Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

https://www.theguardian.com/business...z-trusss-plans

So much for giving back to hard working people!

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Tax cuts and spending cuts are more to the right of where Boris Johnson, to whom Dorris was a massive ally, was.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Is that the Wooden Cabinet? ;)

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

I would say the far-right is fascist or at least any authoritarian approach to imposing your political ideology on the country.

Right-wing is either economically right-wing meaning a smaller state with less spending and lower taxes or socially right-wing with opposition to 'progressive' change.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

The Political Compass remains one of the best resources for teasing out these definitions. This is their exapliner, well worth 5 minutes of your time:



Long story short, if you try to describe economic and social politics in terms of “left” and “right” simultaneously you will come unstuck. You need to define someone’s position as economically left or right and socially authoritarian or libertarian. And one position by no means pre-ordains the other.

Their website is here: https://www.politicalcompass.org/

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

I think you believe the left is easier to understand because you're not within it so find it easier to paint it with a broad brush whereas you have a better understanding of the divisions with 'the right' so find it harder to define precisely. Left/Right classifications aren't perfect but we generally have a rough idea of what we mean.

Well, that's the divide within the Tory Party at the moment but Doris would say they were elected on a platform that didn't push lower taxes and a smaller state.

I think the police find it easier to deal with Twitter posts than crimes because it takes fewer resources and is an easy win for them. It's authoritarian but I think you need more than a few examples for it to be a far-right/fascist/authoritarian state.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Been a while since I did that quiz...

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...6&d=1665053680

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

And to think you once had dinner with Mrs T :rofl:

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Last did this about a decade ago and haven't changed. However being a dunce at linking stuff I won't even try. My coordinates were almost identical, on the right hand edge of the same sub square. Economic L/R -5.75 Social Lib/auth -5.85

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Mine is a bit surprising to me:

https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2022/10/1.jpg

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Not to us…

---------- Post added at 13:22 ---------- Previous post was at 13:13 ----------

Found the last test I did in 2013, and I’ve moved more to the left economically, and become more social libertarian - I blame Johnson & Truss… ;)

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...7&d=1665059480

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

I think my problem (as I too have drifted leftwards) is that while I believe innovation and enterprise to be a more effective driver of prosperity than bureaucracy, the politicians nominally aligned with that position are no longer even hiding their willingness to use it to enrich their mates. As I go through the propositions in the Political Compass test, I’m finding that I’m instinctively reacting against statements that are obviously aligned with these people.

Interesting side note, my downloadable certificate says I’m now to the left of Nicola Sturgeon, which actually isn’t as awful as it sounds - she is charted nearthe dead centre of both axes, which is clearly a contrivance to try to make the SNP cause appeal to everyone.

(Edit) guess I should paste up my results (not the complete certificate, which is the one full of caricatures of notable figures) …

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...1&d=1665060528

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Spooky…..

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Alright Adolf…

---------- Post added at 14:55 ---------- Previous post was at 14:54 ----------

Me too, pretty much the same!

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Have you seen OB's? :D

(the scale had to be adjusted from linear to logarthimic to make it fit...)

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...0&d=1665065308

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

“Mad” Max.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Take that one and move it about as far to the left as it goes…

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

I quess my result is pretty much as I expected. I would love to see the result of ̶o̶n̶e̶ errr I mean some of our more entrenched members.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Mmmm...

Attachment 30213

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Ah, thresholds. I seem to recall Gordon Brown loving those too. Oldest trick in the book and surely something they should have realised would spotted pretty quickly. :mad:

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]

I nearly got a bullseye. :D

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

This was known when they announced the mini-budget. Because of Sunak's frozen thresholds, only the 150k+ earners would be better off in real terms.

I was surprised there was not more media coverage on this. I found this from a week ago:

The Stealth Tax Buried in Kwasi Kwarteng’s Budget

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

You sound surprised????

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

There is rightfully criticism of the unfunded tax cuts. One of which is the reduction to 19% of the basic rate.

What we are now seeing is criticism that the thresholds were not raised, which would have involved even more borrowing!

It's not straightforward this budget malarkey.......

