To Wonder Why Tory Voters Support a £13bn cut in benefits (inc tax credits) when hardly any tory voters even receive these benefits?

[Amylovesgalaxyeggs]

Tory voters statistically earn more and live in constituencies that have higher property values.

Tory voters statistically would be less likely to rely on tax credits or other benefits that will be cut by the party.

Aibu to wonder why a group of voters would vote for a party that wants to cut something that they don't claim. Sounds like a of reverse Robin Hood to me.

Emma you know damn well that statement didnt come from Dawndonna. So why pretend it did.

"The problem with people who vote Tory is that they fail to recognise the elements of luck and society that have contributed to their success. They believe its all down to their natural talent and hard work. There is the element of hard work but the social factors that allow it to pay off have to be admitted to."

Exactly Lurker Do you think there is a slight element of narcissism involved with them thinking that way?

I'm not sure the Tories would want the vote of benefit scrounging scum, Helena, we may taint them, somehow.
I wonder if Emma realises that JSA is taxed, so that particular bunch of welfare lazy gits are all paying tax! Mind you, what she's also unaware of is that child tax credits and Carers Allowance are taxed too. So, I'm a tax payer, again!

Oops, sorry, don't know how the child tax credits got in there.

You snivelling coward. He obviously isn't a moron, far superior to the posh boys on the other side who are only where they because of their privilege, not ability

Nice, longtimelurker . Does it sting that not everyone thinks exactly the same as you?

Oh and we'll done...I'm sure your wise and considered comments on politics, such as that ^ , go a long way to convincing people to vote labour.

Not being in a union, not being a teacher, not coming from a traditional Labour area, not, not, not

there are 1000s of other reasons for voting Tory besides believing that you're rich because you're wonderful. (And, poor people are the scum of the earth, I read it in the Daily Mail, therefore it must be true.)

But, debates about benefit scroungers and whether Miliband looks good eating a burger (and refusing to debate head to head, but only when in a crowd) are part of the reason why I detest UK politics (left or right) because it's all bollocks.

Dora

Lots of reasons on this and many other threads - for me, basically, the Labour party have historically:

spent too much money
Encouraged a 'rights' agenda without responsibilities
condemed people to a life of low asperations and achievement
think they know better than everyone else
Completely rejected the working class, except to patronise every 5 years
Believe in central planning and interference
Are incredibly illiberal and backwards looking

Not to mention having socialist principles but when it comes to themselves opting for the opposite. Like private schools. And they proved just as greedy individually as the Tories in the expenses scandal.

Yep I'll be voting Tory. I don't believe that you can stereotype each party's voters. I'll be going on the facts that are important to me (Iraq war, selling off all of our gold reserves, leaving the Coalition govt with nothing in the coffers). Sadly, I wish we had enough money to give everyone who needs it (disabled etc) tons and tons of money but we don't have it.

Now waiting to be called various names by Longtime and Dawn....

Lady - selling off the gold reserves when he did was Gordon Brown staving off an earlier and potentially worse global crash. There was a very interesting article about it in the Telegraph a while back. The Conservatives voted to send troops into Iraq. As stated up thread the deficit was actually much smaller than at present in 2008. The money went on propping up the banks.

I will be voting for the party that is most willing to address the debt/deficit. So likely Tory even if I'm not a fan of call me Dave. Our deficit is shocking, national debt enormous and the amount we pay on interest an utter waste.

No one seems to want to talk about it or worry about it and everyone acts like the nanny state had loads of money sloshing around. We don't. We are not a 'rich' country in the sense that we spend far far far more than we bring in.

The welfare state as it is can't be sustained so whilethe premise of what we are doing is ideologically sound it is too expensive. That's just the reality. Our expectations need to change.

To give a personal metaphor, my dad has been helping out my unemployed and depressed brother for years, paying his living costs and housing. That is the right and kind thing to do. But if he himself was getting into serious debt doing so and remortgaging his property at a risk to him I would query how wise it was for him to keep giving my brother this level of support. You can't give people the support they expect if the money's not there. And we already spend a colossal amount of the budget on welfare not including pensions.

I agree with all those talking about the importance of cutting our cloth and getting us out of the financial hole we are in.

We spend too much. I wish we had trillions of pounds to spend but we don't. We have to make amends.

You do know the debt now is bigger than in 2010? Things haven't actually improved.

I think I'd advise your dad not to buy a new generation of Trident and to forgo HS2, then. That'll save him several tens of times the 13bn he was hoping to recoup from welfare, regardless of whether or not he disingenuously lumps health service pensions into welfare spending, when they shouldn't be in there, or not.

Most of the welfare budget is pensions. Pensions that increase by more than inflation.

I would prefer we are defended.

I lived through the Cold War and it was terrifying. ISIS is even more so.

So did I. We spent a lot of money on the capability to destroy the world 1000 _times over. We only need to do it once. Or preferably not at all.

NHS pensions come from health spending, not welfare spending. It makes a huge difference to the total. But, it's great for Osborne's artificially inflating the welfare figure.

I've skim read this and see it is becoming a bun fight but I can't get over the stupidity of the first post

Political persuasion aside- can you really not see why someone would choose to vote for a something that freed up funds they don't use/ need in favour of that money being spent somewhere they might need it?????

I'm not sure how we absolve ourselves of paying pensions. Elderly people can't work and most have paid in.

I do think we could look at universal benefits for pensioners, though.

Defended against whom? Very few countries have nuclear weapons of any sort. Do you really believe that the UK could go toe to toe with Russia? And, if the USA is in front of us with its nuclear arsenal, what's ours for?

Yes, bearbehind, or waste ten times that amount on duplicate railways and missiles. Political persuasion is the whole issue.

I don't disagree with your arguments dora, but I'm astounded by the ridiculously naivety of the OP.

Maybe we could. The cost of 'means testing' pensioner benefits has always been given as the reason for their universality. There are huge changes in how old age will be coming down the road but the current govt don't want to alienate their core vote so it'll be put off until it's a crisis.

I lived through the Cold War and it was terrifying.
I'm 56 and what a lot of nonsense. It was not terrifying. There was never any major threat, it was a lot of hot air on all sides. It was the Russians that backed down during Cuba, not the Americans. We've had more bother from Thatcher and Blair.