George Osborne,does he have a point ?

[Herr Tubthumper]

Funny how a politician is trying to make "cunty political gain" when he represents a view you don't agree with. Phillpot didn't want to work and he thus abused the welfare system which is there for those that genuinely need it. Why ignore that fact?

MPs from across all main parties have pulled him up on this; even from his own party. The criticism is not due to differing political views.

 

[pork pie]

employers using cheap labour more like
the osbourne statement was ill timed no more no less and it just proves to me and most others that the man is a cretin

So there are no jobs, or the wages are low? Which is it?

Agreed it was alittle insensitive to comment at that time. But the whole thing was nearly a year ago now, even though it is getting press coverage because of the trial. HOWEVER, the debate is valid, and demonstrates the problems that our Goverment face with the way that the welfare state has become an alternative way of life for scroungers. I read somewhere that they were getting £100k a year (net) - how can that be right because he cannot keep his cock under control?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

There are jobs for people with low skills like him

But not enough. How many are unemployed? How many job vacancies are there? Do the very simple maths and you will see that one into the other doesn't go.

 

[pork pie]

MPs from across all main parties have pulled him up on this; even from his own party. The criticism is not due to differing political views.

Maybe you can let us all know when the matter should be debated? Whatever your views on the timing, the facts of the matter remain true. This piece of shit was banging out kids to milk the welfare state for all he could get. With two women as his brood mares.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

So there are no jobs, or the wages are low? Which is it?

Agreed it was alittle insensitive to comment at that time. But the whole thing was nearly a year ago now, even though it is getting press coverage because of the trial. HOWEVER, the debate is valid, and demonstrates the problems that our Goverment face with the way that the welfare state has become an alternative way of life for scroungers. I read somewhere that they were getting £100k a year (net) - how can that be right because he cannot keep his cock under control?

The validity of the debate is not up for question. It's his timing and the connection he made. Good politicians choose their moments and their fights. Gideon repeatedly gets both wrong.

 

[abc]

MPs from across all main parties have pulled him up on this; even from his own party. The criticism is not due to differing political views.

Ok. So why is it wrong to debate welfare abuse? I suspect we hold the same general view of the importance of the welfare state per se and I can't believe anyone believes abuse of it, in the way that Philpott abused it, is correct or sustainable. So why not welcome the debate that Osbqourne is trying to have?

Off to the game now. Later....

 

[BLOCK F]

Same people who called anybody who wanted a debate about immigration,racists, are now calling anybody who wants a debate about social welfare evil Tory c----!
That is the tolerant lefties for you!!

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Maybe you can let us all know when the matter should be debated? Whatever your views on the timing, the facts of the matter remain true. This piece of shit was banging out kids to milk the welfare state for all he could get. With two women as his brood mares.

I thought the matter had been debated hence the recent reforms which came in?

 

[abc]

But not enough. How many are unemployed? How many job vacancies are there? Do the very simple maths and you will see that one into the other doesn't go.

No lack of jobs in the South East but locals don't want them which is why the immigrant population is here. They are not cheap labour as the minimum wage has to be paid to them as much as anyone else. If the minimum wage is to low then that's a different debate.

Very different elsewhere in the country though

 

[pork pie]

But not enough. How many are unemployed? How many job vacancies are there? Do the very simple maths and you will see that one into the other doesn't go.

There are not enough jobs for skilled workers. That is because LAbour destroyed our economy, and the Government need to cut as much spending of money we cannot afford as possible.There are loads for unskilled, but Brits do not want them, and they such in Eastern Europeans to do them. Do you really think farmers want to use these people to pick their crops, or would they rather use Brits?

The Government need to do more to create jobs for skilled workers, that is were the problem is. There are loads around at minimum wage, but nobody wants them if they are Brits, and better off on the dole.

 

[pork pie]

I thought the matter had been debated hence the recent reforms which came in?

No, that is just the start hopefully.

 

[Twinkle Toes]

So was he actually wrong, or just saying it at the wrong time for you?

He made the case of the tragic deaths of 6 children to justify the Government's welfare reforms. I find it totally abhorrent that anybody could ever stoop so low as to look to gain political capital by highlighting such a dreadful - & indeed unique - case. If Cameron had any balls and/or decency, he'd sack Osbourn & make a public apology.

 

[Ernest]

He made the case of the tragic deaths of 6 children to justify the Government's welfare reforms. I find it totally abhorrent that anybody could ever stoop so low as to look to gain political capital by highlighting such a dreadful - & indeed unique - case. If Cameron had any balls and/or decency, he'd sack Osbourn & make a public apology.

Seeing as Dave has backed Gideon he is tarred with the same brush

 

[pork pie]

He made the case of the tragic deaths of 6 children to justify the Government's welfare reforms. I find it totally abhorrent that anybody could ever stoop so low as to look to gain political capital by highlighting such a dreadful - & indeed unique - case. If Cameron had any balls and/or decency, he'd sack Osbourn & make a public apology.

You appear to be forgetting that whilst it is "fresh" in the press now because of the court case. The incident was a year ago. Their death is intrinsicly linked to the walfare state, as Phillpots wanted them to be with him so he could get the benefits for them. If there were no benefits, there would be no reason for him to try to discredit their mother by starting the fire in the first place. His only motive was greed.

Indeed, if there were no benefits for so many kids, he may not even have had them in the first place. Other issues for debate (at some point if not now) revolve around how he was allowed to have so many kids when he did not have the money to support them without state funding, and why they were not taken into care to bring them up in a manner that would prepare them to take their place in society and pay their way in future.

