麻豆社

"The survey suggests they're prepared to see the government make the "tough choices" being discussed. Young voters favour spending cuts over tax rises by a large margin.

62% say there is a need to reduce spending - though most want the cuts to be made slowly to give the economy as much time to recover as possible."

Like leeches/vampires?

This is predicable from this demographic because the young have in fact contributed the least (taxes) to investment in the state over the many decades it was built up since WWII. What they never see is why that was done, as they're not the beneficiary until much later in their lives, and just live for today when young. What we're seeing now is venal asset stripping of the public sector to pay for bank bail-outs which had in turn over-loaned to the private sector, where private debt largely meant corporate debt not home owner mortgages (14 million homes averaging 拢200,000 each is how much?). Private debt is business loans!
Most of the public services were privatised and much that was left was going to PFI - guess how they fund it?

Look what's being stealthily done to suck assets out of the state. Look into who the great property tycoons have been and what the debt mountain mainly was. It's been done before in history, but we never learn, especially those who collude.

The statistics are irrelevant. Nobody wants an activity they support to be cut. Most people think that it is only "fair" to cut services they don't use. So forget the statistics and facile polls such as you quote and get down to the only way to manage the New Labour Dividend: setting priorities. The NHS and overseas development may well be given high priorities, but they should not be exempt. Please 麻豆社, next time your pollsters are out, get them to force people to make the hard choices by prioritising what has to be done.

As for the rate of cutting, this is a technical issue on which the uninformed opinion of the man in the street is irrelevant. The narrative that is presented to our electorate by the media is mostly that it is not really that serious. How else would the absurd position of Ed Balls gain any traction? If we cut too fast (and no one knows how fast that is until it happens), the economy will suffer - though it may only suffer briefly. Cut too slowly and our creditors become impatient and demand higher interest rates for their loans, or worse, refuse to lend to us at all. If that happens, we shall be ***forced*** to cut MUCH harder and faster, and will have the worst of both worlds. In short, there is far more danger with cutting too slowly than too fast.

The "progressive" agenda that the MSM and 麻豆社 have been peddling is predicated on continuously increasing affluence. That has hit the buffers, possibly for a very long time: what with peak oil; unsustainable demographics and agriculture; depletion of material resources and global warming. The next century will see "progressivism" as a puerile folly of the deluded intelligentsia, and will consist of retrenchment, conflict, famine, and loss of habitat. Liberals: enjoy a last look at your dreams before you wake up to harsh reality.

Margaret Thatcher made a speech saying " There is no such thing as "society", only individuals".
David Cameron now urges us to join "The Big Society" I would request that a 麻豆社 journalist ask the question of David Cameron "Did Margaret Thatcher get it wrong? or has David Cameron got it wrong"

So now the government is separating the age groups to obtain the answer they want in their quest to obtain money from the Brit tax payer for their beliefs.
Doesn't matter what the majority of voters want, as long as the government is satisfied with the resulting answer ?
How about asking again this time through the whole spectrum of public spending and including the whole population in the vote, where the cuts should be made !
Just after the election the government asked Quote : "Where do you think the cuts should be made" Unquote.
The reply was in overseas spending and immigration. The government didn't like that answer so they stated that both will be protected from cuts. Since then the overseas spending and immigration costs have NOT been mentioned.
This is why the government are targetting the 18-24 age group because they are politically naive.
If they targeted the over 55's in the vote, the answer would definately be overseas spending and immigration.
However the governemnt doesn't want this answer so it has re-phrased to target the 18-24 year olds.
Is the sum of 拢800billion really going abroad to 90 different countries as stated, or is the money being used to protect the MP's and their supporters ?
Makes one think doesn't it as the general public has no way of checking this ?

I'll try again nothing else I have written so far seems to have gotton publish - I could appear my views are at odds with what the editorial team want said and published.