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

l could not download my readings but l seem to be near enough the same as you Jo.:)

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

It’s really straightforward. The Conservatives have maxed out the credit card, took a 120% mortgage on the (diminishing value) house but made the kids liable for the debt.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

That's why I said what I did, as in you seem to have seen through the PM and her cohort but your statement came across as being surprised that what they promise and what will transpire is quite different. Being honest, I'd not picked up on the threshold trick by the way, I truly didn't expect things to end up being as great for ordinary people as they were promising because that's not what happens when team blue are in power but didn't think they were being so twisted with the truth. Explains why they didn't want anyone looking at the projected figures.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

And if the rank and file members are having concerns then they are in serious trouble, just like Labour at the last election when a good chunk of the core support just couldn't sign up to what was on offer.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Unless the Government explicitly says they're raising the thresholds you assume they don't. This is pretty much something I was looking for/expecting out of the budget instead of the 45% cut and when it didn't come I knew the thresholds would be frozen.

Cameron/Osbourne are the only ones in recent times to raise the thresholds on the back of the 2015 election.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

As per my avatar to the left…

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...4&d=1665130356

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63177669

This 'gentleman' was suspended for 7 days from Parliament in 2020 - the committee had found Burns guilty of threatening to use parliamentary privilege to intimidate a member of the public for his family's gain.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

At least this time he was suspended fast. Imagine if it was like the ol' Boris days where they let it drag on, try to change the rules to get him off and then suspend him anyway.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

What a charmer.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

He was the one who said

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Doesn’t sound like he could negotiate a trade deal.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

… at a B&Q trade counter?

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

The i newspaper is reporting rebels are planning to oust Truss and crown Sunak.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Pretty much what happened the last time the parliamentary party was handed a leader picked by the wider membership but lacking MPs’ support. Anyone remember how many days Iain Duncan Smith lasted after insisting the was ‘here to stay’?

Mind you, they had given him 2 years to try to put a dent in Tony Blair’s popularity before defenestrating him. I wonder whether Truss will get the same.

Well, that didn't take long
 

First Minister in Truss government sacked.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63177669

New leader no change in sleazy behaviour.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

I wouldn't trust the I newspaper. I am sure some MPs are always talking about it but then they always will be, the question is how far along and realistic are those plans?

It's some MP giving a off the record remark to the reporters and them overwriting it.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

‘The quiet man’ was pathetic. He was never going to win an election sounding like a wimp.

---------- Post added at 19:42 ---------- Previous post was at 19:39 ----------

I wouldn’t be too troubled by what the left-leaning I-newspaper thinks about the Conservative government. If they excelled in the eyes of the public, they would still be painted black.

Not like we do on here :rolleyes:

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Are they excelling atm OB? Do tell us how wonderful this govt is, I'm all ears....
As for the forum, you're the only one who tries to defend anything painted blue. Other right leaning members are sensibly keeping quiet, or are honourably saying what we all know. This Govt is a the worst we've ever had since the English Revolution. Tbh if there was another Civil war, I'd be a Cavalier this time, Charlie can't do any worse.

---------- Post added at 20:24 ---------- Previous post was at 19:53 ----------

Dizzy Lizzies 'Brown bounce' has yet to kick in I expect. Who are the 1 in 5 that's what I want to know....

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

:rofl:

If only they could excel in the eyes of the public just to prove you right :rofl:

However while they are shite and we are all (the bottom 99%) getting poorer through no increases in the personal allowances, energy prices, mortgage rates, etc etc I’m sure they will continue to berated both on here and among the public at large.

It’s not the left leaning press she has to worry about it’s the right :sniper:

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

Won’t accept him. General Election now required.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

I broadly agree. I think they believe a few months of a government perceived as competent, that campaigns competently, has a better chance of not losing as heavily as Truss.

It’s a “win” for Sunak, who gets the prestige as a former PM when he elopes to Silicon Valley. Sure he will have lost, but that’s what happens when you get dealt really bad cards. It lets Mordaunt or others position themselves for post-election defeat leader; which had to be better than being Truss or her direct successor.

Re: New Prime Minister: Liz Truss
 

agree but he was right about Truss plans tanking the economy

Re: Truss’ Troubles
 

Any election now would install Labour, with a sizable majority.
Much as I have no love for the current govt, I love the thought of labour even less.

Re: Truss’ Troubles
 

Can we please correct the header to

Truss's troubles

Thanks

Re: Truss’ Troubles
 

That may be true but Id rather avoid using ' in topic titles anyway. Changed.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

Conor Burns, minister sacked for misconduct claims, is on track for knighthood from Boris

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f...ad25d83d95ca92

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

With Truss in charge l think the Conservatives are very deeply up shit creek Seph but if they get rid of her who is going to replace her and if she is replaced the public are very likely to frown on yet another Conservative leadership contest.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

Unless the polls take a dramatic turn I fear we're going to drift along aimlessly until January 2025. There will be more cock-ups along the way I'm sure but yes I think like the government this thread may have died!

