To think benefits need to be cut to fund increased spending on defence

[Viviennemary]

This is absolutely necessary. Keir Starmer shouldnt have backed down the last time. But now with the current situation with Russia drastic steps need to be taken. We simply can't afford to sustain the current benefits bill with the armed forces so depleted. The money is needed to increase defence.

If 100 people answer this you will get 100 differnt answers. I am a pensioner and I woud scrap the triple lock to help pay for this, bearing in mind I only get the state pension, no private pension. Surely though, with the vast sums needed, if the bulk of that is spent within the UK instead of lining the US coffers, a lot of this would go full cycle, increasing tax receipts and assisting various parts of the UK economy, requiring the use of British-made steel as an example.

In any event, pensions, healthcare, and benefits count for little if the Russians come marching in. There won't be any "nicey nicey" with them. You've all seen/heard of Russian atrocities in Ukraine. Remember just a few short years ago our disbelief when Russia invaded Ukraine not to mention 20,000 children kidnapped. Defence of the realm — are you bothered?

We could always revive dads army…or perhaps we can ensure Amazon, Starbucks et al pay there taxes

Or we could just start questioning why MOD procurement is a total and utter farce that has been wasting tens of billions over recent decades on projects which are either never delivered, or arrive late and in barely functioning states, before we start taking food off people's tables in order to throw even more money at it.

Agree 100%.

The biggest chunk of the welfare bill goes on pensions so the state pension could be means tested for richer pensioners (eg those who have a private income of £30,000 plus) who arguably do not need the pittance that is paid out. However this would need to be introduced gradually, along with raising the pension age. It would need to be done over the next decade.

Bear in mind that state pension is a contributory benefit which people expect as a right after having made the appropriate contributions. It would mean breaking a contract - or establishing a new one.

Another option would be to deny benefits of any kind to all but British born people unless they have contributed a certain amount in tax.

They actually don’t, they use clever schemes to ensure that they pay tax in lower tax economies. Starbucks says it’s uk based operations are run from theNetherlands
and they pay their tax there where the tax rate is lower for corporation tax.

People not having money to spend, in the UK, doesn't work. The high streets die off, taxis etc go out of business and areas become completely deprived. We will certainly see a Reform government if it does happen because we can't keep cutting people's income, yet have an unlimited budget for the asylum system. I hate reform and they will be disastrous for the WC, but they'll give enough promises that they and Restore will gain votes. The issue is that wages are too low, housing costs too high and a lack of full time jobs, as Corbyn called it 'the gig economy'.

Now sell that to the general public and explain why, just because they are topped up by benefits, they shouldn't have children, but we need to accept mass immigration because of our failing birth rates. But the people we'll bring in can have large families and live in poverty because it's cultural, or the single people we'll let in can live off benefits, or worse cost £55k a year to keep a criminal immigrant in prison. Or we need to send money to another country because they carry on having babies during times of war, famine, environmental changes. Have you calculated how much the mass riots will cost?
Lower rate PIP keeps people out of poverty, it gives people money to spend in their communities. It helps many stay in work.

This. Has that all just been forgotten about? It wasn't just the high profile grifters in the government and the HOL who pocketed millions, it was local councils too. The one my relative worked for purchased massive amounts of PPE that was never even unpacked, never mind delivered to the workers who needed it. It all sat in storage for the duration. No idea what happened to it in the end.

How about the royal family chipping in out of their vast obscene wealth to contribute a few million? Trooping the colour was a sharp reminder that they are so keen on swanning around in fancy uniforms and medals representing wars they never fought in. Even Camilla got in on the act.

Tell you don't know what you're talking about without telling us you don't know what you're talking about....oh, you just did! You really need to stop reading social media posts and red top rags (especially the Daily Fail)
🤦🏼‍♂️

Oh for goodness sake. You give up your state pension, that’s up to you. By the time I retire I will have paid 50 years of NI contributions and I deserve that state pension. I am planning my retirement and the state pension is part of my plans. I work full time. There are plenty of people who choose not to work full time, so why are they more deserving than me?

Take benefits off young people who are NEET, give it to defence, and then set up a training scheme where every young person without a trade who joins up gets 2 years of skills training.

Welfare spending goes down, defence spending goes up, NAAFI recruitment goes up, the pool of skilled workers goes up, mental health goes up, and so on.

There is a definition of the word ‘poverty’ which is used for these stats which isn’t actually poverty as we usually understand it.
its now defined as in relation to top earners or something like that. The way it is defined means there will literally always be poverty unless the country all starts earning the same amount of wages.

Ok. So you'd like to see every penny that passes from a parent to a child taxed at 40%? 😮

They are mainly if not exclusively in the public sector.

Overpaid how exactly?
Do you want the disabled in work and education or not?

Wow who knew. If you can type online guys it’s easy to get a job- not just for the disabled but everybody.

Tax it higher than that.
The recipient is getting free money.

If you did that you won’t see anything.

You get more revenue when the highest tax rates are actually lower.

Someone up thread mentioned Starbucks. If we lower the tax rate more corporations will pay their tax here.

Also, if inheritance is free money then what are benefits?

So everyone who is disabled has no transferable skills? Is that what you mean, because my post was regarding that there are some people who cannot work at all because they are severly disabled and these people should be supported. There are also those who have disabilities like pp who are capable of work. Having a disability does not always equate to being unable to work or having no skills but there are some people for whom that is the case. None of this is a revelation, it's just common sense.

Not if she has lower capacity to work. No sanctions for that cohort.

You don’t know what the psoter can or can’t do aside from type on MN so the skill you’re talking about is typing online which is what you highlighted. Apparantly it’s super easy to get work if your skill is the ability to type online. Who knew!

People on benefits have the lowest incomes to survive on in this country it’s a fact. Why target the poorest to save money? Why can’t they increase taxes for the most wealthy or all MPs collectively take a wage cut? Even getting the tax dodgers to pay their fair share? Why is it always the weakest who are targeted first? I would assume you do not survive on benefits yourself, do you?

The tax dodgers I know are gardeners, cleaners and childminders being paid cash in hand

And plenty of tradesman.

Exactly who would you take this money from? Whose benefits would you cut? You do realise that people who rely on benefits are already struggling to pay their bills and buy food, or are you one of those dimwits that believes the tabloid press that they are living it large and better off than people who are working?

We can raise the money we need by taxing multinationals like Starbucks, Amazon, and closing avoidance loopholes on personal wealth. Anyone worth over £10m should be taxed savagely. No one needs £10m, it’s just hoarding.