Tory - The caring conservatives

[Frutos]

b

Wouldn't it be easier just to pay it to a charity for the elderly, Age UK for example, or maybe a charity for the homeless?

That is what he now does - as you rightly say its much easier.

 

[Nibble]

You began by saying that the Tories are revolting, and that pensioners rely on benefits such as the winter fuel allowance. The purpose of my post, now that I clearly need to be more explicit for you, was to demonstrate that not all need to rely on it, and thus looking at the expenditure on this benefit might not be as draconian as it seems. I assume that means testing would be incredibly complicated and thus expensive, and so it is paid to all. It is not a question of agreeing one way or the other, just stating the obvious that it is by no means universally needed. Hopefully this will now be clear, even for you.

You seem reluctant to form an opinion on this? I get what you think you are saying but what do you actually think? Because some don't need it, should the Tory's blanket cut the whole benefit? For everyone?

 

[glasfryn]

yea but what about the WMD'S

yep bad that
how many minutes was it before we were to be attacked by Saddam, we were all sucked in until I/we realised they were the tories in disguise

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I believe this to be the case - my Grandad receives it despite not being in a financial position to require it, and has had immense difficulties convincing the relevant authorities to either take it back or not pay it to him in the first place.

But if he refuses it it will just ultimately end up further swelling the coffers of Dave and Gideon's millionaire mates. Far better to claim it and pass it on to someone who might need it.

 

[drew]

I'm still hanging my head in shame for voting for Blair. Not only did his government get us into the economic mess we're still trying to get out of, but it took us to a war that's still shaping the world for the worse.

Are you now claiming that the global financial crises was the responsibility of Blair? You are aware that prior to the crisis, spending was only just under 40% of GDP, only very slightly higher than it had been when Labour came into power in 1997!

 

[drew]

That is what he now does - as you rightly say its much easier.

Credit to him.

 

[GT49er]

"Many of those hit by a cut to the winter fuel allowance might "not be around" at the next election, said Alex Wild of the Taxpayers' Alliance. And others would forget which party had done it, he added. Mr Wild said the Tories could not wait until a year before the next election to make the necessary cuts to the winter fuel allowance, free bus passes, the Christmas bonus and other pensioner benefits."

That really is a shocking statement. I hope all decent, caring Tories will quickly make their voices heard in condemnation. Won't happen though, will it?

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Using that theory all the Labour Party currently are IRA sympathisers.

And they hate British people too, along with some of their gang smashing up shops and spitting at people.

 

[Hastings gull]

You seem reluctant to form an opinion on this? I get what you think you are saying but what do you actually think? Because some don't need it, should the Tory's blanket cut the whole benefit? For everyone?

The ideal for me would be to pay where it is needed, genuinely needed, but that would be incredibly hard to do, I would imagine, and where would you draw the line? Who would be honest and who would lie, if they knew a few hundred quid was coming their way. This is not easy. The "nice kind" answer would be to say "pay it" because that way the most needy members of society will not lose out what could be a winter lifleline for them - literally in some old folk's cases - but in so doing, you know that millions will be paid out when it is not necessary, and that you will also be rewarding those who have been profligate with their finances, assuming the State will bail them out.

 

[Triggaaar]

nothing to do with bailing the banks out then?

Bailing out the banks saved us from all being ****ed. I don't think that can be blamed for the war either.

And your point is?

I'm ashamed. And no party seems capable of getting it all right, we just have to pick the one that makes the least **** ups. Today's thread is about something the govt. haven't even done.

 

[Buzzer]

This report does nothing more than repeat the calls for removal of universal benefits made by the Fabian Society in 2013. Here's their report

http://www.fabians.org.uk/ageing-in-the-middle/

And the Fabian Society is Britain's oldest thinktank, one of the founders of the Labour Party and their executive committee includes very senior Labour MPs such as Stephen Twigg, Sadiq Khan etc etc. So if the Tories are nasty then so is the Fabian Society.

This is the problem with having to deal with such problem issues such as reforms of universal benefits - there's no language that can assuage the feelings it invokes. Trouble is the lefties do love a knee-jerk reaction when it's the Tories talking about it but are strangely very, very silent when it's the Labour Party. You can just see the usual suspects frothing at the mouth on this very thread. Can't think why they didn't get this excited when the Fabian Society report came out two years ago*.


*I tease. Of course I can think why - they're hypocrites.

 

[beorhthelm]

hands up who thinks that winter fuel allowance, free bus passes, and the Christmas bonus should be means tested, or at least taxable? those not raised does it sit ok with you that a pensioner with say £15-20k income can get a number of handouts, while those surviving on the basic state probably don't have enough? have you seen the cost of the pensions on the UK spending? if you arent concerned about how those who need it will get anything in the next generations, you arent understanding the pension problem.

 

[Nibble]

The ideal for me would be to pay where it is needed, genuinely needed, but that would be incredibly hard to do, I would imagine, and where would you draw the line? Who would be honest and who would lie, if they knew a few hundred quid was coming their way. This is not easy. The "nice kind" answer would be to say "pay it" because that way the most needy members of society will not lose out what could be a winter lifleline for them - literally in some old folk's cases - but in so doing, you know that millions will be paid out when it is not necessary, and that you will also be rewarding those who have been profligate with their finances, assuming the State will bail them out.