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

Boy, Seph. They’re in for a tough old election if they can’t reverse the decline as even someone so blue as yourself is being so negative.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

they got to be a general election by December 2024 so can't goto 2025

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

The Guardian reporting another embarrassing climbdown as rebels threat to vote against rising benefits with earnings instead of inflation.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...s-benefits-cut

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

Yes, so if she goes full term then with the 25 days from dissolving to election it could be January 25.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

Wouldn’t raising benefits by double the rate of wage increases encourage people to not work?

I’m intrigued as to why some baby eating tories want to do just that….

It’s almost like they aren’t tories at all.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

It's easier to live on a wage that goes up less than the rate of inflation than it is for someone on means tested benefits.

Following the freezing of benefits by the Cameron Government, even if benefits are uprated by inflation, the level of benefits will still be less than the poverty line.

On top of this, most of the poorest in society now have to contribute towards their rent and Council Tax (which used to attract a possible 100% rebate) out of money meant for other day to day living expenses.

I think that Truss wanted to do this to effectively claw back the energy help given to those on benefits, whilst those of us that are better off because they are working or have independent means get to keep theirs.

I doubt very much if someone with a wage that goes up by 5% will want to swap places with someone with a benefit going up by 10%. Even if they did decide to stop working on the back of this, they would receive short thrift from the Job Centre. Regulations are in place to deal with people who pack in a job for no good reason or are dismissed for misconduct.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

It's amazing what politicians will do/say with their backs against the wall.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

I think you have a bias towards those who claim benefits.

There are those who have no option due to circumstance that need benefits, these people also use services that are funded fro council tax, why should they not contribute a small amount? as the maximum rebate available is ninety percent it is a small amount. Doesn't universal credit have a housing component which replaced housing benefit?

Then, there are those who claim benefits who are quite able to work but see benefits as a lifestyle, THey manage to evade sanction by knowing how to play the system. some also have side hustles such as 'fag houses' and if you're in my neck of the woods, it's quite a few with side hustles or working cash in hand jobs.

We also, hav working families who are working and ineligible for most if not all benefits. Who are also below the poverty line.

Poverty is not exclusive to those claiming benefits.

Finally, how many peoples wages are going up by 5% ?

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

Can I just ask why you think people in group 1 should be penalised because people exist in group 2 exist?

The UK certainly has plenty of in work poverty, and a system of subsidising employers paying poverty wages. I’m not sure why the enemy here is other poor people.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

So much in here rings true. There is a big difference between the "can't work" and the "won't work" and the latter really should get no help at all (unless the "won't" attitude is clinically determined) but then what about the families of the skivers? And if they do get benefit what do their children learn about responsibility and working for a living.


A problem that Truss (or whoever is in charge) has is that if you try to focus benefits (vouchers, meals etc) it is "denigrating" to recipients not the trust them to make the right choices. She also has to fight her own party who may agree with her but don't want to be seen to.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

It is rife around here, benefits is a lifestyle we have young people in their 20s-30s-40s who have never worked and therefor never contributed a penny to the country ,they sell baccy ,they sell drugs ,they work cash in hand jobs ,its disgusting, I worked 47 years to fund these parasites.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

I don't think and never had said that people in group 1 should be penalised because of those in group 2. if that's what you're taking from my statement then you're overreaching, badly.

I do think that everyone should be making some form of contribution albeit in some cases it would be very minimal to to the services that they use.

Group 2 need to be cracked down on, sognificantly, but in order to do that it's going to cause distress to those in group 1

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

They aren’t linked but you want to punish some of the poorest people in society simply because some are taking advantage (and as Richard correctly pointed out breaking the law). Those in group 2 will simply engage in more side hustle.

Benefits (and pensions) in the UK are already among the lowest in the G20 and the supposedly “advanced” economies.

DWP estimates fraud and error to be around £8bn a year. HMRC on the other hand measure the tax gap at £32bn. Interest payments on the UK debt is £90bn and getting more expensive. If you think anything will be solved by punishing the vast majority of honest benefit claimants to get a few who are gaming the system then you are mistaken. It’s extremely small beer, but a good right wing trope to demonise the poor.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

Where did i say that i wanted to punish them? Again, you're overreaching.

People in group 1 should be given all the help needed to live as full as life as possible. I've categorically stated this multiple times whilst being a member on here.