We have already decided we cannot afford to be the worlds POLICEMAN why then do these misguided MPs and namely Nick Clegg believe we shoud be the worlds BENEFIT office and guarantee the aid budget. Does no one really understand that to give you have to be wealthy, if we dircet our limited resource at this point in time to aid we willn ever generate the internal capability to maintain a longer and more robust level of aid in the future - its like a farmer who decides to eat all his seeds instead of planting it to get a harvest, the later will feed him year after year.

The examples of the benefit system being abused is rife. I know of family and friends and friends of friends abusing the system and they say -"well if I don鈥檛 take it some one else will' .
Examples (first hand knowledge)
Single mother driving top of range BMW divorced from millionaire - she lives in exclusive apartment children go to private school and she gets 拢500 per month for being single and unemployed, her children each receive 拢30 per week EMA which she says is good for pocket money.
Widow been claiming disability last 30 years, bathroom conversion on state, can be seen wheel barrowing soil for her beloved garden in summer then puts neck brace on for visits to benefits office.
Brother receives disability and mobility car for damaged wrist 15 years ago doesn鈥檛 stop him working on the building sites and travelling the world.
I have two daughters one in private school one in Grammar, the one in private school has a friend in the same class who happens to have a sister in the same class at my other daughters school - the issue is its 拢12k per annum to attend my daughters private school yet the girl in the grammar with my other daughter receives 拢30 per week EMA for children in house holds earning less the 拢30k per annum and she鈥檚 not alone.
These are not isolated incidences I am sure everyone knows at least one person exploiting the system.
Take my sister in law who gets a mobility car and gives it to her boyfriend and son for taxi services and she gets 拢50 cash a week for the favour.
Then take the professional couple earning more then 拢100k who won鈥檛 get married because it will impact on their benefits and nursery places for their two children.
Then take my sister who got divorced purely to improve her benefits but still lives as man and wife with her husband.
Then there鈥檚 the scam in Birmingham of people getting bathroom conversions and refurbishments when they have a disabled child, nothing wrong with that other then my friend fits the bathrooms for the council and the same child keeps reappearing in nearly every other home as the child its being done for 鈥� the boy and my friend are there now on first name terms but he cannot raise it again as it is politically sensitive.
Let the gravy train roll !!!!

Remember the fable of Hansel and Gretel?



Perhaps not if you're young (maybe it's been rendered politically incorrect in the interests of Child Protection?) As an exercise, try to construe all the equalities guff over the years as right-wing Libertarian sweeties designed to undermine the status quo (used to me non minority group males). Work out who the groups are (beginning with women) by a process of elimination and try to see them all as narcissistic infantile-disordered sock troops (Lenin's term for Social Democrats) which have just been abused to create ever more consumers for ever more unregulated corporates in their voracious appetite for growth/profit.



6. At 4:11pm on 11 Oct 2010, Crusader wrote:

"Let the gravy train roll !!!!"

You're rightly pointing to benefit fraud which is a criminal act, but the problem is that once one goes down the route of endorsing asset-stripping of the Public Sector for Private Sector profit (which is what I suggest this is really all about), using criminal abuse of Public Services or incompetence (dysfunctional this or that agency, wastage here and there) to justify it, one has given up rational discussion altogether. If anyone wanted to erode Public Services all they had to do was staff them with incompetent people, by passing equalities legislation which ensured that many in these jobs had no choice but to give benefits to what seemed to be the undeserving. This, I suggest, has been engineered in many ways across the Public Sector for a very long time - the objective always being privatisation in the end, i.e. asset stripping the state.

(see link above in post 1)

@6 Crusader

If the examples you have cited are accurate do you not have a civic responsibility to report these abuses to the appropriate authorities?

8. At 7:35pm on 11 Oct 2010, EBAHGUM
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You really are naive aren't you EBAHGUM ?
What do you think happened with the MP's expenses?
Did anyone listen, get them to court, get them jailed ? Of course not they have used the system and overturned the fraud to sound like bonuses.
As much as you and people like you hate the right wing parties - these are now the only avenues left in which to turn to. No one else has listened. Although I loath the majority on beliefs regarding the BNP I feel totally betrayed by LibLab, Cons and Lib Dems. What else is left ? Can you help me ?

