to think that Cameron is having a laugh

[Donotknowhownottomind]

with his talk of wanting a fairer more equal society??

So that's why thousands of people are going to be thrown into poverty come April, disabled people have been disadvantaged by the welfare cuts, the bedroom tax has dislocated loads of people, millions are priced out of the property market, food bank usage is at an all time high and the "living wage" is a bare faced lie !

Also where was the detail in his conference speech as to how he is going to achieve this equal society?

I think he does want more equality. Right now we have millions who rely on benefits that can have a better lifestyle than somebody working and claiming nothing. He wants everyone to be self supporting as much as possible so that welfare is only used by those who are disabled or between jobs.

People go on about living wages etc but the sad fact is many live in expensive areas they can't afford, work fewer hours or not at all and commit to a family size they couldn't possibly support then blame everyone else bar themselves. Labour encouraged this and it's taking a long time to reverse the entitled attitudes.

They got in for a second term so they have a lot of support and agreement to the cuts.

Cameron wants a society that is fair for people like him i.e. the rich.
As a public sector worker I feel devalued by the Tories: Dismantling of important services driven by political ideology, year upon year of pay freeze and this year being "offered" a 0% pay increase. Cameron would not get out of bed for the money I do, less do the immensely challenging work I do with the most excluded in our society.

Maybe I didn't explain myself well enough. I am happy given the current position to pay for welfare for those less fortunate, foodbanks are a disgrace, I do believe a state should support its population. However the point I was trying to make (and clearly didn't) Is that in an ideal world, I would want everyone to be able to earn a sufficient income so as not to need any form of financial state support.

I don't like the idea of working Tax credit, and it's a scandal that those in employment need to have their wages topped up by the state as the wage isn't enough.

They believe that they deserve what they have, and that if people aren't in this position, it's because they're just not trying hard enough.

'Many live in expensive areas they can't afford' so that would be me again. Cookiemonster
So maybe all us nurses should piss off to a slum, preferably up North, far away from the precious millionaires. We'll take the cleaners, teachers and barristers from Starbucks with us too, as they can't really afford to live in London either, then laugh as the wealthy utopia Cameron wanted descends into chaos when they find out there's no one left to wipe up after them.

We'll take the cleaners, teachers and barristers from Starbucks with us too

What are they all doing in Starbucks? I suppose the barristers could be between cases.

BTW Cameron and May were hilarious - stating all the problems (most of which they created) and then laying a vision which is the 100% opposite of what they're actually doing. Did Private Eye write their speeches?

I think he does want more equality.

Yep, he won't rest until he's got most of us relying on food banks.

He wants everyone to be self supporting as much as possible so that welfare is only used by those who are disabled or between jobs

But his changes don't do that - they kick away the support from a broad spectrum of people without replacing it with anything. No-one could argue that it's a laudable aim for people to have to rely on the State less - I can't imagine anyone prefers filling in tax credits forms vs just getting paid enough - but it's an idealogical move to kick the support away before anything is there to replace it.

YANBU

On the point on the impact of cuts to TC on the disabled: There are elements in WTC for disabled £2,970 and severely disabled £1,275 working and also within CTC for disabled £3,140 and severely disabled £1,275 children. The increase in the withdrawal rates to 48% and the lowering of the disregard allowance will be applied to these elements.

(Incidentally the elements were put in the TC system to encourage those with disabilities to work despite the additional costs of juggling work and disability. This was done in preference to increasing benefits such as carers allowance, esa,pip and social care.)

The problem is our economy and house prices have been built for the past 10/15 years on a false platform of tax credits boosting wages, you then need those tax credits to survive.
Mortgages were given on huge multiples where previously they would lend 3x you could borrow whatever you wanted. So it pushed prices up in an unsustainable way.

Suddenly you take the tax credits away once people have had to start to rely on them and it's worse than never having them. Because the wages haven't had to creep up as they would have naturally.

Mortgages have gone back to 3x but the house prices are still at the false 'any amount' loan - partly because we need them kept at that amount so people aren't in negative equity. So in my area you need to earn over 100k a year to buy a flat, a bloody starter flat!!!!

The whole economy is built on a false floor & they are frantically trying to fix it without the floor collapsing.

It's true wasonthelust we are all in Starbucks feeding our caffeine addictions, they are the modern day equivalent of opium dens
The barristers like to laugh at our auto correct fails though, the Barista smiles and keeps quiet.

I would like a go on an opium den. Don't suppose I ever will now (sorry - way o/t).