Perhaps we could adopt the attitude that they can have it because they deserve it , not because they can't afford it.

 

[Nibble]

This report does nothing more than repeat the calls for removal of universal benefits made by the Fabian Society in 2013. Here's their report

http://www.fabians.org.uk/ageing-in-the-middle/

And the Fabian Society is Britain's oldest thinktank, one of the founders of the Labour Party and their executive committee includes very senior Labour MPs such as Stephen Twigg, Sadiq Khan etc etc. So if the Tories are nasty then so is the Fabian Society.

This is the problem with having to deal with such problem issues such as reforms of universal benefits - there's no language that can assuage the feelings it invokes. Trouble is the lefties do love a knee-jerk reaction when it's the Tories talking about it but are strangely very, very silent when it's the Labour Party. You can just see the usual suspects frothing at the mouth on this very thread. Can't think why they didn't get this excited when the Fabian Society report came out two years ago*.


*I tease. Of course I can think why - they're hypocrites.

You assume quite a lot there. Cannot stand Labour. Tory's in all but name. Not least because of the items you mentioned above. Your last line reveals you to be just as hypocritical as those you hold in such contempt.

 

[Hastings gull]

Perhaps we could adopt the attitude that they can have it because they deserve it , not because they can't afford it.

I am trying to work out your last alternative -sorry. Who can't afford it? Yes, by all means if it is deserved, but of course it does not take into account human nature -would the vast majority not all say that we deserve it?! In all my years of working, I don't think I have ever heard anyone say that they don't deserve a pay rise . . Politicians at times have to make hard decisions and weigh up the pros and cons.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

This report does nothing more than repeat the calls for removal of universal benefits made by the Fabian Society in 2013. Here's their report

http://www.fabians.org.uk/ageing-in-the-middle/

And the Fabian Society is Britain's oldest thinktank, one of the founders of the Labour Party and their executive committee includes very senior Labour MPs such as Stephen Twigg, Sadiq Khan etc etc. So if the Tories are nasty then so is the Fabian Society.

This is the problem with having to deal with such problem issues such as reforms of universal benefits - there's no language that can assuage the feelings it invokes. Trouble is the lefties do love a knee-jerk reaction when it's the Tories talking about it but are strangely very, very silent when it's the Labour Party. You can just see the usual suspects frothing at the mouth on this very thread. Can't think why they didn't get this excited when the Fabian Society report came out two years ago*.


*I tease. Of course I can think why - they're hypocrites.

Did I miss the part where the FS report suggests that early in the term is a good time to bring in these cuts, as lots of the pensioners will be dead by the next election, or will have 'forgotten who did it'?

Even if you accept the need for cuts / austerity (lets not start that general point all over again) this kind of ruthless cynicism is unpalatable to most right-minded people.

As HT has pointed out, early in the thread, this is Alan B'staad brought to life. A living embodiment of the nasty Tory. If it wasn't so tragic, it would be funny.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

How THICK some people on here are. This is the "Tax Payers Alliance", not the Conservative Party. Reported by the BBC so that all the angry and aggressive lefties will start spouting their usual bile and hatred.

http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/our_mission

The TPA’s mission is to:

Change the perception that big government is necessary and irreversible
Explain the benefits of a low tax economy
Give taxpayers a voice in the corridors of power

We achieve this by releasing pioneering research into taxation and government spending. Our research team uses the Freedom of Information Act to uncover information previously hidden from taxpayers. In the last year we’ve written 28 papers based on more than 4,100 FOI requests. We also publish books to build on our research, most recently Let Them Eat Carbon and How to Cut Public Spending (and Still Win an Election).

Hang your heads in shame lefties.

 

[Bozza]

That really is a shocking statement. I hope all decent, caring Tories will quickly make their voices heard in condemnation. Won't happen though, will it?

An interesting suggestion. How much of your time do you spend making your voice heard condemning organisations that you have no connection with, do not represent you and you do not consider speaking on behalf of you?

Regardless, I don't want you to be unhappy about this, so I've just condemned it using the strongest possible language. However as I'm in my house by myself no one heard me. Does it still count?

 

[glasfryn]

An interesting suggestion. How much of your time do you spend making your voice heard condemning organisations that you have no connection with, do not represent you and you do not consider speaking on behalf of you?

Regardless, I don't want you to be unhappy about this, so I've just condemned it using the strongest possible language. However as I'm in my house by myself no one heard me. Does it still count?

it does
because if you are already thinking this you will of coarse spread the word, when you get out of the house that is

 

[Buzzer]

You assume quite a lot there. Cannot stand Labour. Tory's in all but name. Not least because of the items you mentioned above. Your last line reveals you to be just as hypocritical as those you hold in such contempt.

Sorry but I don't buy that. You've been very specific about which party you hate over the last year and it's certainly not the Labour Party. As I say, it's difficult to talk about universal benefits for pensioners without it invoking strong feelings that any cut feels immoral but as others have said, the debate needs to be made nonetheless. When the Fabian Society do it, you're silent but when the Tories do it you're apoplectic with rage. Funny that.