[Closed] A truly sad day for British society...

Here here

As a natural right winger, I agree entirely.

We need a long term national plan, not short sighted one eye on the next election self interest.

+1 for everything evb says. If your username is also your location, then your MP is [url= http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24964/rory_stewart/penrith_and_the_border/divisions?policy=6670 ]one who nearly always votes through benefit cuts[/url].

3/10 on the rant score; (Good spelling, punctuation, no random caps, no excessive excalmation marks, and above all a rationl and hard to disagree with point).

Is disappoint, but agree wholeheartedly.

The disadvantaged / poor / uneducated / young don't vote much.

Politicians aim to be voted in and work hard at that.

Its the older, retired, middle class, well paid people that vote more. So I don't expect thing to change much.

[img] [/img]

there have have truly sadder days, there will be further truly sad days. What really is sad are those that moan but don't vote and don't get involved. Am pointing at no one in particular unless you qualify.

Little to disagree with there. I particularly agree with the need for a more long term approach rather than parties and individual politicians looking to their own interests. Unfortunately under the existing system this will always be prevalent. Politicians need votes so will appeal to those who they think can secure their futures rather than the country as a whole. Why should Osbourne care about some wheelchair-bound unemployed guy in Orford? He's hardly likely to vote Tory so he doesn't matter. Osborne, Duncan-Smith, Johnson and Gove are psychopaths who firmly believe that they are right and everyone who doesn't agree is not only wrong but dangerous to both them and the country.

Hameron on the other hand is a brain dead puppet.

If any high rate taxpayers truly agree with the OP, they'll be paying their £43/mo to a charity next year.

It's disgusting.

I've benefited massively from yesterdays budget. I feel like I'm being bribed. I'm a member of that poor, downtrodden demographic, the relatively well-paid, white, middle-class, educated, English male. I'm doing just fine already, comparatively speaking, considering the state of the economy. There are plenty of other people out there who really need the help. If there's money to give away in tax breaks (which I dispute, given the state of the NHS and education, the number of homeless, the treatment of the elderly, etc) then it should be spent on people who need it more than me! Which is practically everyone else! For ****'s sake!

If any high rate taxpayers truly agree with the OP, they'll be paying their £43/mo to a charity next year.

While you were typing that, I was typing this:

Right, I'm off to increase my donations to Shelter and whatnot, hopefully that'll make me feel less dirty.

Oh, and Gideon? I'll ****ing hang before I vote for the likes of you, no matter how much cash you throw at me, you oleaginous little cokehead piece of shit.

oleaginous little cokehead piece of shit

Quote of the week right there!

oleaginous little cokehead piece of shit

His size is just a matter of perspective.

There is no such thing as society.

I agree re. giving to charity, and being relatively well off, we do. However, turning the welfare system into one funded through voluntary donations is entirely wrong.

Poor rant but completely agree.

We can find money to bomb the **** out of Syria and give tax breaks but not support the NHS and disabled.

Tells you alot about the current governments priorities.

This has to be the worst government in my life time. (I'm 37)

Its the Tory party raison d'etre. Its what they do. And they're really, really good at it.

Redistribution of wealth. To take from the poor and disadvantaged, to give more to the people who already have plenty.

The thing that I find staggering is that anyone other than the top 5% of earners votes for the inhumane, casually heartless, self-serving shower of shits!

Sorry i dont vote so apparently i am not allowed an opinion.

Oh, and Gideon? I'll **** hang before I vote for the likes of you, no matter how much cash you throw at me, you oleaginous little cokehead piece of shit.

😆

Agree entirely with this. Another one who will be better off from this bribery budget. But my brother on the other hand, who has long term mental health issues and can't work, will suffer to bribe the likes of me. Just disgusting.

"Just disgusting."

Sums it up really . If I type my true feelings I will get banned .

The total welfare budget is about £130bn (need to check). Personally I am in favour of the most needy getting priority access to this money. I am in favour of the least needy getting nothing.

