The true reason for deficit cutting.

[ivanhoe]

David Cameron is using the deficit as a cover to dismantle the welfare State and the role of the State for the above mentioned reasons, but none of this reality is being picked up by either Labour Ministers, Lib-Dem ministers, or the BBC Media. This reality is being dumbed down. The BBC media is compliant.

The very fabric of the role of what the State should provide in tax payers money to welfare, services and State pensions, is being whittled away under cover of reducing the deficit, and there is no opposition to it.

The Tory mantra of making painful cuts to reduce the deficit is little more than a smoke screen they hide behind to implement their ideology of reducing the size of the State, driving down wages, cutting benefits ect.

My guess is that they'd make pretty much the same decisions for ideological reasons even if there wasn't a deficit.

The cynic in me says how easy it is for the right wing comfortably well off, greed infested Tory supporters to ridicule and chastise people on the receiving end of Tory cuts in welfare. And how equally easy it is for the right wing press to encourage this, just to sell their papers.

The Thatcherist, hard line, anti social policies the Tories are forcing on us all makes them feel superior. And they perpetuate the suffering while living in their comfy homes without a conscience.

The Tories pretend to care about the pensioners having to choose between heating, or eating, the Tory's pretend to care about the family's wondering how they are going to feed their children today and tomorrow.

The Tories since Thatcher have been the same !

No longer a small "c" left of centre Conservative party with a good social conscience.
No, since the 80's they have been ultra right wing, hardnosed, and with no compassion but to condemn the poor to a life of misery and no hope so long as they can live in relative luxury.

This is how they want it, to keep the masses under their eternal control. The Tories only aim is power and control.

For that reason the Tories love it when the economy is bad, so bad that they blame the masses of poor for it. It is malicious and insidious.

And what makes it even more appalling is that the Tories actually do believe they are superior intellectually to everybody else.

This will be their downfall!, and I hope that this will be at the next general election in 2015.

The Tories deserve to be out of office for decades to come, if only to stop their bare faced arrogance.

Food banks in 21st century Britain, is as bad as the chronic homelessness we have, the awful old age poverty, and the low waged economy the Tories have nurtured throughout their 18 years of running Britain, 1979- 1997, and I might add, New Labour under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, 1997- 2010, did nothing fundamental to reverse any of it.

Britain has suffered Thatcher's ideology for over 30 years.

Ivanhoe.

[ShadeofViolet]

Why shouldn't we dismantle the welfare state? It'd make things interesting around here for one when the idle have to get off their fat arses and start working.

Oh look, IDS has come for a browse on MN.

[MiniTheMinx]

Human nature.........we are so far removed from our nature that we don't have any concept of what it was or likely to be at any time in the future.

What sets man apart from Animals is that man shapes nature is using it to create the things he needs. Bees need pollen but do not take up nature in order to maximise pollen production! at least no in any conscious way.

In shaping nature, we shape our own nature.

Some might argue that having a welfare state is civilised, whilst others put forward the view that helplessness strips people of their human dignity. I would agree with those on the right in this respect. Capitalism hasn't always existed but it is only under capitalism that unmet human need drives the formation of welfare.

If our ancestors were to look upon what is happening in the world now, they might conclude that allowing children to die of starvation and evicting their parents from the land to make way for capital accumulation is barbaric in a world where we have the capacity to feed everyone.

[MiniTheMinx]

The acid test really is this. How many 'successful' states pursue left wing policies? I can't think of any you need to study history 1945-2013 to figure that out! why not, I challenge you to read up about American foreign policy over that time frame. You will then know the answer to your question

[TheFalconsmistress]

I totally agree with your post OP.

[TheFallenNinja]

But the difficulty is that one section of society (the ones in employment paying tax) believe they are unfairly funding another section of society (who are the benefit claimants). Of course one day you could be in one section, the next in the other when I suspect the attitude would change accordingly.

Personally I'm not bothered who rally's to which political flag, I just would like to see the state not waste money.

[wannabedomesticgoddess]

The state wastes more money when families are driven to such lengths that social services then come in and kids go into care. Because their disabled mother could look after them with support, but that support is withdrawn.

So instead of paying for the original support, now the government is paying social workers and foster carers. Its not saving anything.