@9 joshua goldblum

Dear joshua,

I'm not being naive, I just don't think two wrongs make a right.

The mis-use of public funds is simply wrong. Nothing more complicated than that.

I was under the impression that a number of MPs and members of the Lords were being prosecuted for mis-use of the expenses system. Quite rightly too. I appreciate, of course, that this only addresses the tip of an iceberg but you can console yourself with the fact that it is a step in the right direction.

Not sure what "you and people like you hate the right wing parties" is supposed to mean.

The idea of me being labelled a lefty would certainly amuse many of my close friends. Political ambivalence is my watchword.

I find the word hate to be one that I particularly abhor. I can't think of anyone that I could genuinely say I hate. Hate is a word that to me conjures up a complete lack of humanity. Everyone has a right to an opinion irrespective of how repellant I might find it.

Can I help you? Well, I suspect not. I can understand and sympathise at your frustration with the mainstream of current politics but I wouldn't recommend a lurch to the far right. Whither lies a society with a very unpleasant taste.

Regards.

Do you know what your government are REALLY spending your money on? If the government ditched their ill thought out plan to build a high speed rail link from London to Birmingham and beyond they would save 拢34 BILLION of tax payers money which could be far better spent on health and education. HS2 ltd (government appointed construction firm) produced a business case which showed very minimal economic benefits for a high speed rail link. But the government decided to adopt it anyway! Alternative expert analysis has proven this business case to be entirely flawed. Despite sending this to Phil Hammond he refuses to engage in dialogue, instead wanting to wait until the consultation in the spring by which stage even more money will have been spent on this preposterous scheme.
This project will destroy the chilterns and many villages and towns and businesses all the way up to manchester/leeds if it goes ahead not to mention 59 protected species of animal. Hammond has just committed another 拢800 million to look at the route option beyond birmingham and what for - ? to save 25 minutes off of a journey to Birmingham. Rail package 2 which HS2 also looked at, does not destroy the environment and for about only 拢2 billion would free up capacity on main line services by electrolysing existing lines, freeing up first class etc. Much cheaper than 拢34 billion. Why on earth are they doing this ? To look good against european counterparts perhaps? Europes got one so we must have it. Vote against this horrendous commitment of your taxpayer money - If we get 100,000 votes on the petition they will have to debate this in parliament otherwise it will just get pushed through. www.gopetition.com/petitions/stophs2
See also HS2 Action Alliance and Stop HS2 websites for the full facts of what is really happening. Not enough people are aware of this across the country. 麻豆社 please write about this!!

11. At 00:04am on 13 Oct 2010, jane_nero
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is called Progress, investing and advancement of our domestic travel.
I would rather our tax money went on projects like these when we WILL see some improvement within our country.
Consistently giving our tax money away under the ruse of "foreign Aid" is just a cover for blind support of the corrupt govs abroad, war lords and the terrorist breeding talliban.
Fighting wars which have nothing to do with us while we should be re-enforcing our own borders to protect our citizens and stop illegals from enterring our country. Ok many are now home grown you may argue - so strip them of citizenship and send them back to where their ancestors originated from if they don't appreciate the freedom they have in the UK. Failing that bring back corporal and capital punishemnt which worked that is why it was abolished instead now they get ASBO's - what a joke.

