To think we need to prioritise defence/Ukraine spending?

[Wildflowers99]

I’ll admit I had no idea how depleted our military has become until a few weeks ago. I was absolutely staggered to read we now spend more on PIP and DLA than our entire military.

I feel like slowly all of our public spending has been funnelled into health, benefits and social care, leaving everything else in a very poor state. Any time anyone has suggested spending money on anything apart from ‘freezing pensioners, the homeless or disabled’ they get shouted down (I am disabled btw, so I do understand the need).

AIBU to think we need to urgently address our spending priorities and as a nation wake up to the fact we’ve been overspending on the above for too long?

That’s only 1-2 billion a year.

Better than nothing!

That’s the spirit…

Isn't most of London now owned by Russian Oligarchs? Yet your answer is to attack the disabled?

Oh come off it, I’m not ‘attacking the disabled’ by querying our incredibly high spend on benefits. Stop using emotive language to shut the conversation down.

Oh come off it , yes you are,,,

It's thinly veiled and seemingly increasingly Labour policy.

When you have family members who have had to fight for PIP/ and DLA despite high needs then you might actually appreciate that attacking the worst off in society to fund wars is not the thing that a decent government would do.

Ensuring everyone, including Russian Oligarchs who have bought up London to charge extortionate rent to tenants, pays appropriate and fair taxes might be a fairer starting point - just to name one possibility that doesn't involve harming people who are already disadvantaged.

But maybe the point of this, and many other threads on benefits is really about moving the Overton Window so that people no longer think that Labour should be the party that are kind/ fair to the less privileged people in the country?

No. It isn't. Most of it is owned by Brits.

I feel like slowly all of our public spending has been funnelled into health, benefits and social care, leaving everything else in a very poor state.

If it is, that's exactly how it should be. Yet you think Britain's 'priority' should be to... send money to other countries!?.

Honestly, truthfully, OP, can you not remotely understand why many people in this country are getting royally pissed off with this kind of sentiment?

I swear I'm living in a parallel universe sometimes...

The word ‘most’ is facetious, but the fact that Russian oligarchs saw investment opportunity in London is widely known www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/mar/06/how-london-became-the-place-to-be-for-putins-oligarchs

Ensuring everyone, including Russian Oligarchs who have bought up London to charge extortionate rent to tenants, pays appropriate and fair taxes might be a fairer starting point - just to name one possibility that doesn't involve harming people who are already disadvantaged.

One of the structural problems in the UK is that (since Thatcher in the 80s) we have bumped up taxes on the relatively few rich and reduced the rate that most of us pay. There are tax calculators for various European countries and handy currency converters. A typical Brit on say £33k per year would take home something like £26k per year. Move to Frankfurt for the same wage (39k Euros) and you'd take home ~22k per year. If we want European-style social support mechanisms we need to pay European-style amounts for it.

Maybe we should all pay a little bit more in tax. Just saying 🤷🏼‍♀️

"Sending money to other countries" isn't "everything else". It's Education, Justice, Transport, Defence. (And for @Jumpingthruhoops Social Care which is the poor relation in the DHSC, one reason why hospitals have beds filled with people who shouldn't be there)

Ah, the eternal battle between guns and butter between security and social spending. It’s a tale as old as governance itself. But let’s be clear: a nation that cannot defend itself has no welfare state to protect.

You’ve stumbled upon an inconvenient truth—one that many would rather ignore. While compassion is a virtue, survival is a necessity.

Every pound funnelled into social programs is a pound not spent ensuring that there is a nation secure enough to sustain them. And yet, every time defence spending is brought up, out come the cries: What about the vulnerable?
What about the pensioners? As if national security were some frivolous luxury instead of the very foundation upon which all else rests.

Ukraine is a mirror, a warning. It is what happens when the illusion of peace blinds a country to the realities of war. They spent decades believing security was someone else’s concern until the tanks rolled in. And yet, here we are, debating whether defence spending should take priority while our stockpiles shrink, our forces dwindle, and our adversaries grow bolder.

The uncomfortable truth? The world doesn’t pause because we’re too busy debating morality. You can’t fund social programs if your economy is under siege. You can’t protect the vulnerable if your borders aren’t secure. And you can’t rely on allies when you bring little to the table but good intentions.

So, should we prioritize defence spending? the real question is: How much longer can we afford not to?

We could but then that would further slow economic growth.

@JadededViewer

A blunt but accurate post, spelling out the hard realities.

i think you are arguing that point with the wrong person tbh. I don’t think you understood the point I was actually trying to make !

The hard truths remain, whether we speak them or not. The question is, do we confront them now, while we still have the luxury of choice ?

I would, and expected to! After covid, COL, and in order to support public services

More defence? Yes

Less on health and social care? No. Aging population and worsening health even before cuts, so get a grip.

Benefits? I doubt it's worth it. No doubt there are some that shouldn't claim, I know a few , but mostly Jesus no I wouldn't be in their shoes

Taxing higher earners including myself more? yes. Not stupid levels but definitely more

Taxing tech more? Well they cost us a fortune in mental health, policing, legal costs and way more. So absolutely!

Are you aware that if you have cancer and surgery/chemo hasn't worked, the next step is immunotherapy?
Are you aware that you need to actually apply to the NHS for funding to try and save your life?
I've done all the above and sadly I was one to waste the funding because it didn't worked. Maybe I should have refused the funding and let it go to some other country who has absolutely no connection to me. After working full time for almost 40 years I'm now reliant on benefits to eat and heat, maybe I should give these up too? Don't worry though, I'm not likely to see Christmas so there will be a bit extra in the benefits pot............

@Whatevershallidowithmylife I'm so sorry.

I don't believe the issue is sick people, the biggest issue is fit people getting 'top up' benefits.
Far too many people are caught in the trap of working part-time and it not being worthwhile to get more hours because it reduces benefits.
Employers need to offer more full-time jobs rather than 4hr shifts (avoiding paid breaks)

But we also need to get back to having a manufacturering base.

Although this thread is about Ukraine, and my primary concern is Ukraine, it doesn’t just apply to Ukraine. The emergency services, infrastructure, council responsibilities (public libraries, swimming pools, roads, environmental health) are all suffering as the lion’s share of the money goes to social care or health.

So no, I don’t understand why people are pissed off. I’m all in favour of healthcare and benefits, they’re essential to a civilised society, but not on the level we’re seeing at the moment, where they’re eating up everything else and we’re now seeing the effects of that.

Many people would be homeless if they were taxed in this way. That salary isn’t dissimilar to mine, and I wouldn’t be able to pay my mortgage on my already cheap house.

But you have cancer. Nobody should remove benefits from people undergoing cancer treatment. The vast majority of people claiming PIP are not in your position. It’s a straw man.

And yet, every time defence spending is brought up, out come the cries: What about the vulnerable? What about the pensioners? As if national security were some frivolous luxury instead of the very foundation upon which all else rests

Oh absolutely. As if funding 2.5% on the military is ‘choosing bombs over feeding people’ when 40% goes on health and benefits, not to mention 60% of all council tax going on social care. It’s bonkers.