Same with benefits. Leave a family to scrape by and the first thing to get cut is the food budget. You might save a few hundred pounds on the benefits per year, but then what are you spending through the NHS when poor diets lead to health problems etc.

[pumpkinsweetie]

wannabe makes good points in her post. The knock on effect these cuts will have will cost even more money than the money the government will save, not to mention the affect on retail and business as those people will not be able to afford essentials, which of course brings money to shops and businesses.

The effect on social care, and the wellbeing of youngsters will do untold damage.

[ivanhoe]

Well said wannabedomesticgoddess

[ivanhoe]

As stated in my OP. Cameron is using cutting the deficit as a cover to reduce the State and cut welfare. End of story.

We British are largely like sheep, particularly middle England.

[ivanhoe]

""New Labour only won power again after Blair dragged them to the right. And due to the rise of UKIP we can see that the nation has stepped to the right, leaving very few (but vocal) people bleating on about what we should be doing (in their opinion)""

Bang on.

[ivanhoe]

""""Why shouldn't we dismantle the welfare state? It'd make things interesting around here for one when the idle have to get off their fat arses and start working"".

How jolly interesting. I'm amazed it's not been thought of before ?

[CogitoErgoSometimes]

I think it's delusional to believe it's 'the right' that exclusively wants to see a scaling back of welfare. It's not even those in comfy homes or the right wing press. Traditional Labour party supporters, who can't be tarred with the middle England 'sheep' label, are very angry. People like Brown's Nemesis Mrs Duffy, know (because they live in the real world and are not at all romantic about poverty) that effort is not necessarily rewarded, those who need help are often unable to get it and far too many are taking the piss. Why else would Balls and Miliband be making announcements this week that they would also reform the welfare state if/when they are back in power? Their grass roots supporters want them to represent workers... not welfare.

[BaconKetchup]

Didn't Ed Miliband announce the other day that if Labour get into power next they will not be reversing any of the cuts, and indeed will be continuing with an austerity programme?

That means what Cogito said is correct.

[ttosca]

I've posted many times the report that shows the majority of the public is misinformed about how much is spent on welfare, in what departments, and the level of fraud.

=============================

New research commissioned by the TUC shows support for government welfare cuts is based on ignorance and misinformation.

A recent poll shows many people?s assumptions about welfare spending are wildly inaccurate, that those who are most likely to be wrong about the realities of welfare are most likely to support government cuts, but that ? when provided with accurate information ? people shift from supporting government plans to opposing them.

For example, on average people think 27% of the welfare budget is wasted on fraud. In fact, by the government?s own figures, fraud accounts for only 0.7%.

wwinn.org.uk/news/support-for-welfare-cuts-based-on-myths-and-misinformation/

---

Voters 'brainwashed by Tory welfare myths', shows new poll

Survey shows public ignorance of the level of benefits and who gets them



Ministers were accused of demonising benefits claimants in an attempt to justify their controversial decision to increase most state handouts by less than inflation.

Polling commissioned by the Trades Union Congress suggests that a campaign by Tory ministers is turning voters against claimants ? but only because the public is being fed "myths" about those who rely on benefits.

The criticism comes before a crunch Commons vote next Tuesday on the Welfare Benefits Uprating Bill, which will ensure that most benefits and tax credits will rise by only one per cent for the next three years. Labour, which will vote against the measure, tried today to answer Tory claims that it is "soft" on scroungers by announcing a "tough love" plan to force adults who have been out of work for more than two years to take up a government "job guarantee" or lose their benefits.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/voters-brainwashed-by-tory-welfare-myths-shows-new-poll-8437872.html

[ttosca]

Cogito-

Why else would Balls and Miliband be making announcements this week that they would also reform the welfare state if/when they are back in power? Their grass roots supporters want them to represent workers... not welfare.

and

Ketchup-

Didn't Ed Miliband announce the other day that if Labour get into power next they will not be reversing any of the cuts, and indeed will be continuing with an austerity programme?

---

The answer is two-fold

1. Pure political pragramatism: The Tory scum and right-wing press have so far successfully propagated myths about welfare and welfare claimaints. Rather than challenge these myths, they calculate it would be easier to campaign on the commonly-accepted narrative.
   