IF we could somehow figure out how to get group 2 out of the benefits system that they're not entitled to, then in theory that money would be able to be used to improve the lives of those in group 1 ?

it APPEARS that you can't make progress with group 2 without imposing those in group 1.

If we' are in such a shit state financially then we have to go after avery single option, ALL of them. Tax, benefits, the lot.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

I forgot as well almost £30bn a year goes via housing benefit - a wealth transfer from taxpayers to landlords because we've no social housing.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

Group 2 do need to be cracked down on thats a simple fact, that doesn't however as i've already quite categorically said (yet for some reason you still choose to ignore) mean causing distress to those in group 1

Out of interest what do you class as 'punishment' ?

Using an example of something else being wrong doesn't equate to something else being right, as per my earlier post, if we're in such a state financially then we should be going down EVERY avenue

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

Payment for and use of essential services should not be linked. Applying this principle would mean the sickest people in society would have to pay towards their NHS care, whilst unable to work.

The money that those on benefits receive towards their rent depends on their circumstances. Some are on Housing Benefit and some receive help via Universal Credit.

The remainder of their income is for day to day living expenses, so making them pay towards their rent and between 20 to 30%* of their Council Tax means going without essential things (as does the frozen period of benefit uprating that is currently being carried forward yesr on year).

The weekly amount is so finely tuned that only one bath/shower a week is catered for within the allowance!

There are indeed working families in poverty; 40% of those on Univetsal Credit are working. They would face the double whammy of their wages and benefits not keeping pace with inflation whilst prices are skyrocketing.

It is simply not possible to claim out of work benefits without suspensions or sanctions by packing in your job, losing it through misconduct or not being availablr for or actively seeking work. Regular checks are made via form enquiries, checking efforts that are input online, interviews and requirements to attend training courses to improve employability.

Such sanctions are brutal and include a man being refused benefits because he had a heart attack during an interview, a lone parent who was late because her child needed to use the toilet and a man with cancer who was forced to choose between attending the jobcentre or going to a hospital appointment. He chose the latter and was sanctioned.

In this situation it's hardly surprising that people are breaking the law in order to survive, I know I couldn't survive on today's benefits alone.

The 5% figure quoted is said by the Government to be the current rate of wage increases.

* Help towards the council tax now varies across the country. This used to be met in full under the Council Tax Benefit scheme.

The Cameton Government essentially slashed the budget for this, handed the amount remaining to local authorities and said "do what you will with it". The maximum amount of help available is, bizarrely, now dependent upon where one lives!

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

l am in group 1 and have been for 20 years plus because of my long term health and we certainly don't mind making contributions each month as we already pay a certain amount of council tax each month and if they required a bit more we would certainly pay that bit more.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

Why shouldn't everyone have to make a degree of contribution to services that they use ?

Why should there be exceptions? People who have a relatively small degree of savings are getting hit more and more and are having to make cutbacks, and not just to luxuries such as netflix.

So you agree there is a housing component and rent doesn't necessarily come out of 'other living expenses'

You've massaged the 5% figure. the actual stats are

In real terms (adjusted for inflation), growth in total and regular pay fell on the year in April to June 2022 at 2.5% for total pay and 3.0% for regular pay; this was a record fall for regular pay. Average total pay growth for the private sector was 5.9% in April to June 2022, and 1.8% for the public sector.16 Aug 2022

I'm not arguing that some of the methods involved have had catastrophic impact to individuals, however, the examples you give are of edge cases . This of course by no means lessens the impact felt.

I also via SWMBO see people who are sanctioned, why? because they refuse to travel outside of a three mile area for work, because they refuse to work shifts (not that they have compelling reasons such as childcare, simply because they don't want to work shifts) people who refuse to work because they don't want to work weekends . For every example you give of those who really do need our support, there are an equivalent number of people who are quite simply abusing the system because they can't be bothered. there are those also who are desperate to work including people in 'Group 1'

People who cannot work should get every single piece of help available, but still make a contribution to the services if they consume, even if it's 50p


TL:DR the whole system is screwed, it's needs rebuilding from the ground up

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

The vast amount of the welfare budget is spent on retirement pensions. The rest is spent on the sick, disabled, carers etc

The smallest amount was spent on Jobseekers Allowance.

Sure, you've worked and paid in, but so have most of the others as that's how the scheme works. When you can afford to, you pay in, when you need help, you take it out.

It sounds like you have the all too common attitude of "Benefits should be cut, but not those that I claim as i'm genuinely entitled and have paid into the system". Well, so have most of the others.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

It's not even about 'paying that bit more' it's about everyone in society making a small in some cases tiny contribution for the services they consume. and having enough money provided to be able to make that contribution.