@binners the change to the 40% tax band benefitted 600,000 middle class earnjng around £42k, the low paid should vote Tory as a weak economy impacts them the most and Labour currently have no credible offering. We are still paying the price for Labour mismanagement and mark my words it's going to get a whole lot worse in the next 3 years. IMO we really have seen nothing yet in terms of financial pain.

The thing that I find staggering is that anyone other than the top 5% of earners votes for the inhumane, casually heartless, self-serving shower of shits!

I would like to commend John Humphreys on Radio 4 at about 8:10 this morning for confronting Osborne with this (or something very near to it)

So you've failed completely on your first 2 targets and your 3rd one, that of getting a surplus is likely to be missed as well.
What does a man need to do to get sacked?

I don't think it's a given that a Tory government will produce a better economy than a Labour one. Or that its proceeds will be spread any more evenly.

You're not talking about the trickle down effect are you Jam?

Can someone explain exactly WHY top rate taxpayers (me included) need an extra £43/mo? At the expense of the disabled on benefits? FFS.

oleaginous [b][i][u]little[/u][/i][/b] cokehead piece of shit.

I've just googled that bit, I'll have to scrub myself with a wire brush and bleach mind, and he's apparently 5'11".

Heres a thought for you Jammers. As a natural right winger it might blow your *ing mind completely though. But maybe some people, when voting, take into account other considerations than purely [b]WHAT'S IN IT FOR ME, ME, MEEEEEEEEEEEEEE?!!!!!!![/b]

I know, I know..... *ing mental, right?

You get better jambalaya, the low paid should vote Tory! 😆

What the **** does being little have to do with it?

I would like to commend John Humphreys on Radio 4 at about 8:10 this morning for confronting Osborne with this (or something very near to it)

So you've failed completely on your first 2 targets and your 3rd one, that of getting a surplus is likely to be missed as well.
What does a man need to do to get sacked?
Well asked sir, well asked.

Counts being counts.

But then, they are the [b]elected[/b] government.

Sorry i dont vote so apparently i am not allowed an opinion.

So why not vote for Labour then, if they are closer to your values?

I don't understand not voting - do you think the system of government in a country is going to change (without a revolution) by abstaining.

I've just googled that bit, I'll have to scrub myself with a wire brush and bleach mind, and he's apparently 5'11".

What the **** does being little have to do with it?

Nothing really, obviously. I was ranting, it's not meant to be totally coherent. His physical stature is irrelevant, but his actions are contemptible, perhaps I was applying 'little' in that sense, he's a figuratively little man, small-minded, morally and philosophically stunted.

I agree re. giving to charity, and being relatively well off, we do. However, turning the welfare system into one funded through voluntary donations is entirely wrong.

For the record I've just increased my monthly donations to charity by roughly the amount I'm going to benefit in the next tax year (I think, will check properly later, and that's excluding gift-aid, which goes on top I think). It's just a short-term way of doing something to redress the balance, and I agree entirely that it should not be the way we look after the most vulnerable in a civilised society.

Agreed... just reading summary of it again to check I haven't imagined it...

* reductions in higher rate tax,
* increase in tax free entitlement,
* reduction in Capital Gains Tax,
* reduction in Corporation Tax,
* cuts to disability benefits.

Nope, it still definitely says all that... disgraceful. Oh, and that's not even mentioning the Academies... I have Canadian citizenship, thinking now might be the time to cash in and move there instead...

I don't think it's a given that a Tory government will produce a better economy than a Labour one

No, no it isn't... https://mickfoster.wordpress.com/2016/03/13/who-is-better-at-managing-the-uk-economy-labour-or-the-tories/

<totally failed to share a table from google photos>

Found one I could link to.

[img] [/img]

now off to increase my CAF donation.

I don't think Labour are the answer to this - replace a bunch of self-serving muppets with another, equally self interested set of muppets?

No thanks. I'm moving to China. One-party politics is where it's at these days.

If any high rate taxpayers truly agree with the OP, they'll be paying their £43/mo to a charity next year.

Yep. no problem.

