Anyone still thinking of voting tory at the next General Election?

*LauraNorder. DaisyAnne's response was not a belittling one. It was a perfectly reasonable rquest for clarity on what you had written.

You wrote: The point I was making earlier regarding benefits was not about top ups for low wage earners. It was about those who can work but choose not to being encouraged to work for the sake of their own mental health.

DaisyAnne was quite reasonably asking who were these physically and mentally fit people being paid disbility benfits, and what is the evidence from their existence. I worked for 11 years for two different charities helping with benefit applications and I never came across one case of someone applying for a benefit they were not entitled to, still less actually getting it. However it was a common experience to have seriously ill people refused diability benefits, and when we took them to appeal, they were invariably given the benefit. I never had a single client who I took to a tribunal refused the benefit.

I have a close frined who for 30 yeaars was a judge in the Social Security Tribunal sytem, ending as one of their most senior judges and she extimated that over 60% of those who apeealed to the tribunals had the benefit granted as they qualified for it. Now Social Security Tribunals are courts of law, headed by a judge. If they are consistently granting benefits to people who had been refused them evn though they qualified for them, who are all these people who despite being fit and well seem to find it so easy to get disability benefits? it is a reasonable enquiry.

LauraNorderr

No one is asking anyone to respect a point of view they don’t agree with, but to respect that it is given without the need to belittle others.

I've no idea who that was replying to, but could you answer my question so that I have some idea what you are saying.

LauraNorderr

My hope is that a wealthier country will pay a decent living wage so that top up by benefit is no longer necessary. The point I was making earlier regarding benefits was not about top ups for low wage earners. It was about those who can work but choose not to being encouraged to work for the sake of their own mental health.

I'd be really grateful if you could explain how the country is going to get wealthier by abolishing the higher rate of income tax and doing away with the cap on banker's bonuses.

Were is the 'wealth' going to come from? This is, IMO, the really vital question.

And have you ever considered that state spending is as much an engine for growth as investment from private individuals or companies?

No one is asking anyone to respect a point of view they don’t agree with, but to respect that it is given without the need to belittle others.

LauraNorderr

My hope is that a wealthier country will pay a decent living wage so that top up by benefit is no longer necessary. The point I was making earlier regarding benefits was not about top ups for low wage earners. It was about those who can work but choose not to being encouraged to work for the sake of their own mental health.

Do you mean:
1. People who are not working, not ill, but are somehow currently entitled to disability benefits,
2. People who have mental health issues, could not currently work and are currently entitled to disability benefits
3. People who have physical issues, could not currently work and are currently entitled to disability benefits
4. People who have mental or physical issues, are currently entitled to disability benefits and, if they lived in an area where there is a shortage of labour so, while still being entitled to disability benefits, might get a job where the employer can adapt to their needs - but don't live in such and area.

MaizieD

^I hate to say Volver but the reaction to Truss will not last. They will begin to normalise what they are saying. It will begin to sound possible to some.^

Do you really think so? Do you think that when they put forward their plan for slashing public services, the NHS, pensions, benefits etc. to 'pay for' the tax cuts for the rich everyone is going to say 'Oh, yes, that makes perfect sense'?

In a sense, everything normalises with time. So, we may not agree but may accept this is what happens because they are the people in power.

No, I don't think they will say, "that makes perfect sense". Those are very much your words, not ones I used. As it affects people, they will grumble but few will actually do, or be able to do, anything about it.

I may wish it was different, but I don't think it is.

However, if those in power can bring about a GE then people may not vote for the party doing this to them.

You (generic) can still be respectful of the poster when pointing out that something is wrong.

'I think you might be mistaken' is very different from 'Are you actually stupid?', for example.

She did however point out that a point of view given without belittling others is to be respected without necessarily being agreed with.

I don't agree with that. A point of view must only be respected if it is based in reality. I could tell you the moon is made of green cheese, you don't have to respect that view. Because it's just wrong.