---------- Post added at 12:31 ---------- Previous post was at 12:28 ----------


I can't believe im going to defend Papa here, but, the point is that there are people who are abusing the system, adding billions to our welfare bill which could be given to those who are in genuine need. to improve their quality of life.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

Thankfully, in the main, we don't have a system where need is related to ability to pay.

The payments needed to make up any shortfall in rent comes out of money earmarked by Parliament for day to day living expenses, such as food, toiletries, bathing etc.

Indeed, unreasonable demands as to how far people are prepared to travel to work etc are met with negative sanctions.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

Isn't this is a part of what being a society is? everyone contributing ? regardless, of how small that contribution may be ?

To add, it's OK to expect some people to pay nothing, whilst increasing the costs on others ?

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

I’ve paid in all my days. If by some unfortunate scenario I found myself claiming unemployment or sickness benefits I’ve most definitely made a contribution.

To insist I further contributed to fund public services simply means you’d have to raise benefits to account for the bare minimum in living costs they are designed to accommodate. The net benefit to the exchequer would be zero.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

I don't believe in supporting cradle to grave scroungers who will not work but are fit to do so

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

So everyone who ever claims benefits, regardless of how short a period, should be penalised by not raising them with the cost of living?

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

That shit will not work on me

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

Logic?

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

Sorry, but you're overreaching again, at no point did Papa say that, but it's true that there's a degree who have had and will continue to have no intent on working and instead relying on the benefits system.

IF we could fix that, then theoretically there's more money for people who genuinely need to rely on the benefits system for their life.

Surely that's not a bad thing ?

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

I wouldn’t link raising benefits by the cost of living (inflation) with the inability/ability of the DWP, HMRC or law enforcement to successfully prosecute criminal activity by other actors, no. Neither would I link it to their success at getting long term claimants off benefits. Again it’s an entirely separate issue, and not one the poorest in society should pay for in the manner suggested by others in the thread today.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

So, it's OK for those who have worked their socks off to improve their lives to keep having to pay more and more because you don't want to target those who are fully capable of working yet choose to abuse the system?

Taking your use of the word 'poorest' There's a major difference between those who are poor through no fault of their own and should be given every piece of help available to live as full as life as possible. Compared to those who you would class as poor but are so due to the fact that despite them being 100% able to work and contribute to society, they instead decide they can't be bothered and instead abuse an already pressurised system.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

I didn’t say I thought it was “okay” I merely said I wouldn’t link the uprating of benefits with the ability of Government departments or agencies to identify and root out these people.

I agree, there’s a massive difference between those who need and those who exploit the system. However as I said above it’s extremely small beer against all Government expenditure on benefits, the tax gap, or even just the monthly interest payments on our £3 trillion of debt.

If you want to attack poor people (including the working poor on Universal Credit) this is the best way to do it. If you want to target and root out people who exploit the system this isn’t. They’ll continue to exploit it regardless.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

That extremely small beer as you so put it, could however improve the lives of those that genuinely need it.....

What's your solution to stopping people exploiting the system?

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

So could many Government policies or initiatives, yet there’s little clamour from the right wing press for many of those.

The Department for Work and Pensions pays out around £327bn a year in benefits and pensions. By my measure they could therefore give less than an extra 2 pence in every pound to claimants if they reduced fraud and error to zero (an absolutely unachievable aim).

With the best will in the world, it’s not going to pay the gas bill.

I’m not here to put one forward, but every benefit claimant facing a real terms cut is not the answer. Doing literally nothing equal to or better than your proposal both functionally and morally.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

I do find it very frustrating that I do tend to find myself agreeing with you on several things recently.

I think benefits should be increased, by how much is open for discussion. I got a 3% pay rise this year and will get 2% next year.

As long as the premise that no one on benefits can earn more than anyone that works, then fine.

In regards to people that game the system, yes they exist but agree they are a small %. It is in most human DNA to want to have more and better yourself.

I have been fortunate to have been in full time employment every day since September 1990, and I have quite a few years ahead. I feel no ill will to anyone on benefits ( I may get a little irked from time to time, at some of the small % of career benefit claimants)

Everybody is getting a real terms cut, but I wouldn’t agree with cutting the most deprived, that just isn’t right. Defining or identifying the most deprived is the thing.

Re: Liz Truss [Prime Minister]
 

I can't even remember the last time we disagreed. :hugs: