes on wages has dropped in the last twenty ears. It was at the highest during the seventies when half the 'pot' went in wages, and it is now down to around thirty percent. Basically the rich have hot richer and the poor poorer.
The system ever since then has been tailored for it, and with it the accumulation of social power. Most people are too zombified to acknowledge this puts us, the majority, in deep doo doo.
I admire self-made people and have no problem with very poor, poor, middle class, rich, or super-rich people, but I do think the disparity between the top 0.1% and the poorest is far too wide. I dislike that systematic end result of the global capitalist world we live in.
If I had a magic button that capped wealth at £x million and that money raised the level of the bottom few %, then I would push the button. However I don't, and the super-rich aren't likely to volunteer such a system. (Many do have large philanthropic efforts and are to be applauded for that.) So it's nothing more than a hypothetical fantasy that would fall apart in the real world.
Would you push that button?
So, it's inequality between the extremes that I don't like. I've no problem with a meritocracy, per se, I just think our impersonation of that produces too wide a gap between top and bottom.
I admire self-made people and have no problem with very poor, poor, middle class, rich, or super-rich people, but I do think the disparity between the top 0.1% and the poorest is far too wide. I dislike that systematic end result of the global capitalist world we live in.
If I had a magic button that capped wealth at £x million and that money raised the level of the bottom few %, then I would push the button. However I don't, and the super-rich aren't likely to volunteer such a system. (Many do have large philanthropic efforts and are to be applauded for that.) So it's nothing more than a hypothetical fantasy that would fall apart in the real world.
Would you push that button?
So, it's inequality between the extremes that I don't like. I've no problem with a meritocracy, per se, I just think our impersonation of that produces too wide a gap between top and bottom.
I agree it would be great if everybody thought the same and as a result we collectively did something about the most damaging extremes of inequality, and the money in politics problem for instance, but alas, the elite are very good at divide and conquer and we are good at falling for it too.
I don't agree that we live in a meritocracy when some people have to work so much harder to achieve what another priveleged person can have handed to them on a plate, and then there are the disadvantaged youth, called hopeless by Nigel Farage, who know how limited their opportunities are, which is why they often lead lives of violence and crime.
I do agree that some people are naturally talented and work hard and should be rewarded for their hard work, providing it is not of a socially destructive nature.
I agree it would be great if everybody thought the same and as a result we collectively did something about the most damaging extremes of inequality, and the money in politics problem for instance, but alas, the elite are very good at divide and conquer and we are good at falling for it too.
I don't agree that we live in a meritocracy when some people have to work so much harder to achieve what another priveleged person can have handed to them on a plate, and then there are the disadvantaged youth, called hopeless by Nigel Farage, who know how limited their opportunities are, which is why they often lead lives of violence and crime.
I do agree that some people are naturally talented and work hard and should be rewarded for their hard work, providing it is not of a socially destructive nature.
Nor do I, not exactly. And, in truth, a completely fair world where everyone has the same start in life and opportunities isn't possible, but I still think I'd like a world closer to that (given that magic button).
Nor do I, not exactly. And, in truth, a completely fair world where everyone has the same start in life and opportunities isn't possible, but I still think I'd like a world closer to that (given that magic button).
I'd like to think the magic button will materialise when their is a shift in attitudes towards the accumulation of wealth beyond that which is necessary to live a comfortable life - I mean, who really needs five yachts?
Comments
I saw a comment recently that sums this up perfectly.
It's all very well saying that but there really are plenty of real life tragedies out there such as the one below:
Young mum-to-be blames online benefits forms for driving her dyslexic partner to kill himself
Greens have
And what are their plans for us disabled?
You will find some of the Green Party commitments here, under 'Mental Health Services,' 'Availability for Work' and 'Welfare Reform.'
Here you go - http://policy.greenparty.org.uk/dy.html
The proportion of the economy that goes on wages has dropped in the last twenty years. It was at the highest during the seventies when half the 'pot' went in wages, and it is now down to around thirty percent. Basically the rich have hot richer and the poor poorer.
The system ever since then has been tailored for it, and with it the accumulation of social power. Most people are too zombified to acknowledge this puts us, the majority, in deep doo doo.
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2012/oct/19/change-your-life-selfishness
Left-wingers are pure evil....says The Telegraph
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100227068/five-reasons-why-left-wingers-are-pure-evil/
I admire self-made people and have no problem with very poor, poor, middle class, rich, or super-rich people, but I do think the disparity between the top 0.1% and the poorest is far too wide. I dislike that systematic end result of the global capitalist world we live in.
If I had a magic button that capped wealth at £x million and that money raised the level of the bottom few %, then I would push the button. However I don't, and the super-rich aren't likely to volunteer such a system. (Many do have large philanthropic efforts and are to be applauded for that.) So it's nothing more than a hypothetical fantasy that would fall apart in the real world.
Would you push that button?
So, it's inequality between the extremes that I don't like. I've no problem with a meritocracy, per se, I just think our impersonation of that produces too wide a gap between top and bottom.
I agree it would be great if everybody thought the same and as a result we collectively did something about the most damaging extremes of inequality, and the money in politics problem for instance, but alas, the elite are very good at divide and conquer and we are good at falling for it too.
I don't agree that we live in a meritocracy when some people have to work so much harder to achieve what another priveleged person can have handed to them on a plate, and then there are the disadvantaged youth, called hopeless by Nigel Farage, who know how limited their opportunities are, which is why they often lead lives of violence and crime.
I do agree that some people are naturally talented and work hard and should be rewarded for their hard work, providing it is not of a socially destructive nature.
Nor do I, not exactly. And, in truth, a completely fair world where everyone has the same start in life and opportunities isn't possible, but I still think I'd like a world closer to that (given that magic button).
I'd like to think the magic button will materialise when their is a shift in attitudes towards the accumulation of wealth beyond that which is necessary to live a comfortable life - I mean, who really needs five yachts?