I don't think Labour are the answer to this - replace a bunch of self-serving muppets with another, equally self interested set of muppets?

All politicians are self serving to some extent, but Labour have never persecuted the poor like this and never would. They generally ask those who can easily afford to pay more, to do so. Which is fine by me.

Increase in personal allowance, with no increases on fuel etc. Means those on lower incomes should be better off. Exactly the type of policy that Labour would traditionally support.

I have Canadian citizenship,

What left wing utopia do you expect to find there, as it has lower rates of tax than the UK.

Exactly the type of policy that Labour would traditionally support.

Paid for by cutting disability payment to who have trouble washing themselves or using the toilet?

Labour would never support that.

I havent gotten round to checking the proposed disability cuts yet, can someone please summarise what they entail and how many claimants they will effect?

Paid for by cutting disability payment to who have trouble washing themselves or using the toilet?

Are the cuts not intended to reduce benefits to those that are physically able to do the above, and remain for those that are inacapable?
My general understanding of the disability hounding and social cuts was to thin out the hoards of mis-claimants. Whether this is actually the case, nor being undertaken in the fariest manner is probably the real area for discussion.

Super ISA and the proposed savings scheme for low earners seem like good changes for all to me, before I cast this budget as a Tory cover-up i'd like to know exactly whats being covered up.

" Tory cover-up i'd like to know exactly whats being covered up."

There is no cover up , they are quite open about cutting benefits to the most vulnerable people in our country .

dragon - Member
Increase in personal allowance, with no increases on fuel etc. Means those on lower incomes should be better off. Exactly the type of policy that Labour would traditionally support.

I have Canadian citizenship,
What left wing utopia do you expect to find there, as it has lower rates of tax than the UK.

They're going in the right direction, IMO...

2. Raise Taxes on the Wealthy
The Liberals also promised a tax hike for Canada’s top 1% to pay for a tax cut for the country’s middle class. It means that anyone who earns over $200,000 would see a tax hike of around 4%, while those earning between $44,701 and $89,401 would see a cut of around 1.5%, according to the Globe and Mail.

The tax hike on the rich stems partially from Trudeau’s criticism of the Conservatives’ taxation policy. Over the course of the elections, he frequently accused Harper’s government of favoring tax cuts for the rich and big corporations over regular Canadians.

There is no cover up , they are quite open about cutting benefits to the most vulnerable people in our country .

But I think that need to be backed up with more facts rather than the most commonly spoken statement.

My personal angle is that I simply refuse to accept that Cameron et al gather in the cabinet, sat on comfy chairs made from piles of cash and resting their weary feet on the backs of hunched immigrants - rubbing their hands in glee at their latest concocted plans to make their rich friends richer purely at the expense of the underpriveledged and disabled.
That is pretty much the picture that is painted on a daily basis. How true can it really be? Are the Tories truly 'evil', with nothing but an evil agenda?

Politics falls into caricaturisation far too easily.

AFAIK the budget was designed partly to help small businesses grow.

The kinds of businesses who will give employment to the unemployed and needy.

Which is a far more satisfactory long-term strategy than just giving people money to sit around getting depressed all day.

I've seen this doing the rounds

[img] [/img]

Can someone explain exactly WHY top rate taxpayers (me included) need an extra £43/mo

Because lots of people on marginal rates just above the cutoff have diverted money into their pensions so that they don't have to pay higher rate tax on it, as they were widely advised to do:

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2119279/Tricks-avoid-slipping-40-higher-rate-tax-bracket--50k-child-benefit-trap.html

the government would rather have them keeping that money out of their pensions and in income tax (at 20%) and spending it in the economy now rather than put aside untaxed into pensions in the future.

People are more likely to just use the money as income when its in the lower rate tax bracket.

re poster, puh-leez..
As above, we need to think longer term as a society.

RE ninfan - sounds logical - is it a cover-up/hoax? should I be really angry?

AFAIK the budget was designed partly to help small businesses grow.

There were tax cuts for small businesses yes.

The kinds of businesses who will give employment to the unemployed and needy.