   
2. Labour is no longer a party which represents workers in any case. It is neo-liberal party, and as such, can ultimately be expected to defend the interests of the ruling class.

[ttosca]

Also, when you hear Tory's talk about 'making work pay', you should read that as 'reducing social security payments'.

In reality, as everyone should know by now, the majority of social security is paid out to people in work.

The problem is that work doesn't pay, not that social security is too generous.

If the Tory scum really wanted to 'make work pay' they would enact a Living Wage as a legal requirement. They won't. Quite the contrary, they've suggested that the min wage should be allowed to 'wither away' over time by not keeping the rate up with inflation.

So, thanks to the Tories, we'll continue to have a situation where tax payers subsidize businesses who pay pittance wages to their employees.

In other words, welfare for the rich, Capitalism for the poor.

[niceguy2]

Yawn...yes yes, it's all the fault of the Tories. Life before they came along was just ticketyboo and we lived in a socialist utopia.

Tories are scum, the economy is in the shitter because of them. The Lib dems are scum I expect for getting into bed with them. Labour won't change anything because guess what....it's the Tories fault. Is there anything which wasn't the fault of the Tories?

[CogitoErgoSometimes]

"Rather than challenge these myths, they calculate it would be easier to campaign on the commonly-accepted narrative"

Or... it's not myths. The 'commonly-accepted narrative' is the truth, in other words. There is no great popular demand for extreme socialism or communism.

[CogitoErgoSometimes]

"support for government welfare cuts is based on ignorance and misinformation."

To claim that this all boils down to the electorate being stupid is rather insulting and patronising, don't you think?

[ttosca]

Oh, good show, Cogito, going for a play to the gallery!

What I said was that people were misinformed about welfare, thanks to the relentless propaganda coming from the Tories and the right-wing press (as that article shows). I didn't call them stupid.

In fact, the public appear to be considerably smarter than the Tory apologists, since, when told the actual facts about social security spending, the numbers for people who support or oppose cuts to social security typically swap the other way around.

In other words, when the public are made aware of the realities of welfare spending, as opposed to Tory lies, they no longer support the cuts.

It's not surprising that the only way the Tories can maintain this level of support - as abysmal as it already is - is through lying.

[ttosca]

Smith. Shapps. Now Cameron lies to Parliament on NHS stats

I?ve written recently about the gross abuse of statistics by the DWP and by Grant Shapps on behalf of the government, which led to public rebukes by Andrew Dilnot, the Chair of the UK Statistics Authority.

This is not aberrant behaviour. The Tory party has a strong track record of statistical distortion and even outright lies. David Cameron lied to Parliament last year about new private sector jobs created under his government (an offence that used to lead to automatic resignation if discovered). Last week, he was at it again.

During PMQs on Wednesday, during a typically woeful and arrogant performance in which he barely referred to an opposition question let alone answer one, Cameron was challenged by a Labour MP on the massive increase in A&E waiting times. Here?s the exchange:

Robert Flello (Stoke-on-Trent South) (Lab): Yet again we have no answers from the Prime Minister, who blames everyone but himself and denies that there is a crisis in A and E. Let me give him one more chance to try to give an answer. Why does he not admit what everyone in the health service knows?his £3 billion reorganisation has diverted attention and resources from patient care and he has betrayed his promises? May we now have an answer?
The Prime Minister: The abolition of the bureaucracy that this Government have brought about will put billions of pounds extra into the NHS, but the point that the hon. Gentleman has to take on is that this Government made a decision, which was not to cut the NHS. We are putting £12.7 billion extra into the NHS.

£12.7 billion extra into the NHS. David Cameron knows this to be untrue. He knows it because, like his ministers Iain (Duncan) Smith and Grant Shapps, he and his government were rebuked late last year for making similar false claims on NHS spending. Here?s how Sky News reported it:

he [Dilnot] said the UKSA?s calculations were based on what he considered ?the most authoritative source? of national statistics on the subject ? the Treasury?s Public Spending Statistics publication.

?On the basis of these figures, we would conclude that expenditure on the NHS in real terms was lower in 2011-12 than it was in 2009-10,? he said.

