Something positive about this government

Daphnedill, I'd quite like you to answer your own questions, because I am not quite sure what you are getting at.

How are you planning on getting by when you are older and may be in need of support?

DH was in Labour Party Headquaters 50 years ago during the election supporting them strongly. He was young and now sees things differently. Today on the radio I heard that JC's rise in the ratings is largely down to all the young who have jumped on his bandwagon. I can't remember a saying about voting Labour when young and changing later but pretty sure it would fit now.

It appears that Day6 is not alone in changing allegiance as she matured and saw the world beyond the unachievable idealistic.

How would this thread be going if GO had announced in the budget that taxes were to rise by 3p in the £ to pay for the extras suggested above?

I don't know, Day6. It worries me greatly.

Have you never needed to claim any benefits?

I'm interested in why the people who have never claimed never have. I'm not sure whether they've been lucky in life or have never been in the situation where they just couldn't cope.

I'm not sure whether to congratulate them on their luck or resilience.

Nonnie, I expect people would be delighted, because they're very keen to claim that they care and help the vulnerable.

(Or maybe not!)

So what good has this government done?

I used to be a member of the Labour party. I left when Blair showed his true colours.
I am back again and support Corbyn.
Nice to be called young and idealistic.

Printmiss, you make a very good point. No government can win 'em all.

This thread was set up to bash the Conservative government, and you don't need to be a genius to recognise that those with left-wing persuasions (a little army almost) are armed and ready to weigh in.

I am not a political heavyweight, but I read the Guardian as well as the Telegraph. I would see myself as a hard-working person from a staunchly left-wing background who has fallen, big-time, out of love with the Labour party, its ethos and politicians. There are many like me, and that's why the Conservative party won the last election.

I only have to look at the recent history of the Labour party to appreciate it hasn't served me well. That's not to say the Conservative government is above criticism - it's not - but over the years it has represented me and many workers like me with very little to their name, much better than the Labour party has.

Jeremy Corbyn seems a lovely man of (misguided) principle, a genuinely nice bloke, but I really do fear for the future of my family - and let's face it, we are about our own families and our own futures, as that's what we've worked to protect - should he and his supporters ever take office.

Daphnedill, I needed benefits when widowed with two small children, it was humiliating. I chose not to work because my children were grieving . I did return to work but it was difficult finding work which gave schools holidays off and didn't mind me taking time off when my children were ill. I was lucky to be given work by Christians who acknowledged my difficulties . If this was a life style choice so be it, I would do the same again . I do have lower mobility which is to cover taxi costs, this will fill tax payers here with horror , I use the taxi to get to the surgery and the physio dept. I cannot afford a car . I hope if I become more disabled I will have help , again I fear I am upsetting the tax payers here but my disability is not a life style choice

Let's hope that day never dawns Day6

Daphnedill. Are you seriously saying that you don't know anyone who has never claimed benefit? I know very few who do or have unless you count pensions.
But then I am lucky in that I live in that part of the country that most left wingers hate: the affluent south east.

I'm not a tax payer, but even if I was, why should that upset me?

Of course she didn't say that, petra. She's asking about people on here.
Pensions are not benefits.

Ah yes petra the land of milk and honey.

You are obviously in genuine need, Anniebach. Why on earth should taxpayers be filled with horror by that?

Promises? Printmiss - threats more likely in the case of this government.

Osborne has presided over a steady increase in the national debt.
www.economicshelp.org/blog/334/uk-economy/uk-national-debt/
The deficit has decreased - but that is just the gap between what we are spending and the amount we are paying in taxes. But it is still a deficit - which is why the debt is growing - and we are paying massive amounts of interest on the debt.
Very little progress on making sure that big companies pay their fair whack. Huge reluctance to tax the wealthy and those on high salaries.
Very little progress on nabbing individual tax dodgers.
Abject failure to stimulate the economy.
(Could, for instance, have given it an instant boost by funding lots of social housing construction.)

I'm afraid the notion that hard-working ordinary people can succeed in life - own their own homes, save for their pensions etc has been blown out of the water as far as younger generations are concerned. Housing costs are now so high in most of the country that home ownership is an impossible dream. And rental costs so high that saving is extremely difficult. The kind of steady employment in the same company that helps someone to end up with a good pension has been greatly eroded.
Maybe that is why they are not keen to vote Tory?
And our generation - well however comfortably off we should be very worried about cuts to the NHS. It was in pretty good shape in 2009. However everyone knew there was a demographic time bomb heading its way with increased demand looming from increasing numbers of older people. Has there been planning for this over the last 6 years? No indeed. We have a shortage of doctors, a shortage of nurses and a shortage of money to run hospitals. This is, without doubt. a deliberate attempt to undermine the NHS. And if anyone is consoling themselves with the thought of their health insurance. Sorry, BUPA etc are not interested in end of life folks. They won't look after you if you have a heart attack or a stroke and if you get cancer they don't have the massively expensive radiotherapy machines so you have to wait in the queue with the rest of us. And as for long term care for Atzheimer's or in extreme old age... I don't think so.