 

[Billy the Fish]

There are too many on here who fail to realise that most people claiming benefits are deserving of help and genuinely in need of assistance. The scare mongering in the press has worked incredibly well to bring the hard of thinking to the conclusion that most people on benefits are cheating and system in some way.

It all works fantastically to divert attention from the people who are really cheating the system.

I think you have to accept that if you have state benefits there will be some who use it to do nothing. I've come to the conclusion that in the grand scheme of things it's best to ignore these people and let them get on with it, it's not like it's a particularly good or fulfilling existance. For me, the only other option is to go back to victorian times and let everyone fend for themselves, that is clearly not an option anymore.

Uh_huh_him makes an interesting point that all this is masking the real debate, that seems to be what modern politics has become - it's just a load of soundbytes and using extreme cases to make your point either way rather than having an objective debate with real facts and figures.

Recently on NSC there's been discussion on all sorts of things like the NHS, education and unemployment, but very rarely do I see anyone join the dots and link it all together, red and blue argue about the problems but never look into the root cause. I think that is also a reflection of modern politics, nobody seems to see the bigger picture on anything. Certain sections of society are now stuck in a vicious circle of poorly educated parents breeding poorly educated children. This section of society is vilified for something that isn't their fault.

If we educated children properly with small class sizes and well trained teachers to teach a well rounded curriculum where everyone left school being able to read, write, add up, look after themselves, have an appreciation of culture then alot of our current social and health problems would just sort themselves out. The next generation might then be capable of raising children properly, which many seemingly aren't at the moment.
If we had further education more focussed on sciences and engineering I'm sure alot of our employment problems would improve.

Of course, that could well be utterly futile. Seemingly the whole world is a slave to banks and corporations who hoard a massive % of the planets wealth which should really be put to use to keep people in better living conditions. Labour, Conservatives - it doesen't matter when the system is rotten and politicians answer to moneymen.

 

[Bakero]

I think you have to accept that if you have state benefits there will be some who use it to do nothing. I've come to the conclusion that in the grand scheme of things it's best to ignore these people and let them get on with it, it's not like it's a particularly good or fulfilling existance. For me, the only other option is to go back to victorian times and let everyone fend for themselves, that is clearly not an option anymore.

Uh_huh_him makes an interesting point that all this is masking the real debate, that seems to be what modern politics has become - it's just a load of soundbytes and using extreme cases to make your point either way rather than having an objective debate with real facts and figures.

Recently on NSC there's been discussion on all sorts of things like the NHS, education and unemployment, but very rarely do I see anyone join the dots and link it all together, red and blue argue about the problems but never look into the root cause. I think that is also a reflection of modern politics, nobody seems to see the bigger picture on anything. Certain sections of society are now stuck in a vicious circle of poorly educated parents breeding poorly educated children. This section of society is vilified for something that isn't their fault.

If we educated children properly with small class sizes and well trained teachers to teach a well rounded curriculum where everyone left school being able to read, write, add up, look after themselves, have an appreciation of culture then alot of our current social and health problems would just sort themselves out. The next generation might then be capable of raising children properly, which many seemingly aren't at the moment.
If we had further education more focussed on sciences and engineering I'm sure alot of our employment problems would improve.

Of course, that could well be utterly futile. Seemingly the whole world is a slave to banks and corporations who hoard a massive % of the planets wealth which should really be put to use to keep people in better living conditions. Labour, Conservatives - it doesen't matter when the system is rotten and politicians answer to moneymen.

Great post, Billy.

 

[Silk]

As other posters have pointed out, the debate has been had, the reforms are coming in. If George Osbourne now wants a debate, is he admitting there's something wrong with the new policies?

 

[beorhthelm]

He made the case of the tragic deaths of 6 children to justify the Government's welfare reforms.

but he didnt. i find it odd how so many people are sucked in by this, hearing what they want to. the question was about his lifestyle before the events, not the events. that said, Cameroon should get rid as Osborne is doing neither his party or the country any favors.

 

[Twinkle Toes]

You appear to be forgetting that whilst it is "fresh" in the press now because of the court case. The incident was a year ago. Their death is intrinsicly linked to the walfare state, as Phillpots wanted them to be with him so he could get the benefits for them. If there were no benefits, there would be no reason for him to try to discredit their mother by starting the fire in the first place. His only motive was greed.

Indeed, if there were no benefits for so many kids, he may not even have had them in the first place. Other issues for debate (at some point if not now) revolve around how he was allowed to have so many kids when he did not have the money to support them without state funding, and why they were not taken into care to bring them up in a manner that would prepare them to take their place in society and pay their way in future.

The case concerned the motives of ONE twisted individual (plus the pair of vile collaborators, obviously). Where's the evidence for the plethora of other supposed examples of a twisted, greedy individual on state benefits behaving in such a disgusting way? That - as far as I'm concerned - is at the heart of this particular situation, whereby a member of our Government takes it upon themself to use a single, extreme example to justify a policy affecting millions of citizens.

 

[Twinkle Toes]

but he didnt. i find it odd how so many people are sucked in by this, hearing what they want to. the question was about his lifestyle before the events, not the events. that said, Cameroon should get rid as Osborne is doing neither his party or the country any favors.

But why use such an extreme case to highlight his belief that Welfare reform is so necessary? Does it not strike you as being at best: highly insensitive; & at worst: calculated, manipulative & downright nasty?