The Budget

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Norpig wrote:the Tories would have done all this with or without austerity, it's just the way they think. Austerity provides them with a great excuse to pick on the vulnerable and low earners

What an absolute load of crap.

The only people worse off after yesterday are those sitting on the dole making no effort to get a job, and those who think having 65 kids is appropriate.

Wise up you bellend.

spoken like a true disciple of Thatcher the witch you bellend

Natasha Whittam wrote:

y2johnny wrote:
You should consider moving Gru towers to china, i think you'd prefer it

One child per couple was a brave decision, and it has slowed down the growth of the population in China.

Johnny, do you really think anyone needs 3 kids?

Freedom of choice.  Would you like anyone telling you that one twirl a day is enough.  Or one footballer ruining your life per life time is enough.  i didn't think so.

Seems like it's Nats vs The World take 2

y2johnny wrote:
Freedom of choice.  Would you like anyone telling you that one twirl a day is enough.  Or one footballer ruining your life per life time is enough.  i didn't think so.

Me having five Twirls a day hurts no one but myself.

People having three, four, five children hurts everyone. Less money, food and resources to go around.

Some experts predict that there could be a world food shortage in as little as 50-75 years if the world population continues to expode. That is going to impact on your children and certainly your grandchildren - doesn't that bother you?

bwfc1874 wrote:Do you seriously think this is going to reduce the amount of children people have? It's completely unrealistic just look at China's disastrous one child policy. 

I completely agree that we have a global problem with over population and it's only going to get worse, but the answer isn't to devalue any 3rd, 4th, 5th children etc. It's beyond belief, no serious plan for low paid workers starts with making them poorer. 

No plan to reduce the people on the planet is going to be nice, but sometimes you have to make brave decisions to benefit the future of mankind.

If every country had a one child policy the population would be reduced in less than a century.

Not supporting poor families is not going to effect population, it's ridiculous to think that it would.

The Tories policy on green energy shows they don't give a flying fuck about sustainability it's all short term economic gains across everything, housing, education, selling public assets and now the environment. I just can't understand what Tory voters have bought in to.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

y2johnny wrote:
Freedom of choice.  Would you like anyone telling you that one twirl a day is enough.  Or one footballer ruining your life per life time is enough.  i didn't think so.

Me having five Twirls a day hurts no one but myself.

People having three, four, five children hurts everyone. Less money, food and resources to go around.

Some experts predict that there could be a world food shortage in as little as 50-75 years if the world population continues to expode. That is going to impact on your children and certainly your grandchildren - doesn't that bother you?

eating five twirls a day will help the food shortage, plus your ever increasing cholesterol will EVENTUALLY put a further strain on the NHS and resources.

Pot Kettle.

bwfc1874 wrote:Not supporting poor families is not going to effect population, it's ridiculous to think that it would.

The Tories policy on green energy shows they don't give a flying fuck about sustainability it's all short term economic gains across everything, housing, education, selling public assets and now the environment. I just can't understand what Tory voters have bought in to.

Stop making me agree with you 74 you bellend

bwfc1874 wrote:Not supporting poor families is not going to effect population, it's ridiculous to think that it would.

The Tories policy on green energy shows they don't give a flying fuck about sustainability it's all short term economic gains across everything, housing, education, selling public assets and now the environment. I just can't understand what Tory voters have bought in to.

There's supporting poor families so they have the basics - food, warmth, housing but the "poor" people of today expect massive TVs, 200 fags a week, 25 pints, meals out at KFC and enough nappies to fill Wembley.

People should be given enough to survive, but being unemployed shouldn't be a life choice and that's what the Tories are trying to do. Force people to work.

As for all this green bollocks, the biggest single risk to the world is over-population - that will kill us all long before greenhouse gases and the like.

Its the unemployed scrougers of society that need sorting. The fact people don't want to work but are fully able to should stop. The fact people on benefits can then be better of than many people who are working is wrong. It should be enough to survive but not enough to purchase the luxuries in life. If they want a 50 inch HD TV then go work for it like everyone else.

This is exactly the problem, the Tories campaign over the last 5 years has been to dupe people into believing everyone on benefits is a scrounger and it was overspending on public services that crashed the economy.

Absolute bollocks on both counts, and for an intelligent person I'm amazed you're naive enough to believ that. Of course there are some that abuse the system and they should be continually seeked out, but that is a minority the majority of people on benefits are so for a good reason - they need them to survive.

And don't forget the majority of people on benefits are in work, you should know better than to believe the crap that comes out of politicians mouths.

The green bollocks is directly linked to over population, they both go hand in hand and the only way we're going to survive the explosion in population is to be more sustainable in everything we do. That includes clean energy and it should also include the meat and dairy industry, our consumerism is out of control.

bwfc1874 wrote:This is exactly the problem, the Tories campaign over the last 5 years has been to dupe people into believing everyone on benefits is a scrounger and it was overspending on public services that crashed the economy.

Absolute bollocks on both counts, and for an intelligent person I'm amazed you're naive enough to believ that. Of course there are some that abuse the system and they should be continually seeked out, but that is a minority the majority of people on benefits are so for a good reason - they need them to survive.

And don't forget the majority of people on benefits are in work, you should know better than to believe the crap that comes out of politicians mouths.

