The Labour Government

[Kirkstall Blue]

Children have the highest poverty rates in the UK. Pensioners have the lowest poverty rates in the UK. If Labour can take from pensioners and give to children surely this is a good thing

Almost all of us pay tax, the burden should be shared equally by everyone. I despise any form of poverty including children or disabled people, elderly the list is endless. That’s why this labour government should give up their fuel and clothing allowance first.

Giving children a free breakfast at the expense of pensioners just above pension credit limit both should be provided for we are a rich country but still we allow the price of baby milk to rise that much, mothers have to steal it, anti- theft tags on baby milk.

We should protest more on any measure that brings down the level of benefit in our country we are already to keen on the blame game

 

[inbetween]

It might be to do with having a population smaller than the city of Bristol.

5000 is about 1.25% of their population.

Not really a sensible point.

So they're being 'clever' with how they accept asylum claims by not overarching themselves to extend their borders for asylum claims outside of their physical borders?

Is this presumably to account for the fact that there aren't unlimited resources and the Icelandic population should come first?

I hope the penny has dropped.

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

Absolutely. Unfortunately they didn’t do that. They took off poor pensioners as well.

And very rich ones.

 

[bluenova]

So they're being 'clever' with how they accept asylum claims by not overarching themselves to extend their borders for asylum claims outside of their physical borders?

Is this presumably to account for the fact that there aren't unlimited resources and the Icelandic population should come first?

I hope the penny has dropped.

Are you suggesting that we should also only accept 1.25% of our population each year in new asylum claims?

 

[Kirkstall Blue]

And very rich ones.

The rich ones in government ?

 

[hammocity]

I agree completely I'm a strong proponent for a larger welfare state. Given that the current option is tory or red tory and net welfare was cut in the most recent budeet, don't you think it is better to take from the more well off demographic (pensioners) and give to the poorer though?

it was quite simple to do, any Senior's living in Band D and above Council Tax bands and those in the 40% income tax band should be excluded from the WFP. As always it wouldn't be perfect but it would have helped a lot.

My mate who owns a business installing forecourts for Tesco (Indigo Forecourts Limited) is 69 years old and last year rang the Pension Servicr to say he didn't want the WFP, the process he had to go through was ridiculous so he gave up and just donated his payment.

 

[Vic]

It might be to do with having a population smaller than the city of Bristol.

5000 is about 1.25% of their population.

Not really a sensible point.

It's a very sensible point. It shows why the UK is neither "swamped", nor very welcoming.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

I agree completely I'm a strong proponent for a larger welfare state. Given that the current option is tory or red tory and net welfare was cut in the most recent budeet, don't you think it is better to take from the more well off demographic (pensioners) and give to the poorer though?

The issue is with the word demographics. Men are more well off than women on average. Should we take money off men and give it to women? It's a good idea to redistribute wealth from richer people to poorer people. If you do that, then you don't need to redistribute money based on demographics, because that will naturally happen anyway.

It's also worth mentioning that older people are going to have more wealth (as opposed to income) by definition, because they are at the end of a long career earning money and have usually paid off all of the things they need to. They are also in a position where they would find it very difficult to increase their earnings if they wanted/needed to. They have a higher level of on-paper wealth, but that wealth has got to pay for their living costs throughout their retirement. But obviously if they're rich enough to be in a particular tax bracket, they should be taxed like anyone else in that bracket.

Similarly, help with utility payments should be available to anyone who is struggling to pay their bills because of their circumstances, regardless of age.

 

[hampshireblue]

Very safe and very welcoming.

And still you choose not to accept or read the post that kaz7 put up. She was referring SPECIFICALLY to the camps, not France as a whole FFS.

 

[kaz7]

And still you choose not to accept or read the post that kaz7 put up. She was referring SPECIFICALLY to the camps, not France as a whole FFS.

Thank you

 

[inbetween]

It's a very sensible point. It shows why the UK is neither "swamped", nor very welcoming.

How is the UK not swamped? I thought that local government, healthcare, social care, housing, transport, education were all on their knees? Why on earth all the fuss over resources if there are ample available?

If the system is however broken then how will an additional hundreds of thousands of people help this system or the people that you know are already here and need to use it too?

But then again, you only have to ask the people of Altrincham who are sat on 2yr NHS waiting lists whilst migrants in their town are being given phones and immediate access to private doctors so maybe it won't affect it after all?

 

[Eebo]

How is the UK not swamped? I thought that local government, healthcare, social care, housing, transport, education were all on their knees? Why on earth all the fuss over resources if there are ample available?

