The Nasty party run a vile, nasty advertising campaign trying to divide the public

[ttosca]

The Conservatives brand the unemployed as 'shirkers'

The Conservative Party has adopted an aggressive set of campaign advertisements targeted at 60 constituencies contrasting "hard working families" and "people who don't work". This divisive advertising represents once again their attempt to label the unemployed as lazy 'benefit scroungers'. It also demonstrates how little they understand unemployment and poverty. The notion that there are 'hard working families' and 'people who don't work' assumes these groups exist as separate social groups. One result of recession is that hard working families are affected. Company failures, factory closures and lay-offs don't just impact on 'scroungers'. This is why the results of austerity are so devastating. It is indiscriminate in its effect. It is also why austerity doesn't work. It drives families, hard working families into poverty.

Unemployment is a key driver of poverty. Two-thirds of working age adults in families where one or more of the adults are unemployed are poor. Unemployment, particularly long term unemployment, grinds away devastatingly on families creating poor housing, poor diet and ill-health. It leads to a cycle of debt and targets for loan sharks. It leads to homelessness, eviction, repossession. It destroys lives. It leads to a loss of dignity and well being. This is why it is unethical of the government to target those most affected by austerity, brand them as work-shy scroungers and attempt to turn those better off against them. Mr Cameron once said 'we are all in this together'. Now the unemployed and those receiving benefits have become the government's scapegoats for the failure of their economic policies.

In the aftermath of the riots of August 2011, the Prime Minister said "this is a country of good people". Now it seems he is saying this is a country of 'good' and 'bad' people; the haves are 'good'; the have nots are 'bad'; 'strivers' and 'shirkers'. It is a disgraceful turnaround and he knows this is not true. It is cynical politics at its worst.

songoflife1.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/the-conservatives-brand-unemployed-as.html

[MrsChristmasVamos]

I would hope that the Great British Public will not be mislead by such utter bollocks.

I have faith that the majority of the public are well aware that the Nasty Parties views are not necessarily the correct ones.

I think they would perhaps do well to tread very carefully. Come 2015, most of them will join the ranks of the 'shirkers' too.

[ttosca]

Seriously - these psychopaths need to be kicked out of office NOW.

[KellyMarieTunstall]

Totally agree.

I hate the newest attempt to divide the general public

{... middle class families are currently being charged more for every day food in supermarkets to subsidise cheap alcohol deals for binge drinkers.
Mr Cameron said the minimum pricing plans would stop supermarkets selling ?discount tins of high-strength lager? for between 25p and 30p each. He said: ?What it is, is about people pre-loading on very, very cheap, heavily discounted drink from some supermarkets...?}

[510]

How are those delusions doing tonight? Have we found the big pot of imaginary m

[MrsChristmasVamos]

That won't happen, sadly.

I often wonder what it's going to take for us all to stand up and say enough.

I think the best we can hope for is that come 2015 'we' will ensure that they are kicked out by the biggest majority ever seen.

[510]

How are those delusions doing tonight? Have we found the big pot of imaginary money that the Left can use to buy its way into power. Again. Leaving the country broke. Again.

[ttosca]

How are those delusions doing tonight? Have we found the big pot of imaginary money that the Left can use to buy its way into power. Again. Leaving the country broke. Again.

You're right. We can't afford to keep paying for economic crises and recessions caused by psychopathic greedy / gambling / money laundering / drug dealing bankers.

We have to act now so it never happens again. This means prosecuting the bankers who got us in to this mess - including the 'Too big to Jail' bankers HSBC:

www.huffingtonpost.com/brad-miller/too-big-to-jail-we-should_b_2311444.html

[ttosca]

^
I often wonder what it's going to take for us all to stand up and say enough. ^

I don't know, but I'm angry - really fucking angry, and I know a lot of other people are too.

I wouldn't be surprised if their are riots in 2013.

[MrsChristmasVamos]

See, I don't see it. I know people are angry, I'm one of them, but I think people are fighting so hard to keep their heads above water, that 'doing something' becomes a kind of dream.

I feel like 'we' know we are powerless to kick them out, so bide our time till the next GE.

It always amazes and baffles me that people can perform at their jobs so badly, when at 'shirker' level you would have been kicked into touch long before now.

[Meglet]

That ad did make me laugh. I work, but I look and feel a lot more like the bloke slumped on his sofa.

mrschristmasvamos I agree, I have managed to write some letters and try and kick up a stink but the Condems are doing too many nasty things, too quickly to be able to fight them. I'm trying to deal with my day to day stuff, I don't have much time and energy left over to compose ruthless letters.

[LaVolcan]

Sigh - just the sort of stuff my MIL would love.

[domesticgodless]

ttosca I reckon the riots and social unrest are coming in April 2013 when the benefit cap/ bedroom tax shit hits the fan and thousands of people end up having to leave their overpriced homes and tramp across the country trying to find suitable affordable accommodation that doesn't exist (probably being sanctioned as they go for missing their workfare appointments).

