Regressive Policies - Poorest will lose 10% - Fair?

Notch7 said:
The difficulty is differentiating between those people that dont work but potentially could and those people that genuinely cant work.

In a fair responsible society, those people that cant work should not be made to suffer as collateral damage by trying to be tough on benefit fraud.

Neither should tackling benefit fraud be used as an excuse to cut benefits across the system.
Click to expand...
According to Hammond, "there are no unemployed people!" :rolleyes:
http://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-politics-42042769/philip-hammond-says-there-are-no-unemployed-people

So why the need to cut benefits if there are no unemployed? :confused:
 
Sponsored Links
To many foreigners coming here cap in hand ,claiming benefits & milking the system :sneaky::sneaky:
 
Roger928 said:
We'll be paying over £40 billion servicing debts this year...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...debt-cost-taxpayers-520-BILLION-interest.html

Do you think that's sustainable?
How many future generations have to be destroyed with debt and war just to placate the greed of the current one?
Click to expand...

The Debt has gone up by 53% in the last 7 years so these policies have not worked to resolve it. They have exacerbated it.

We need a new set of policies, continuing with the current set will only continue the rising problems.
 
Sponsored Links
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JohnD
Harming children for no good reason
15 16 17
Replies
250
Views
21K
Gerrydelasel
Gerrydelasel
Odds
More Whataboutery...
3 4 5
Replies
61
Views
3K
Odds
Odds
Odds
The Red Wall
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
Odds
Odds
B
Postal Voting and Fraud
2 3
Replies
41
Views
2K
Odds
Odds
JBR
  • Locked
UKIP - a 'one trick pony'?
11 12 13
Replies
188
Views
21K
RNReindeer
R
Back
Top