The disabled who can't wash themselves or use the toilet without help generally don't do very well in the employment stakes, hence tend to be dependent on benefits. Those who do get jobs tend to be at the lowest end of the wage spectrum ie below living costs and need extra help to make end meet (being disabled adds a lot of cost to day to day living).

The disabled who can't wash themselves or use the toilet

So we are in agreement, it's the most physically disabled that have seen the cuts - not the less?

Or is it actually vice-versa, based on a score-rating?

Because lots of people on marginal rates just above the cutoff have diverted money into their pensions so that they don't have to pay higher rate tax on it, as they were widely advised to do:

An extra £43/month won't make any difference to that. The main reason pension savings has skyrocked recently is fear that higher rate relief will be axed (as recommended in a recent treasury report). It was only ruled out last week from this budget so as not to cause any major upset prior to the Brexit election. It may well still be cut. I've been saving at the maximum rate into my pension the last 2 years and will do so next year, just in case it is cut.

If any high rate taxpayers truly agree with the OP, they'll be paying their £43/mo to a charity next year.

Sorry our family wont be. Our family has seen year after year of tax increases, and we are one of these apparently wealthy middle class families.

Of course all of you non 40% pay earners who will be benefiting from a higher basic threshold of £11k will be passing that on to charity too right?

That poster falls right into the Tory hands essentially it says 'public sector wants ever more of your money'. And it make it look like the Labour have given up on the private sector, which is odd really as back in time the working man in a factory, workshop, ship yard etc. was their core support.

is it a cover-up/hoax?

nudge behaviour to put people off using a tax loophole and increase total tax receipts?

should I be really angry?

If you think that [b]tax avoidance[/b] is a bad thing, and that the [b]ten percent[/b] (for it is they) should not be putting money into pensions just to avoid paying income tax, then probably not

Super ISA and the proposed savings scheme for low earners seem like good changes for all to me

[url= http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/low-paid-workers-to-get-speedboat-tax-relief-20160315107141 ]A Summary of the savings scheme for low earners, for the more terminally middle class[/url]

😉

[quote=ninfan spake unto the masses, saying]Can someone explain exactly WHY top rate taxpayers (me included) need an extra £43/mo
Because lots of people on marginal rates just above the cutoff have diverted money into their pensions so that they don't have to pay higher rate tax on it, as they were widely advised to do:
> http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2119279/Tricks-avoid-slipping-40-higher-rate-tax-bracket--50k-child-benefit-trap.html
the government would rather have them keeping that money out of their pensions and in income tax (at 20%) and spending it in the economy now rather than put aside untaxed into pensions in the future.
People are more likely to just use the money as income when its in the lower rate tax bracket.

Surely you'll get the same thing happening, but at a different threshold?

Crony capitalism is ruining the world. Not sure what the answer is really. Nasty, selfish, uneducated people seem to be the norm in all sectors of society now.

If any high rate taxpayers truly agree with the OP, they'll be paying their £43/mo to a charity next year.

I'd love to but Nicola has other plans it seems.......

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35830150 ]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35830150[/url]

It's not a truly sad day; a truly sad day is when somebody dies or there's a huge disaster.

As it happens I'm currently in the middle of receiving first-hand experience of the NHS and Social Services provided by this self-serving evil capitalist scum Tory government that some forum members are so fond of criticising in their determination to prove their right-on credentials.

We have my elderly MIL staying while she receives chemotherapy. She is generally quite unwell even without the cancer. When she first arrived at our house we (as fit and well people) were completely ignorant of what was available ABSOLUTELY FREE OF CHARGE from the NHS and Social Services. Admittedly it has taken a lot of effort and learning and we have been helped by the wonderful district nurses who have explained a lot and helped us make the right contacts. Caring for her is almost a full-time job for Mrs Gti, what with all the phone calls and trips to hospital, doctor visits, carers, form-filling etc. but my wife is resourceful, determined and articulate so we have been able to get help with everything including all the nursing and care and incontinence products and now almost all the cost of the care home where my MIL will go once the chemo is finished. Suffice to say we are massively impressed by the care that we've received and the dedication of the social and medical professionals we've encountered. AFAIK my MIL is also contented with her state pension and other services she's received during her life.