A lot of the ConDems' early victims (the sick and disabled) may quietly fade away and indeed die. But the coalition are getting nastier and more arrogant as they go along, and that will eventually be their undoing, as it was Thatcher's in the end. They despise most of the population of Britain, since they are not rich enough to be important. It really is as simple as that.

I actually also think that they are stupid, complacent and incompetent enough to believe that destabilising the lowest socioeconomic echelons of a society will not cause a massive rise in mental and physical illness, slum housing, crime and juvenile crime (including rioting no doubt), care admissions for children, and general social misery which will start to affect more and more of the 'middle' class as income is eroded by unemployment, inflation and artificially high house prices. And all this as the budgets for health, mental health and social work are cut to the bone. A disaster, and not just for the poor.

Around 2015/16 I am predicting that we will start to see the first tent cities full of homeless ex professionals living alongside those kicked off their benefits. These are already common in America.

[MrsChristmasVamos]

It's a shame, Meglet because I really think if the GBP did make their feelings known, most of them would scuttle off with their tails between their legs, never to be seen again. Easy to do when you live off Mummy and Daddy's money.

I do keep thinking that something's got to give, but I really do think that it's so hard for so many right now, like you say, they are doing too much, too quickly.

[Heroine]

I wonder who costs the country more, unemployed on JSA, circa £5k a year, or 'hard working families' on government subsidised wages (working tax credits) - average claim circa £10k a year...

[LaVolcan]

and that will eventually be their undoing, as it was Thatcher's in the end.
I sincerely hope so, and the sooner the better.

and general social misery which will start to affect more and more of the 'middle' class as income is eroded by unemployment, inflation and artificially high house prices.

It's that which will lose them the votes, so they might begin to listen then.

[domesticgodless]

Not to worry Heroine, the ConDems will make sure no one gets anything in the end and the hardworking families can all work harder for less money. Like they do in the competitive economies like China, which Gideon smacks his lips over. That's what 'striving' means: slaving.

[domesticgodless]

indeed LaVolcan. I think they are too stupid to notice quite how many people are being affected by their policies and how the misery is going to spread upwards. They are arrogant enough to believe that if people just tried being richer it would all work out for them fine.

[Heroine]

What's weird is that I have experienced so many lazy ineffectual pointless people in the workplace that are keeping the unemployed out of a job that I no longer believe that people in work are any more hardworking than someone doing virtually nothing at home.

Trouble is that all this type of advertising does is increase crime overall and cause downward economic spirals in areas of some unemployment or poverty.

I remember the incredibly angry 80s where 'posh' kids were hated, where the working class kids were so angry as to create a nightlife culture that was 'shag or fight, preferably fight' and we had a resurgence of really nasty social movements. Looks like the conservatives want a similar social environment. IN some ways I can see why - if the population is blaming each other, perhaps they won't remember to watch the government.

Lets hope the internet will prevent this manipulation of the 'ignorant'

[Narked]

You know what costs the country the most? Corporate tax avoidance. An ocean of cash compared to the drop that is benefit fraud. Much easier to convince those feeling the pinch that it's the fault of the poor and the poor that it's the fault of immigrants than to restructure tax legislation.

[Heroine]

Also if the 'subsidise cheap alcohol' was explained sensibly it would be:

'the price conscious parts of the market are paying market prices, but the majority of the profit comes from the higher margin products bought by the less price aware and those more happy to pay extra for intangible or soley psychological benefits like a nice label on a bottle of wine or a waitrose bag"

More fool them!

[garlicbaubles]

That link didn't show me the advertisement. Here it is on the Guardian.

Hardworking families vs People who won't work? WTF? Not "can't" or even "don't" work - the only acknowledged alternative is "won't". It's a straw man

[Narked]

'They are arrogant enough to believe that if people just tried being richer it would all work out for them fine.'

I disagree. I think they're traditionalists. They'd like a return to the workhouse. They've already started to divide people into the 'deserving' and 'undeserving' poor.

[Heroine]

'giving support to hard-working families' is actually government subsidised wages for poor employers - i.e a filter to allow business generated money to go to shareholders if government picks up some of the cost. CON-dem is getting less a cynical label and more an accurate term for how stupid they think we all are.

Shameful

[domesticgodless]

you may be right Narked. I have heard both types of views from them. I think that for example Cameron is the 'hear no evil' type who would like to imagine that if poor people just tried harder like the dear Chinese there would be no more poverty (not that he actually cares at all).. but IDS is definitely the workhousing type.

[Heroine]

Also its a bit 'who should we be helping?

The people who don't need it, or the people who do?

i.e. those who haven't yet started a family because they can't afford to, who are sitting at home no matter what their skills are because the economy has shut them out, and who are literally just getting through the day in any way that stops their money running out, getting depressed and watching their skills fade as they do so and who are so fatigued and exhausted from society's contempt that they are slipping into psychosis'.

I vote the latter - its a better use of income than giving extra clothes or holiday money to a well-set-up crew who have large expenditure solely because they like ready meals and trips to macdonalds.