To worry about the Tory plans after this budget

[bobbywash]

and I accept the election may derail all of this but.....

The chancellor has said an additional 30bn worth of cuts needs to be made in the next parliament for their figures to work.

Now bearing in mind the ring fenced NHS budget and the (wavering) commitment to the education budget and pensions. Where the heck are an additional 30bn of cuts going to come from.

Is there anything left to cut

THE POINT ED IS YOU WERE SAYING SIBLINGS SHOULD HAVE MORE RESPONSIBLITY. WHILE AN MP FROM THE PARTY YOU SUPPORT CANT DO THE SAME

Its the I'm alright jack attitude again isnt it.

I'm still struggling to see what that has to do with me, Helena?

It's a bit like saying all Labour supporters are war mongers because Blair engaged in an illegal war.

How on earth are individuals responsible for how MP's behave?

My brother is an absolute nightmare. I would rather take in a homeless stranger than him. My sister I would put up at a drop of a hat.

There is only so much you can do with a relative who is in trouble with addiction and is disinclined to change his/her ways. Believe me.

Dawn I am surprised that you don't feel your family should help you especially with those salaries, yet you feel more than comfortable claiming from the 'state'.

And you are being rather rude to people who don't agree with you. Is it your way or the high way?

Dawn has been treated bloody appallingly on this thread I am extremely disgusted by the attitudes hypocrisy and gaslighting shown here.

Do you think that MP should be responsible for his brother Hillingdon or do you also like to play different rules for different folks!

As HelenaDove has said like I am totally disgusted how Dawn has been treated. I am in a similar situation to her. I am shit scared at the hidden agenda in the budget!!

Thanks to all with compassion

This thread is fucking sickening. Normally people lie when they are ranting about benefits. They always say its not the disabled we mean.
Fucking bollocks. What kind of nasty cunt dya have to be to not think that people with disabilities and there carers should live a nice life. Bastards.
Dawn

. Thank you to the many kind folk on here. You are much appreciated.

Dawn - I think in your frothing and swearing you forgot to actually read what I said : Here , try again :

My own belief is that BOTH state and FAMILY should support those who need support. That is not to say the State should pay less, however.

Some of the attitudes on here are disgusting and so lacking in compassion and empathy. Dawn & her husband both worked in decent paid jobs, paying taxes etc. Now some of you think she should be going cap in hand to her siblings for financial support rather than the state that she has contributed to? WTAF??
As for the poster who said disabled claimants shouldn't have cable tv or alcohol to brighten up their lives are you even human??
Or maybe its only those 'wasters' who are disabled from birth and never contribute a penny who you wan to live in misery? What a nasty bunch the Tory (UKIP?) supporters on here are, certainly showing your true colours now.
Just remember folks, life is fragile and accident or illness can happen to anyone.

Dawn - I think in your frothing and swearing you forgot to actually read what I said : Here , try again

I've just looked for frothing and swearing and I'm sadly disappointed not to see any other than a fairly mild swear word. I was hoping for a festering pus ridden cock or two being thrown about.

Are you always this over the top?

To be fair I would have said much worse than she did.

dawn from one carer to another (even if nobody would actually acknowledge me as one because I get no state help and work full time) I admire you greatly.

Dawn - I have been lurking.

I am sorry you have had such a judgemental and horrible response from some posters.

What if you are disabled and HAVE no family???
what if that family are abusive / disinterested?

I agree that there are lots of benefit bashing threads where folk say: 'of course, I don't mean the genuinely disabled.

Well, often, they do

Yes I was thinking of abusive families. More broadly I don't like the idea of shifting society back to the position where family ties were everything. Am I the only person that has read Dickens? It's just another way to force us back to the Victorian age of patronage and gross inequality.

Not only poor individuals and families lose out in such a world. Society as a whole benefits from utilising the talents and abilities of the poor just as much as the rich.

If I had to come down on a side, I would say that ime those of us who have come up from the lower social orders are a damn sight more personally resourceful than those who have simply built on existing merits of inherited status and position.

Dawn

Years ago when I started working with disabled young people, one of the things that shocked me were the amount of young people I met who were disabled as direct result of abuse by a family member.
There seems to be this myth of loving family members caring for their disabled and sick relatives. Some families are like this, many are not. Indeed many families can't even be bothered to visit elderly family who live in care homes. There are many elderly people living in care homes whose own children never visit them.
You can't make social policy based on a fairytale idea of how families work.

Yes, there is also an odd contradiction between the idea that families should take responsibility, and the requirements of modern economic life, whereby we are all required to work increasingly long hours for less pay and re-locate on demand to chase work.

Tories have always linked this idea of family values and needing richer and poorer groups, is that not enough in itself to show there's a link? And of course it'll all be women's fault soon, we should be back looking after the kids 24/ 7 while the men go out and do the important male-type things.

What annoys me are the posters claiming labour are responsible for the deficit because they were reckless with money. NO.

Labour's spending in relation to taxes received was the same as previous Tory and Labour governments up until 2008 when the banks gambled with our money and lost. The Labour government had to spend £124bn bailing out the banks. They could only do that by borrowing the money, hence the large deficit.

Tories know this, but decide to blame 'benefit scroungers' with their £75 a week luxury living.

That's neoliberalism for you, it's a mass of contradictory beliefs and practices. Pro-deregulation and allowing the already rich to become even richer because they think wealth will 'trickle down', but opposed to any taxation or regulations that would ensure the wealth 'trickles down'.

Pro high unemployment because it weakens the power of the work force and means the average worker is willing to work for less money and in worse conditions, but against a welfare state to support the unemployed.

And as you pointed out Gibbering, expecting extended families to offer more in the way of practical support but then holding it against people who don't want to move away from their support network to find work!

"Labour's spending in relation to taxes received was the same as previous Tory and Labour governments up until 2008 when the banks gambled with our money and lost. The Labour government had to spend £124bn bailing out the banks. They could only do that by borrowing the money, hence the large deficit.

Tories know this, but decide to blame 'benefit scroungers' with their £75 a week luxury living."

This ^

And as you pointed out Gibbering, expecting extended families to offer more in the way of practical support but then holding it against people who don't want to move away from their support network to find work

Its gaslighting on a national scale.