Maybe legalising and nationalising the supply of opium to the masses is the way forward. Seems to be the approach to foreign policy these days

he talks the talk but he does not walk the walk

YANBU

I can absolutely get behind the need to have a fairer society; however, unless it relates to opportunity I am "intensly relaxed" about equality. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that a degree of inequality is probably no bad thing.

I think that on the whole the Tories get more right than wrong, and in the real world (outside of mumsnet) their policies and messages chime with the average voter.

We do need to look after the most vulnerable, we've got a 3rd sector in this country (which I feel is becoming increasingly self serving) that we're all free to support.

in the real world (outside of mumsnet) their policies and messages chime with the average voter.

Dunno about average, but many, many more of us (the actual electorate) voted for something other than the Tories.

MaliceInWonderland78, your real world and mine are two toally different things if you feel that way ^^

We could also talk about funding and regulation of the 3rd sector Malice but I think Kids Company has already largely made the point.

Also great if you live in an area where there are plenty of 40% taxpaying parents who can claim gift aid on the voluntary organisation which runs clubs for their kids. Not so great if parents have no money to support day to day living let alone charitable donations.

I think what Cameron means by "equality" is, we're all in the same food bank queue whilst him and his mates are all with their big fat snouts in the trough. And elsewhere.

Look, the fact is that the outrage you witness on here (and I think it's justified at times) isn't being displayed elsewhere. Most people are fairly satisfied with their lot and have 'never had it so good'

I'm not saying that some people aren't struggling, I'm just saying that most other people don't care. Or if they do, it certainly not enough to feel motivated to do anything about it.

howabout I'm not quite sure what point you were trying to make with regards to the Kids Company

I'm just saying that most other people don't care. Or if they do, it certainly not enough to feel motivated to do anything about it

Very true. People who are doing ok don't really think about being in the position of those badly affected by this Government.Why would they?
Personally I couldn't vote for a party that does not care about the worse off or vulnerable or a party whose MPs have no idea what it is like to live in poverty or even know people who have been.
This idea that people choose poverty or could just turn their life around if they could be arsed is ignorant at best.

Living in the US has really opened my eyes to a lot. What I see happening in the UK saddens me because these policies are going to take us backwards.

Rather than tax credits why not start giving families the support they deserve. Raising a family is extremely expensive and I find it astonishing that there are zero tax allowances for all. Same with married couples. Here in the US you can elect to pay taxes jointly as a married couple. Makes a huge difference as household income is taxed. DH earns tonnes and me much much less. My salary is taxed at the higher rate because of his income.

Also what most people in the UK don't realize is that if you have a disabled child your child qualifies for social security. You get paid about $2500 a month to stay home. Most states, at least NJ where I live, provide heavily subsidized care for disabled children. We have an extremely high income and pay full rate of $80 an hour. A family with an income of $100k pay $17 a hour. Once 3 all care for development is funded by the school district. Yes you have to navigate the school district and we moved to one which is a leader in the country for special needs, but they have state funded advocates here to ensure each and every child gets the services they need.

So yeah while you see lots more homeless people and drug addiction not supported you do see the government here trying their hardest to provide for those in need.

I wish the UK looked to import the positive aspects of policies they see in other countries rather than the negative ones. Right now what Cameron is doing is the welfare cutbacks of the Clinton era.

Malice what I mean is I think the concerns which led to the demise of Kids Company with regards to governance and even the efficacy of their interventions illustrate the limitations of providing social safety nets via the 3rd sector. I would also argue for greatly improved NHS integrated social and end of life care over any amount of tax relief or direct government support for hospices.

Want2beSupermum I have also lived and worked in the US and I completely agree with what you are saying. However moving back to taxing families over taxing individuals in the UK is always argued against by women who remember being told by their husbands there was no point in them working because he was already benefiting from their allowances. (there was a lot of resistance on MN to the introduction of the small transfer of allowances provision for married couples recently introduced). Am I right that the US retains the provision for couples to choose to be taxed separately and forego allowances, as I think this is what they use to counter this?

Also am I correct in saying that the gender pay gap is lower in the US? If I am right then I think this can be attributed to shorter maternity leaves and the need to pay better to make a second earner's contribution worthwhile.

howabout correct on both counts. I will add that nearly all good employers offer more than the minimum required maternity leave. I'm expecting my third and have the option to take a year if I want with the first six months paid. With my 2nd it feel at an awkward time so I went back after 8 weeks. It was very doable although I didn't lose the baby weight as zero time to exercise.