@CeedeeKay She didn't make this claim in a speech. What you are misrepresenting or misquoting is a line from an interview with a magazine called Women's Own and the entire transcript is available at the Thatcher Foundation web-site. Give it a read, you might learn something.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

10. At 8:13pm on 12 Oct 2010, EBAHGUM wrote:
I was under the impression that a number of MPs and members of the Lords were being prosecuted for mis-use of the expenses system
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It's not even got to court yet and won't. 3 from the commons and 3 from the lords.
Do you honestly believe they will get 10+ years jail for fraudulently obtaining money from HMRC ?
If you do you are more naive than anyone could imagine.
Its like sending Daz to jail for racial aggravated assault IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

Did anyone see the statement in the gov position regarding overseas aid this morning ?
They have at least admitted now that the true cost of their overseas aid, only aid mind you not costs, will cost every family 拢2000 this coming year to a total of 拢60 billion. At least they are 拢59,983,000,000 increase in their claim of 拢7.3 million.
Even some coalition MP鈥檚 are now questioning the amount of money we spend overseas each year, and are asking for figures on ALL overseas expenditure.
Quote: - 鈥淥verseas aid is one of the two areas, in addition to health, which is being ring-fenced from future cuts - a decision that has been questioned by some within the party鈥� Unquote.
This has been brought about by the public poll when the coalition first took their seats, which wanted without exception, overseas aid and immigration to be stopped. While I agree with health being protected I see no reason why Overseas Aid and Immigration should not be stopped. Again the gov is trying to evade the issue with not mentioning Immigration in their quote above.
Mind you it was only on Sky, the Gov controlled 麻豆社 could not state this, as their licence money would be affected.
If the truth was told the country will erupt.

Margaret Thatcher made a speech saying " There is no such thing as "society", only individuals".
David Cameron now urges us to join [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]The Big Society" I would request that a 麻豆社 journalist ask the question of David Cameron "Did Margaret Thatcher get it wrong? or has David Cameron got it wrong"

I have taken trifectaCJH advice and read the full transcript of the Margaret Thatcher interview (transcribed by No 10 at the time!!!) concerning the Margaret Thatcher claim "That there is no such thing as society, only individuals" Sorry but even trying to read between the lines I only see it meant as it was said. I ask again How can we join David Camerons "BIG SOCIETY" if there is no such thing. Maybe Margaret Thatcher did not mean what she said!!! God forbid!!!!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Rod, I have to say I am quite pleasantly surprised with the sensibilities of the 18-24 demographic. The statistics you quote above certainly convey a sense of optimism that that segment of the voting public will find themselves neither jobless in the near future nor the recipients of state housing benefits.

Before the election this year I wrote on voter apathy in the UK. I would be curious to know if you have any data on voter turnout with respect to the 18-24 year olds? The sample that was surveyed above appear to be well-versed in current affairs which can only be a good thing for the UK going forward!

Anna

At least you have taken time to read it ceedeekay. The way that I read it was that she was saying that we have to take responsibility for our own actions first and only then if we need more help do we turn to "society". There are undoubtedly many people who need help and who need a wider society but there are also many who have no idea of personal responsibility and who could do so much more for themselves leaving the available resources for those who need it. If we can get away from the idea that benefit thieves or tax avoiders or even bankers(for example) are stealing from the state and that they are actually stealing from society then we might begin to get to the "Big Society".

I have just read a news article that US is spending USD 200 million per day for his visit to India. We are adviced in our work environment to make maximum use of video conferencing facility where ever possible to encourage spending cuts. I was just wondering if politicians across the world start using video conferencing facilities and avoid travelling, this will not only help in saving billions of dollars of tax payers' money, also, reduces security risks.

With the age group mentioned I would really like to see the figures on the political parties that these "kids" hold alliance to.

Obviously they don't realise what taxes are collected for, where the money goes, who it is spent on and what prpoaganda is repeatedly forced on them thru the media.

Surely Education, Welfare, Roads, NHS, domestic spending as a whole should benefit from OUR own taxes.