I know of 2 people for whom benefits are a lifestyle choice. They trained in London with a friend of mine who is now close to 60. She is still in touch with them and neither of them has ever worked since they left college. They have no disabilities but their homes and everything else are paid for by the taxpayer. My friend lives in Canada and is amazed that they have been allowed to do that. I don't know how they manage it but it is a fact that they do.

We have never had any payments from the government although I did sign on once but got a job the next day so didn't claim. I have had far too many operations but until we retired we had private medical insurance so the NHS didn't pay. We have most certainly paid in far more than we have taken out and done so willingly. I think most of my friends are the same, the majority of people never claim.

petra I am what you term a left winger and live in the South East. Don't hate anything about it, in fact love where I live. There are many people friends and relatives who are also what you would describe left wing and we all live here. Many of my friends are extremely affluent, some who have done very well under the Tories, but be in no doubt, they dislike what the Tories are doing to our society, and couldn't possibly support them.

Ana, because of what some tax payers say on this forum

I find the way people in social housing, on benefits, receiving disability payments are judged on this forum by some .

People in social housing , they may have lived in their home for over 40 years , love the house, bring up their children in the house, nurse a dying husband/wife in the house , bury loved pets in the garden, planted shrubs etc in that garden, then they are left alone, make them leave that house because they don't own it , this is brutal , they are second class citizens in the eyes of many and this is so wrong

So AB what would you say to the family living in B & B who know one person living alone in a family house? Would you say they should believe that person needs the house more than them?

We moved around a lot for the sake of our family so I know what it is to leave behind family and friends.

I would say that nobody should be living in a BandB, let alone a family. But it's not right to take away a home just because there is only one person living in it. Most people want to downsize when the house becomes impossible to look after. They should be allowed the dignity of deciding for themselves.
Why punish a widow/er because councils have not been allowed to build enough houses? Punish the government that allowed the situation.

"Have you never needed to claim any benefits?"

Yes, I have daphnedill, and I was denied them, because, it transpired, I'd been this silly, idiotic women with a work ethic, who'd done her best to be self-supporting all her life.

It back-fired on me big time when I was very sick and unable to go to work. I survived a decade of poverty living on my small, hard-earned pension. If I'd not had a pension (ie: not worked) I would have been entitled to all sorts of benefits, plus knock-on schemes like fares and help with council tax and help with heating/boiler repair etc, because I was ill. Hoist with my own petard. I lived on bread and tinned foods, and didn't heat the house. I got a meagre amount of Incapacity Benefit, which was taken from me by Blair's government.

Whilst unwell and in and out of hospital I knew of those who'd never worked who had a better life on benefits, with all their needs met. The system failed me, a life-time contributor, when I needed it most.

It HAS to pay to go to work if you are able-bodied and well, otherwise the rest of us, who do our best to get by and pay into the system, are taken for mugs. I am a compassionate person and truly believe we as a society should look after our weakest members. I discovered no one is there for you if you spend a lifetime doing your best to be self-supporting. That group of people are invisible to Labour supporters.

In my experience Labour pupport to be the party of the weak, which is fine and very noble, but in that they also actively support those who do little to help themselves.

Labour targets the wealthy (who should most definitely pay their dues in taxes etc) whilst failing to recognise that quite a few people are wealthy because they've worked bloody hard for everything they have. Most of us want a fair society and also to better ourselves and to have opportunities to get on in life. I feel the Conservative party understand that, whereas Labour is fast becoming embroiled in the politics of envy.

Labour hates the top tiers of society yet fails to give ordinary working people any breaks. Those people, that strata of society, do not lack compassion, as some would like to believe. (That particular mud is slung all the time by the Left who imagine they have a monopoly on 'feeling' and compassion.) They do believe in fairness and need to be recognised as a huge sector of society that deserves incentives for being self-supporting.

Now our welfare system is open to all Europeans (non-contributors) allowed to settle here who make their way to our shores. That just CANNOT be right - or am I missing something? I am not sure how even the most liberal amongst us could say that's a workable system. I believe the Conservative party also recognises the madness of it, so, as far as I am concerned , that's another thing it's got right.

Nonnie, your many moves were your choices?

Anniebach wrote: "I fear I am upsetting the tax payers here but my disability is not a life style choice."

Annie, I am sure I am not alone in thinking that taxpayers HAPPILY pay into a system which looks after those who do not have the means or ability to support themselves. Those people, like you, haven't made lifestyle choices.

I work for that and am glad a benefits system aids those most in need.

My children had to claim JSA, and were glad of it until they could find employment. Like the majority, they were genuine claimants who'd have had nothing if they'd not been given benefits. I am thankful that we do have a safety net for all those in genuine need.

Be a good idea to make landlords who buy social housing rent them for the cost of social housing rents, they wouldn't be eager to buy would they

Day6, I, too, have needed to claim benefits. I was absolutely horrified how poor you have to be to claim anything. Unfortunately, I know more than I wish about working age benefits. At 61, I haven't reached pension age yet, so I'm not exactly sure how they work, because I have no personal experience. What I do know is that it's an absolute myth that people of working age can claim enough to live a comfortable life. I received less for my son and myself than the new state pension will be. The only way people can live comfortably is if they fiddle the system, which I abhor, but I can understand why people do it. I would love to know what all these extra benefits are. I'm not stupid and I looked at every possibility.