If the system is however broken then how will an additional hundreds of thousands of people help this system or the people that you know are already here and need to use it too?

But then again, you only have to ask the people of Altrincham who are sat on 2yr NHS waiting lists whilst migrants in their town are being given phones and immediate access to private doctors so maybe it won't affect it after all?

It's broken because too many rich folk don't want to pay their share of the tax burden and the Tories have given all the money to their mates or spent it on Rwanda and other useless schemes in order to pass money to their donors..

Tees Valley Mayor Ben Houchen has given £600m of assets to a couple of businessmen for free, and thrown in a £100m of site clean up for good measure and you are worried about an immigrant having a phone FFS

 

[Ohrodneyrodney]

And still you choose not to accept or read the post that kaz7 put up. She was referring SPECIFICALLY to the camps, not France as a whole FFS.

The number of ‘camps’ referred to have been reduced over recent years as people have been moved to generally very good accommodation centres in nice areas, where they are also well supported by the local communities.
What she actually said was “let’s move away from the idea that France is safe”, which is nonsense.

 

[inbetween]

It's broken because too many rich folk don't want to pay their share of the tax burden and the Tories have given all the money to their mates or spent it on Rwanda and other useless schemes in order to pass money to their donors..

Tees Valley Mayor Ben Houchen has given £600m of assets to a couple of businessmen for free, and thrown in a £100m of site clean up for good measure and you are worried about an immigrant having a phone FFS

Oh yes and it's true that asylum and the boat crossings in general have become a huge money making opportunity for the rich which is why successive governments including Labour are happy with things as they are.

For a start it allows crappy half-empty hotel chains to fill their boots and fill their boots they have. It also fills the coffers of governmental friendly privates such as Serco who all have handy backdoors into #10.

Personally I'd rather we fulfilled our bare minimum obligation to process claims once somebody arrives here. We should then process those claims ASAP and give the home office the resources to do it ASAP so that the cost to the taxpayer is as small as possible. That's all I would do, nothing else.

Your argument is however different, you don't clearly care about the price of increasing numbers, you only care about who pays and that should be the rich? I hope you can see the problem with this.

 

[metalblue]

And very rich ones.

Next you’ll be backing the IDF saying they might have killed 100 innocent civilians but they got the bad Hamas fighter.

 

[hcblue95]

The issue is with the word demographics. Men are more well off than women on average. Should we take money off men and give it to women? It's a good idea to redistribute wealth from richer people to poorer people. If you do that, then you don't need to redistribute money based on demographics, because that will naturally happen anyway.

It's also worth mentioning that older people are going to have more wealth (as opposed to income) by definition, because they are at the end of a long career earning money and have usually paid off all of the things they need to. They are also in a position where they would find it very difficult to increase their earnings if they wanted/needed to. They have a higher level of on-paper wealth, but that wealth has got to pay for their living costs throughout their retirement. But obviously if they're rich enough to be in a particular tax bracket, they should be taxed like anyone else in that bracket.

Similarly, help with utility payments should be available to anyone who is struggling to pay their bills because of their circumstances, regardless of age.

Pensioners are the only demographic to get non-means tested benefits though so aren't you basically saying the wfa should have been removed so that everyone is on a level pegging?

 

[mackenzie]

What I really don't understand is this;

I watched a report on Sky News a few months ago, where some people looking to get from France to the UK were admitting that they were doing so because their application for asylum had failed there.
Then we have the Moroccan who, in May of this year, stabbed an OAP to death in Hartlepool. He didn't know him, he just felt like it. He didn't have a severe mental disorder either, according to the court hearing.
This Moroccan had been denied asylum in 8 Europe countries before he got to the UK.

We need to sort shit like this

 

[hilts]

Which isn't the point really. Refugees and asylum seekers is a problem for the whole of Europe, it's no more Frances resposibilty than it is Denmarks,no one country should be expected to take more just becaus of geography.. The answer is a european wide policey with all European countries working together for solutions and providing asylum to those accepted.While not perfect we decided to opt out of whatever system was in place. Nobody to blame for that except ourselves.

It's a global problem if you're discounting geography

 

[bluethrunthru]

whilst migrants in their town are being given phones

Has it not occurred to you that a good way to locate someone and track them is via a mobile phone? Especially if its one YOU give them?

 

[mackenzie]

Has it not occurred to you that a good way to locate someone and track them is via a mobile phone? Especially if its one YOU give them?

I sincerely doubt that is why some are getting phones.
What makes you think that? Not averse to being proven wrong, just curious.