I can see how a less able person with less determination could easily fall out of the system or fail to get all the help they need. That's a shame and it's made more shameful by the tiny section of society who are extremely well-informed about their rights and manage to live their lives quite comfortably by exploiting the system to the full. I could cite another relative who fits this description perfectly.

So to anybody who bleats about the injustice of the UK's system I would say: get off your backside and go and live in, for example, India or Nigeria where a huge percentage of the world's population lives, see how thay are forced to manage than come back here and tell me you live in an unjust society.

Oh and by the way I also have to confess that my BIL is a hospital GM at the other end of the country and the most decent, caring, conscientious, hard-working bloke you could ever want to meet. I see the stress he suffers in his efforts to deliver good care in the face of cuts and I see the respect he is accorded by his colleagues from the cleaners to the consultants. So yes, I've a strong opinion on this, which is why miserable, whining, entitled folk who do nothing but carp and criticise, get right up my nose.

Rant over. Carry on.

So to anybody who bleats about the injustice of the UK's system I would say: get off your backside and go and live in, for example, India or Nigeria where a huge percentage of the world's population lives, see how thay are forced to manage than come back here and tell me you live in an unjust society.

So your argument in favour of the Tories is that Britain is still not as bad as some places.

Nothing like setting your sights high, eh?

Just to expand - we know things are overall good, but we want them to STAY that way not be dismantled by Tories.

So by favouring small to medium enterprises, for example, the Tories are dismantling the welfare system, in your book?

Did it ever occur to you that it's better to give people the opportunity to work and gain self-respect rather than receive benefits all their lives?

So to anybody who bleats about the injustice of the UK's system I would say: get off your backside and go and live in, for example, India or Nigeria where a huge percentage of the world's population lives, see how thay are forced to manage than come back here and tell me you live in an unjust society.

Dropping to the lowest common denominator is just daft, although the Tories do seem very keen on the idea for anyone who is not a millionaire.

I don't think today is a "particularly" sad day. Just one of many. The problem I think is that no-one is prepared to be radical and our governments just regularly nibble at the edges.

Europe is our only protection from these self serving buffoons.

Did it ever occur to you that it's better to give people the opportunity to work and gain self-respect rather than receive benefits all their lives?

How does creating a society where the most disadvantaged can't afford to survive give them self respect?

What next, kick a homeless person to help motivate them?

The 'support for small businesses' comes mainly in the form of lower (or no) business rates. A previous change the government made was to allocate business rates to local authorities. So this 'support' takes money directly from the organisations respoinsible for social care. Nice one Gideon!

So to anybody who bleats about the injustice of the UK's system I would say: get off your backside and go and live in, for example, India or Nigeria where a huge percentage of the world's population lives, see how thay are forced to manage than come back here and tell me you live in an unjust society.

We have an NHS that decides what conditions it will and won't treat. Can someone please explain why I should continue paying my taxes when not only will the NHS not pay for my lifelong meds (for which I have an exemption card) but my (now ex) NHS Joint Head of Endocrinology consultant told me that he's not interested in my debilitating symptoms.

I have no other option but to pay for private consultations, blood tests and my lifelong meds that I buy online from outside the UK thus incurring a risk to my health.

In this so-called civilised society we have patients joining health forums seeking advice to manage their condition(s) as well as requesting contact details of our 'drug dealers'.

As a matter of routine ADs are routinely proferred, as are statins as are PPIs etc etc. Why should this be? Rolls eyes.

In the meantime it looks as though I've developed another health condition that I'll again need to self fund.

The NHS pi$$es money up the wall right, left and centre through bribery, corruption and mismanagement with the poor taxpayer expected to fund it all. Where's the justice in that?

As it happens I'm currently in the middle of receiving first-hand experience of the NHS and Social Services provided by this self-serving evil capitalist scum Tory government that some forum members are so fond of criticising in their determination to prove their right-on credentials.