LauraNorderr

It isn’t brave to put a differing point of view as an anonymous poster. Callistemon has since acknowledged that. She did however point out that a point of view given without belittling others is to be respected without necessarily being agreed with.
Let’s get back to political debate.

Sorry - I missed a few posts when I responded to Maisie. I must learn not to write half a post, get distracted and come back without checking the progress of the thread.

Ignore me and resume political debate .

LauraNorderr

My hope is that a wealthier country will pay a decent living wage so that top up by benefit is no longer necessary. The point I was making earlier regarding benefits was not about top ups for low wage earners. It was about those who can work but choose not to being encouraged to work for the sake of their own mental health.

I’m very aware LauraNorderr that this thread is in Chat, and that everyone is entitled to their opinion. But as others have said, opinions must be based on fact, not conjured out of a belief system that has no basis in reality.

What you say about a rich country is true; a rich country can look after its inhabitants. But this country has lost £500bn in a week; that’s more than the cost of Brexit and of the Ukraine war. Our credit rating is likely to be reduced and we are getting warnings from the IMF. While we may all want to have a rich society, the childlike approach suggested by Truss and Kwarteng isn’t the way to get there.

Your comment about those who don’t want to work being encouraged to do so for the sake of their own mental health. I seriously think that is a Victorian attitude that has no place in modern Britain. Are you seriously suggesting people’s mental health will be improved by helping to make them destitute? I just can’t find any words to discuss that if you really believe such a thing is true. It is a view worthy of the people who ran Victorian workhouses.

MaizieD

^I wasn't agreeing with LauraNorder and said that, so why the lecture from stoneofdestiny was aimed at me I have no idea.^

I've looked back and I think that SoD was initially addressing your use of the word 'brave', but went on to address LauraNorder's perceived lack of empathy.

Looks like a bit of a misunderstanding to me.

That's what I think. Others may disagree.

That's certainly how I read it, Maisie. I was responding to the response to LauraNorder's post. I don't disagree that there is little 'bravery' attached to posting an opinion on an anonymous forum, but that wasn't what my 'well said' referred to.

I probably would - as soon as I had recovered from my Frontal Lobotomy procedure!?

My hope is that a wealthier country will pay a decent living wage so that top up by benefit is no longer necessary. The point I was making earlier regarding benefits was not about top ups for low wage earners. It was about those who can work but choose not to being encouraged to work for the sake of their own mental health.

It isn’t brave to put a differing point of view as an anonymous poster. Callistemon has since acknowledged that. She did however point out that a point of view given without belittling others is to be respected without necessarily being agreed with.
Let’s get back to political debate.

I hate to say Volver but the reaction to Truss will not last. They will begin to normalise what they are saying. It will begin to sound possible to some.

Do you really think so? Do you think that when they put forward their plan for slashing public services, the NHS, pensions, benefits etc. to 'pay for' the tax cuts for the rich everyone is going to say 'Oh, yes, that makes perfect sense'?

volver

For everybody who says they live in a safe Tory seat. Never give up.

I hate to say Volver but the reaction to Truss will not last. They will begin to normalise what they are saying. It will begin to sound possible to some.

However, Keir Starmer and the LP will have to work at putting over a reasoned, reasonable programme. He should be able to as he has done all the groundwork he needed to do. Let's just hope the far left keep quiet for a while.

MaizieD

^I wasn't agreeing with LauraNorder and said that, so why the lecture from stoneofdestiny was aimed at me I have no idea.^

I've looked back and I think that SoD was initially addressing your use of the word 'brave', but went on to address LauraNorder's perceived lack of empathy.

Looks like a bit of a misunderstanding to me.

That's what I think. Others may disagree.

Oh ok.

It sounded as if I was getting a lecture because I used the word brave somewhat flippantly.

Perhaps I should have put a ?? or after it.
After all, I'm the first to criticise sports reporters when they describe a footballer as 'brave' or 'courageous' for kicking a ball.

LauraNorderr Fri 30-Sep-22 19:30:27

Thank you for putting your point of view so clearly Laura. It don't believe it helps to knock it because it isn't my view. It is dangerous not to understand that it is a point of view, and that people are persuaded it is fair.

