Benefits v Defence Lord Robertson

[Wednesdayschild87]

Lord Robertson’s Speech… seriously does anyone care?? He’s laid out the fact that as a nation we can’t carry on like this… he said we can’t afford to keep throwing money at benefits whilst leaving our country defences I’m actually shocked no one has come out and spoken on this matter before. I’m incredulous.

Would you agree that child benefit should be the first to be abolished? No? Well which ones???

Obviously after child benefit has been abolished surely!

Child benefit must be the first to go surely?

It’s not a matter of arbitrarily abolishing whole categories of benefit. The whole system needs a radical rethink.

Do think the current benefits spend is just fine and nothing to worry about?

Why? Why are children less important than the elderly? I dont really understand your logic here. Children are the future we need to invest in them. And no I dont get child benefit so this isn't all me me me.

The government do not concentrate funds on defence of the realm, or the good of the realm. The government for the last 50 years, whatever tie they wear, have focused on concentrating funds in their own hands and those of their mates and of those who they can pay to buy votes and in the hands of the already rich.

I keep asking how exactly politicians can claim simultaneously that “the economy” has so massively improved over the last 50 years while services are so much worse. We pay taxes. Where are they going? Straight to shareholders.

These are the main issues. It's all very well saying 'lets cut the benefits' but the system relies on landlords being paid benefits via their tenants claims. That is the country we have created. That's why thousands of random people and allowed to flow into th country and that's why no young professionals without inheritance have any chance of having a secure home to have their own families. Perhaps we should wake up to these facts.

That's why thousands of random people and allowed to flow into th country and that's why no young professionals without inheritance have any chance of having a secure home to have their own families.

Current headlines on the BBC feature their investigation into how the asylum system has been misused historically and how easy it is to do so. Is the incredibly unpopular mass migration of the last 20 years going to be stopped? Can’t see it happening.

Like most decisions ever made it is to benefit those who already hold the wealth. It's often depicted as a chaotic situation no one can fix but the reality is we're all being fleeced.

MN! If you are in social housing you should live in it and it should be your only home!
Also MN "why cant brits do the LIVE IN fruit picking jobs We have to have people come from other countries to do the jobs Brits wont do!
Posted this on another thread
"a. Fruit picking veg picking etc a lot of which is LIVE IN work. If you rent social housing you have to actually fucking well live there. You are not allowed to live away from home for the length of time these employers want you to. If you want that you will need to give SH tenants more rights! But that would also mean giving them more rights to leave their home for other reasons
b. Gas safety checks fire door checks electric checks Surveys My tenancy agreement says i have to be home for these and no i cant get a friend or neighbour to do it for me.
c. the hatred there is for SH tenants ensures that some busybody would probably report the flat as abandoned if a tenant were to risk their tenancy by taking this job.
d. i have mentioned SH tenants because they will be the most likely group expected to take these jobs yet their hands are tied and they cant And even if they wont perhaps they want a life after the working day (just like home owners have You know the ones who arent expected to do these jobs instead of sharing a berth with a stranger"

Social housing is so rare it's barely worth mentioning anymore, the majority are in private lets which profit landlords at the expense of taxpayers. This is why the problem is not being resolved, there are so many people benefitting from it at the expense of a healthy economy.

and VAT and tax on interest on savings

Part of this increase will be coming from the migration of people to UC from legacy benefits.

The welfare bill is never going to be dramatically reduced as we have an ageing population. Over half of the welfare bill is spent on people of pension age with state pensions, pension credit, attendance allowance. Not a single political party will even look at reducing the triple lock to a double or single lock. They are simply burying their heads in the sand and hoping someone else will come along and take the massive political backlash.

@OlympicProcrastinator
"Absolutely nobody should be getting benefits for ADHD or anxiety. Autism is massively over diagnosed and depression should be treated and time off work granted for a specific amount of time paid, but no benefits paid for it."

Surely it should be based on need and how someone is affected rather than blanket decisions.

Depression can vary massively from mild to severe, from relatively easily treatable to treatment resistant. You really want to put a deadline on recovery to someone who has been sectioned and is receiving ECT?

Anxiety - again massively varies, and the thing that many people miss when discussing this is that people rarely get benefits for anxiety alone. Funnily enough many other, physical, health conditions can lead to anxiety (and depression). There is not a clear demarcation been physical and mental health, they are intertwined with one affecting the other.

Autism is a huge subject, and this is getting long enough, but suffice to say I disagree and there are a number of reasons for any increase whether real or perceived.

@Blankscreen
"Don't get me wrong I absolutely agree that people need to get off their arses and start working.
It is and I know it is a stereotype but too many people are having kids they can't afford to keep and now they have lifted the 2 child benefit cap."

Two small issues there.

The jobs aren't out there. There are more people looking for work than there are jobs available. This is likely to get worse.

The birth rate is falling, it's way below replacement level. We having an aging population, hence the pension bill being so high compared to all other benefits. So excellent news for you I suppose, we told people not to have children they couldn't afford, and many, many, didn't. Now we just have to deal with the consequences.

Do you realise the cost of child benefit vs pensioner benefits? And let’s not forgot many of those pensioners received child benefit or the equivalent when they started families and it wasn’t means tested!

This country doesn’t make or produce anything - the birth rate has declined and the cost of living is too high. How are they going fund a war or military?

It's all very well saying 'let’s cut the benefits' but the system relies on landlords being paid benefits via their tenants claims.

We made every increasing house prices a key driver of our economy

This is the crux of it

I’m not the person you’re replying to but I absolutely think pensions should be means tested. Although not at anything like £30k. It can’t be right that we’re paying millionaires a state pension - working hard or being fortunate to have accrued assets not through work, shouldn’t be the criteria for state handouts. It should be based on need.

t is and I know it is a stereotype but too many people are having kids they can't afford to keep and now they have lifted the 2 child benefit cap

Why do people write utter nonsense?

People aren’t having loads of dc for council housing & benefits, just look at the birth rates!

Because the jobs aren't there?

If you couldn't get a job and benefits didn't pay enough to feed your children what would you do?

Or perhaps you could only get zero hours work, no work this week so no money, again no food for your children. Do you just not feed them?

How would that work? Say someone gets £30k a year from a private pension, do they then lose the £12k state pension? Wtf

Why is that so radical?

If you earn a certain amount you pay more tax
If you earn a certain amount you receive fewer or no benefits
If you have a mortgage you don’t get housing benefit help
We means test the vast majority of things, why not the state pension?

I agree with him and my thoughts are that our benefits bill is too high, and that includes pensioners.

As well as not receiving nearly as good basic state pensions as younger retirees, we oldies didn’t get child benefit (or Family Allowance) as it was known for our first child til 1977. My older child was 7 by then.