Well, lucky - in a sense - that her health problems happen now (sorry that they happen at all, of course). In a few years Jeremy *unt and co will have concluded their plan to destroy the NHS so she would be stuck with a sizeable bill.

This is not about the NHS.

The Tories are taking benefits away from disabled people .

Benefits that help them live a better life whilst enduring hardships we can only imagine .

All so they can give more money to people they think will vote for them .

peteimpreza - the cuts are based on a sliding scale are they not?

My impression is that they are not cutting any benefits for those that genuinely struggle with basic needs (like those mentioned eariler), but those that are able to look after themselves pretty much in full capacity will recieve less.
Thus, I suppose, there may also be an intention is to root out fraudulant claimants.
Still, I would agree that it seems strange fo them to continue to strip welfare when in the face of the public it appears so damaging.

All so they can give more money to people they think will vote for them

"Did it ever occur to you that it's better to give people the opportunity to work and gain self-respect rather than receive benefits all their lives? "

You are trolling ?

Do you have any idea how disabled some of these people are ?

FFS man have some compassion .

So by favouring small to medium enterprises, for example, the Tories are dismantling the welfare system, in your book

No, they are dismantling the welfare system by cutting disability benefit. Obvious, no?

Do you really think cutting taxes for higher rate payers will help the poorest? Do you think stimulating entrepreneurial activity will help the long term benefit claimants?

Rather naive, I think.

The single mum who's never worked, and the young man with no qualifications and mental health issues aren't waiting for some cool new startup job to come along and lure them from their daytime TV...

We have an NHS that decides what conditions it [s]will[/s] can afford and [s]won't[/s] can't afford to treat.

I dont understand how, with the deficit still rising and the debt going through the roof the government thinks it has any money to give away to anyone in the form of tax cuts and breaks.

Until we at least get to a budget surplus rather than deficit then the government doesnt have a single penny to fund give aways to anyone.

We have an NHS that decides what conditions it will can afford and won't can't afford to treat.

FTFY

Er, nope.

It can afford to give me ADs, statins, PPIs etc etc. Because of course people in high places are having their greasy palms crossed with silver by Big Pharma.

the young man with no qualifications and mental health issues aren't waiting for some cool new startup job to come along and lure them from their daytime TV...

Not according to the news report I watched last night, as said young man coninued to thrive with his new funded mobile coffee cart. He was completely made up.
Granted, we only need so much coffee. But still, was good to see.

Pay more tax then. We'll be able to afford more spending on benefits.

You'll feel better pay 60% tax and watching the less advantaged being taken care off.

As per usual on STW there's views from one end of the spectrum to the other.
I'm quite pleased with this budget, as I'm fortunate to fit into that "middle" sector. The £43/month increase seems a bit of a myth though as the BBC reckoner tells me that whilst I gain on tax, I lose on NI so overall it's £13/month. All welcome though as I haven't received a pay rise for 3 years.
I have a different view to most in that I feel that we should all be treated the same tax wise in the percentage that we pay, not very popular I know, but I don't understand why anyone should have to pay a higher rate of tax if they are fortunate to earn more as they pay more in anyway.
I'm not familiar enough with the disability points to make a comment I'm afraid.

I dont understand how, with the deficit still rising and the debt going through the roof the government thinks it has any money to give away to anyone in the form of tax cuts and breaks.

Give people more money in their pocket and they'll spend more in businesses which pay more tax which boosts the economy etc etc. [/i]

Sadly, (as the situation in Japan evidenced) it doesn't always work like that.

Pay more tax then.

If we want a health service, care for the disabled, care for us when we are old, roads without potholes, decent public transport, shiny new submarines etc etc that is exactly what we will have to do. And it's about time the politicians were brave enough to say so.

So far it seems quite telling that most arguments are based on the disability cuts, but with seemingly little to back up exactly what is being cut.

Pay more tax then.

I'm quite pleased with this budget, as I'm fortunate to fit into that "middle" sector.

So do I. I'm not pleased with the budget.