How will this plan be executed? How many are to be forced into poverty? How many will be forced into deprivation and destitution? Not because of Kwertang's prejudiced view of them opting out to work, but what that prejudice leads to when there is no work they can do without childcare or social care for those for whom they are responsible?

Why do we have to take away the safeguards at work? If the rich will achieve because they are so brilliant at this, why can't they keep those working safe? How long will you deprive people of a proper amount to live on while the rich build these businesses and offer the jobs you are imagining?

What about Pensioners? Truss and Kertang seem to be prepared to punish them because they didn't guess the system would change retrospectively (they have 'previous' on this sort of thing).

To hold the market-driven view, which is what we are being offered, you need to consider a market in human beings. Is that really what you think is OK?

And, if this is all so wonderful, why do you have to sink the Daily Mail-style "politics of envy" jibe? I want what works; that works for all. It isn't "envy" but death, poverty and destitution that I worry about. It's that simple.

The Conservatives have not shown us they can do anything efficiently and with care so far.

But if, and it does happen, it is just nonsense- then why should people not have the freedom of speech to say so, and why

Because some people get very upset if their opinions are challenged, and others think that disagreement = bullying, and others think that disagreeing with people forces them off Gnet,

I don't think we'll ever sort this one out. Though I tend to agree with you, Fleurpepper

Kandinsky

Personally, I vote for whoever will make me richer & my life easier.
I’m a very selfish voter.

You wouldn't be richer if you had to pay for private healthcare though. 1p in the £ won't even pay the insurance costs.

I wasn't agreeing with LauraNorder and said that, so why the lecture from stoneofdestiny was aimed at me I have no idea.

I've looked back and I think that SoD was initially addressing your use of the word 'brave', but went on to address LauraNorder's perceived lack of empathy.

Looks like a bit of a misunderstanding to me.

That's what I think. Others may disagree.

Callistemon21

^It's not brave to give an opinion on an anonymous forum^.

It most certainly is on Gransnet!!

Just depends if said opinion is based on facts, or prejudice and pie in the sky.

As said above, you learn something every day on GN- the fact we are anonymous, makes no difference at all. If an 'opinion' given can be backed by facts- then I shall always respect it.

But if, and it does happen, it is just nonsense- then why should people not have the freedom of speech to say so, and why.

Kandinsky

Personally, I vote for whoever will make me richer & my life easier.
I’m a very selfish voter.

That'll be a 'no' then, Kandinski?. ?

Doodledog

Callistemon21

Chatting on an anonymous forum is not going to change anything, though is it, StoneofDestiny.

I’m not sure what this argument is about, but I seem to have been brought into it for agreeing with SoD. No, chatting on here won’t change anything, any more than it ever does, but that’s not why we do it (chat on here). We do it to exchange opinions, hear other points of view and consider things we might not have previously thought if (or that’s why I do it). I don’t know why that raised a sigh, but hey ho.

Exchanging opinions is a good thing, Doodledog, as is providing information from sources some people might not know about. As I have said previously, you learn something new every day on GN.

However, taking up a flippant remark and proceeding to lecture and berate the poster is quite different, unnecessary and not likely to win over or influence others.
I wasn't agreeing with LauraNorder and said that, so why the lecture from stoneofdestiny was aimed at me I have no idea. She misdirected her arrows.

Yes, it's a chat forum, not a political think tank.

I live in a staunchly Labour town, where they say that a pig with a red rosette would be voted in. ?
I always vote for the candidate I consider the most dedicated to the constituents, not the Party.
I voted for Boris in the last GE because we were in the middle of Brexit, and I thought that 'changing horses in midstream'would make the transition even more difficult.
I definitely wouldn't vote for the inept bunch that are presently running the country..........into the ground! However, I can't see the Labour lot doing any better.
I've lived through all the previous crises, and survived, and I'll survive the present one, if I live long enough, but the country's in an almighty mess.