The green bollocks is directly linked to over population, they both go hand in hand and the only way we're going to survive the explosion in population is to be more sustainable in everything we do. That includes clean energy and it should also include the meat and dairy industry, our consumerism is out of control.

Rearrange these words into a well known phrase or saying:

"Troll the feed do not."

bwfc1874 wrote:This is exactly the problem, the Tories campaign over the last 5 years has been to dupe people into believing everyone on benefits is a scrounger and it was overspending on public services that crashed the economy.

Absolute bollocks on both counts, and for an intelligent person I'm amazed you're naive enough to believ that. Of course there are some that abuse the system and they should be continually seeked out, but that is a minority the majority of people on benefits are so for a good reason - they need them to survive.

.

You clearly think you're more intelligent than everyone else because you've "seen through" the Tory campaign.

Congrats.

Breadman wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:This is exactly the problem, the Tories campaign over the last 5 years has been to dupe people into believing everyone on benefits is a scrounger and it was overspending on public services that crashed the economy.

Absolute bollocks on both counts, and for an intelligent person I'm amazed you're naive enough to believ that. Of course there are some that abuse the system and they should be continually seeked out, but that is a minority the majority of people on benefits are so for a good reason - they need them to survive.

And don't forget the majority of people on benefits are in work, you should know better than to believe the crap that comes out of politicians mouths.

The green bollocks is directly linked to over population, they both go hand in hand and the only way we're going to survive the explosion in population is to be more sustainable in everything we do. That includes clean energy and it should also include the meat and dairy industry, our consumerism is out of control.

Rearrange these word into a well known phrase or sentence:

"Troll the feed do not."

or if you keep them in that order you sound like yoda

BoltonTillIDie wrote:Its the unemployed scrougers of society that need sorting.  The fact people don't want to work but are fully able to should stop.  The fact people on benefits can then be better of than many people who are working is wrong.  It should be enough to survive but not enough to purchase the luxuries in life.  If they want a 50 inch HD TV then go work for it like everyone else.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:This is exactly the problem, the Tories campaign over the last 5 years has been to dupe people into believing everyone on benefits is a scrounger and it was overspending on public services that crashed the economy.

Absolute bollocks on both counts, and for an intelligent person I'm amazed you're naive enough to believ that. Of course there are some that abuse the system and they should be continually seeked out, but that is a minority the majority of people on benefits are so for a good reason - they need them to survive.

.

You clearly think you're more intelligent than everyone else because you've "seen through" the Tory campaign.

Congrats.

If only more had done

Natasha Whittam wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:Not supporting poor families is not going to effect population, it's ridiculous to think that it would.

The Tories policy on green energy shows they don't give a flying fuck about sustainability it's all short term economic gains across everything, housing, education, selling public assets and now the environment. I just can't understand what Tory voters have bought in to.

There's supporting poor families so they have the basics - food, warmth, housing but the "poor" people of today expect massive TVs, 200 fags a week, 25 pints, meals out at KFC and enough nappies to fill Wembley.

People should be given enough to survive, but being unemployed shouldn't be a life choice and that's what the Tories are trying to do. Force people to work.

As for all this green bollocks, the biggest single risk to the world is over-population - that will kill us all long before greenhouse gases and the like.

Do you not think ISIS will kill us first?
Anyway I've been won over, I'm voting Selfservative every time now.

A very interesting budget - very centrist and lifted almost in it's entirety from Labour. Newsnight were saying that the key measures including the "living wage" and reduction in tax credits were Ed Miliband's work, so clearly a move to appease centrist voters.
However there is some serious devil in the detail.

First of all I'm fairly sure that the reduction in tax credits is only for new applications so people with more than two kids currently won't be affected. Not 100% on that but I think it's right.
Working women who have kids pay full tax before they have kids and after they have kids so tax credits are effectively a bridging loan while the kids grow up into fully-fledged taxpayers themselves. But the popular Tory/UKIP vote wants to target scroungers and wasters who are taking the piss and I'm not convinced this does.

In fact I'm not sure who the scroungers and wasters are, how many exist and what is their motivation to scrounge off society. We all think we know them but nobody seems to be willing to quantify the problem because it's very much a case-by-case basis. It could be such a massive minority that it's statistically insignificant, but I guess the only statistic that matters is that an increasing percentage of voters think there's a significant problem so the politicians will jump.

Another interesting aspect is cultural/religious. Whilst our society has changed since WW2 to adopt the view that we should control our breeding and only have as many kids as we can afford, many other cultures still encourage large families. Wonder if anyone will raise this aspect of it as there's a potential minefield if ever I saw one.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:This is exactly the problem, the Tories campaign over the last 5 years has been to dupe people into believing everyone on benefits is a scrounger and it was overspending on public services that crashed the economy.

Absolute bollocks on both counts, and for an intelligent person I'm amazed you're naive enough to believ that. Of course there are some that abuse the system and they should be continually seeked out, but that is a minority the majority of people on benefits are so for a good reason - they need them to survive.

.

You clearly think you're more intelligent than everyone else because you've "seen through" the Tory campaign.

Congrats.

You've clearly realised your views on this are complete and utter, unsubstantiated shite.

Congrats.

Well worth a read -

http://econ.st/1NQVHOw