Even the Telegraph, normally a tame Rottweiler for the Tories when it comes to the NHS, got saw the reality of the matter and got in on the act with this headline:

Image

When the £12 billion claim first reared its head, it was challenged robustly by BBC Politics Show host Andrew Neil. Interviewed after his speech to the Conservative party conference last autumn, Jeremy Hunt tried to claim that the Tories had put this extra money into the NHS.

Neil, to his credit, shot back that this was ?pure propaganda? ? and revealed that the funding increase was £60 million ? far less than matching inflation, and therefore a substantial real-terms decrease.

But the truth about NHS spending under this government doesn?t end there. A huge amount of the money that the coalition puts into the NHS simply goes in the front door and straight out the back. As I reported last year, in the 2011/12 fiscal year, the Treasury ?clawed back? no less than £1.4 billion from NHS funds, while siphoning off another £1.5bn for other uses ? dwarfing the paltry increase in budgeted funds.

But it gets worse. The clawback for the 2012/13 year was even higher ? at £2.2 billion.

The reality of the NHS funding situation is no secret, and is certainly not something that Cameron could claim to be in ignorance of or that it slipped his mind.

No matter which way you cut it, Cameron ? knowingly ? lied to the House and should resign immediately, were it not that such things are more likely to lead to promotion than to resignation under this government, as Jeremy Hunt?s case showed last year. Not only that, but he repeated a lie that he?s already been rebuked about and told not to repeat.

I have therefore written to Andrew Dilnot at the UKSA as follows (with a copy to Shadow Health Secretary Andy Burnham):

Dear Mr Dilnot,
Last Wednesday (5 June), David Cameron claimed during Prime Minister?s Questions:
?We are putting £12.7 billion extra into the NHS.?
Looking at Treasury spending statistics, I see a nominal, but not real-terms, increase in NHS spending compared to the last year under the previous government, but certainly nothing like £12.7 billion. Since the Treasury routinely claws back well billions from the NHS ? some £2.2 billion during 2012/13, up from £1.5bn in 2011/12 ? Mr Cameron?s statement was a bald lie. He did not say that NHS budgets had increased, but that more was ?put into? the NHS ? which is not true when the Treasury is clawing back far more than the nominal increase.
And even if this were not the case, budgets have not risen by £12.7 billion ? or at all in real terms according to yourself late last year.
Since you have been so good as to rebuke the government over false statistical claims on at least a couple of occasions this year, please would you take a look at this matter and do so again?
See the following links for further information:
skwalker1964.wordpress.com/2012/12/21/the-govts-1-5bn-backdoor-nhs-theft-on-top-of-its-1-4bn-claw-back/
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nhs-treatments-rationed-hit-cash-1777836
liberalconspiracy.org/2013/02/18/revealed-tories-siphoning-nhs-money-to-the-treasury-despite-promises/
I look forward to your response.
Best regards,
Steve Walker
The SKWAWKBOX blog

Can I ask you to do the same, to make sure that this issue receives the attention ? and eventually the public rebuke ? that it deserves? If you want to send your own complaint to the UKSA, the email address is [email protected].

Can I ask you to do the same, to make sure that this issue receives the attention ? and eventually the public rebuke ? that it deserves? If you want to send your own complaint to the UKSA, the email address is [email protected].

You might want to copy it to your MP, too ? a complaint from Sheila Gilmore MP to Andrew Dilnot led to the rebuke on ESA benefit lies, so some MPs do pay attention to such things and take action. If you want to find your MPs details, you can look them up very quickly at www.theyworkforyou.com.

Jump in and let?s turn up the heat on Walter Mitty David Cameron for his persistent, arrogant lies!

skwalker1964.wordpress.com/2013/06/09/smith-shapps-now-cameron-lies-to-parliament-on-nhs-stats/

[CogitoErgoSometimes]

Me playing the gallery?... LOL. Sorry tossa but your track record of deliberately and rather too-obviously filling the MN boards with nothing but the most emotive far-left propaganda makes you a very black sock-puppet of a pot to start dishing out criticism to this particular kettle...

[BaconKetchup]

Cogito "tossa"? was that a freudian slip?

[ttosca]

Cogito-

Maybe some day you'll start arguing with facts instead of rhetoric all the time.

[niceguy2]

kettle....this this pot......you're black