Even the gov with the face of Mr Nuttall stated 鈥淚 think it is obscene that our MPs think that it is right to increase money going out of the country at a time when our own people are being put out of work through cuts.
It just goes to show how out of touch they are with the man in the street who is struggling to make ends meet, and yet they see nothing wrong with sending taxpayer's money far and wide across the globe. Overseas spending is a luxury we cannot ill afford at the moment.鈥漊nquote

However look at the recent comments from the overseas recipients of British taxpayers money : -
First the Taliban thank the UK for our donations to them.
Then the 麻豆社 stating most of the aid we regretably send to Africa ends up with the War Lords Must have had some basis for stating this as the Propaganda mouth of the Governemnt doesn't state this lightly.
Reverberations of Doctor Kelly hear I think. Who is the next victim of MI5 ?
If the statement wasn't withdrawn immediately !! Then, what would the consequences be for the 麻豆社 from a gov who employs them for their propaganda ?
My My what a sick country this has become, surely the sickest country in the EU now, as no other country puts foreigners before it's own citizens.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I read about the widespread benefit fraud and wish to comment on a case that I have been told of within my own community. Senario:- Daughter works for a bank (part time) for several years. As a bank employee obtains a low interest mortgage to buy a house for Mother and Father Inlaw. Inlaws qualify for housing benefit. Housing benefit paid (IN CASH) to daughter in law to cover the mortgage.
After 5 years the daughter thinks this is great after the inlaws pass on I will own a freehold paid for by the state so repeats the process for her own mother Now 2 freeholds for her personal "Pension Pot" in years to come. I am told that the preferential interest rate for her mortgage is 2% above base.The second of these mortgages was taken out this year when I thought mortgages were difficult to obtain due to the financial state of the banks. These two mortgages are in addition to the mortgage on her family home. If a part time bank employee is allowed this type of mortgage to exploit the housing benefit system What is the senior management allowing themselves
Have I got it wrong? Is this allowable under the benefit rules or is it fraud? Any comments?

It is true that young voters don't like any cut in the financial support
www.icarelive.com

raising tuition fees may be a false economy. it was recently reported that gaduates recieve 拢100,000 in extra wages. if this is correct, they may be worst off by going to university. the debt will be 拢40,000, increased interest is charged on top of this over possibly 30 years. there will be on average higher taxes. and the loss of 3 years pay that they would have had instead of going to university. on the over side, if they didn't go to university the government would lose the extra taxes. but more importantly, there will be less graduate jobs and therefore many companies would be forced to leave the country with all the economic consequences this entails. funding university education more than pays for itself by attracting large corporations into the country. the loss of which is considerably larger than any savings in cutting university funding.

A British Business Rep. was on CNBC USA cable Business Channel a few weeks ago .. saying basically:

That British Businessmen were planning to take advantage of the Labor Cost Differential ..to Outsource their work to Offshore Labor aka Asia ..the very scheme that has destroyed our American Economy via the Centerpiece of NAFTA:

Off Shoring Mfg. \ Off Shoring Banking \ Out Sourcing Jobs ..

Oddly, within British Economic History, that would have brought
one the Gallows not that long ago:

Economic Stability & Security concerns.

If a British Subject spent above a given number abroad
in Post WW-II Britain, you'd be Arrested & Imprisoned.

Will your Gov't require that Sales Tax be paid on your Corporations locating overseas & selling products not made by British Subjects at Home?

Our Conservatives did not - thus for the 42,000 Factories lost since 2001, the millions now unemployed, 1 in 7 Americans now in Poverty, 4 of 5 Job Applicants find no work .. thanks to Our Patriots:

America did not see a Dime in Sales Tax Revenues .. all Profits went to Off Shore Banking.

'The Wealth of Any Nation is it's Manufacturing for Export'
Anyone saying otherwise beds with Fools & Liars. ~b.tourville

So what you're seeing is Your Conservative Government getting ready to have massive amounts of Unemployed British Workers fall upon them for Food_Housing_Medical.. long term.

They're going to Invest Heavily in British Corps. that Off shore &
make the Tidy Sum as the Stock Price soars.. a scheme.

In typical Conservative Fashion - they discounted having an Educated Workforce at Home: Not Needed.


That is what This Rioting is About, Gentlemen.