General Election - 4th July 2024

[BrianW]

Most of the welfare state is state pensions.
Another massive chunk goes to working people to subsidise inadequate wages and excessive rents. (I'm quite up for not subsidising bad employers and greedy landlords, but are the Tories?)
Another chunk goes on disability benefits, including those paid to disabled people in work. (You can claim PIP and work if you qualify, and as it is (rightly) not means-tested you could be the MD of a FTSE 100 company in theory.)
What people go on about is the money given to long-term unemployed, and that is petty cash in the scheme of things. If it was stopped tomorrow, I doubt you'd get 10p off your tax. But you would get a whole lot of extra crime in exchange.

(EDIT) Forgot to point out that the 'economically inactive' includes full-time students and all those people over 55 who have retired on private pensions, and don't need to work anymore as they have enough to carry them through to state pension age and beyond. These people aren't going to work unless you seize their assets.

 

[metalblue]

Most of the welfare state is state pensions.
Another massive chunk goes to working people to subsidise inadequate wages and excessive rents. (I'm quite up for not subsidising bad employers and greedy landlords, but are the Tories?)
Another chunk goes on disability benefits, including those paid to disabled people in work. (You can claim PIP and work if you qualify, and as it is (rightly) not means-tested you could be the MD of a FTSE 100 company in theory.)
What people go on about is the money given to long-term unemployed, and that is petty cash in the scheme of things. If it was stopped tomorrow, I doubt you'd get 10p off your tax. But you would get a whole lot of extra crime in exchange.

Excellent summary. No one who works full time should need their wages subsidised*



*as a general rule as I’m sure there are certain situations it makes sense.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

Well, if you seriously think labour are going to do a better job than the Tories you need your head examined, yes the Tories have been as you say it twats, but you ain't seen nothing yet, when labour get in.
How anyone with kids or grandkids can vote for that pile of turd is completely beyond me.

I have no affiliation to any party, I dont even vote. Im voting this one! The shite that this tory govn has brought upon thi country has been the worst in my lifetime. From the 70s and Labour (Idiots) to Cameron's big fuck up.

But this govn, with all of their greed, self interests, running down our services, the racism and its rise under them, the absolute idiocy of what Truss did, the laughing stock this country now is... Its all convinced me we are being run by amateurs, by greedy self interested amateurs who are busy robbing what they can from the public purse before they are voted out. And they need people like you to justify what they are doing. You are a fool, but at least not a Reform fool.

Labour will come in, get soooo much flak, they could even do more damage to the country, but they will not be worse than what we have just witnessed, for that to happen they would have to all be criminals.

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

Most of the welfare state is state pensions.
Another massive chunk goes to working people to subsidise inadequate wages and excessive rents. (I'm quite up for not subsidising bad employers and greedy landlords, but are the Tories?)
Another chunk goes on disability benefits, including those paid to disabled people in work. (You can claim PIP and work if you qualify, and as it is (rightly) not means-tested you could be the MD of a FTSE 100 company in theory.)
What people go on about is the money given to long-term unemployed, and that is petty cash in the scheme of things. If it was stopped tomorrow, I doubt you'd get 10p off your tax. But you would get a whole lot of extra crime in exchange.

(EDIT) Forgot to point out that the 'economically inactive' includes full-time students and all those people over 55 who have retired on private pensions, and don't need to work anymore as they have enough to carry them through to state pension age and beyond. These people aren't going to work unless you seize their assets.

Great Post. Also worth noting that it's unrealistic to get to zero economically inactive. Even removing students and those who chose not to work. There will always be 1 or 2 % who just aren't mentally capable of maintaining a job. As a nation we are not doing badly in terms of these numbers.

 

[bluenova]

Not true at all - if labour improve the country fantastic. Very blinkered view. The fear is that the 11 million economically inactive will grow further under labour. This is our fundamental problem but can’t be discussed.

Why would you imagine that? The biggest leap in inactivity came under Thatcher, and then post Covid.

The Labour party have always prioritised people being in work, where they can. There's even a section in Labour's manifesto which addresses inactivity, saying it's growth is a concern, and that it's a priority to get people into work where they can.

You'll see a lot more about rights and responsibilities of working age people in Labour's history, than with the Tories.

 

[hilts]

Pmsl at you taking an obviously deliberately hyperbolic post literally.

I can't even remember you're post now tbh, so I will say my bad and apologise.

 

[maxwellblue]

(EDIT) Forgot to point out that the 'economically inactive' includes full-time students and all those people over 55 who have retired on private pensions, and don't need to work anymore as they have enough to carry them through to state pension age and beyond. These people aren't going to work unless you seize their asassets.

So are you suggesting that those assets should be seized to get those people back working

 

[Brewster's millions]

Why would you imagine that? The biggest leap in inactivity came under Thatcher, and then post Covid.

The Labour party have always prioritised people being in work, where they can. There's even a section in Labour's manifesto which addresses inactivity, saying it's growth is a concern, and that it's a priority to get people into work where they can.

You'll see a lot more about rights and responsibilities of working age people in Labour's history, than with the Tories.

Well as long as there’s a section in the manifesto saying the rise in inactivity is a concern then we’ve nothing to worry about.

 

[bluenova]

Well as long as there’s a section in the manifesto saying the rise in inactivity is a concern then we’ve nothing to worry about.

Strong argument.

Thanks for your contribution to the debate.

 

[HelloCity]

Well, if you seriously think labour are going to do a better job than the Tories you need your head examined, yes the Tories have been as you say it twats, but you ain't seen nothing yet, when labour get in.
How anyone with kids or grandkids can vote for that pile of turd is completely beyond me.

Brainwashed beyond belief.