Ritiro del benessere significa che il Regno Unito non può ASSE AX DUE FILD Benefit Cap, Rachel Reeves per dire ai parlamentari
https://www.ft.com/content/e4ffe485-e5de-47cd-b595-06f2eecb356f
di corbynista2029
Ritiro del benessere significa che il Regno Unito non può ASSE AX DUE FILD Benefit Cap, Rachel Reeves per dire ai parlamentari
https://www.ft.com/content/e4ffe485-e5de-47cd-b595-06f2eecb356f
di corbynista2029
20 commenti
Maybe a one child cap.. if you can’t afford two kids then maybe keep all your resources and attention on getting a single child ahead in life? A good parent wants the best for their child at their own expense not the other way round.
I am honestly at a loss for words seeing the sheer arrogance of benefits claimants in this country. They’ll lead the UK (and themselves, of course) to ruin when their pie-in-the-sky ideas about where money comes from and who pays for it meet the reality of the bond markets.
I can only hope the country survives the IMF bailout (if there is an IMF left the way international institutions are going) and comes out on the other side.
Greece at least had the Euro. The pound is unlikely to survive.
You weren’t planning to axe it anyway! You invested so much political capital last year insisting that Labour continued to support the policy and that you had no intention to remove it. This is such a dishonest line from Reeves.
And regardless, the two-child benefit cap is bad because it puts people into poverty. Putting *another group of people* into poverty to axe the two-child benefit cap would just be like shifting around the deckchairs on the Titanic.
This is a good move. Reform UK who pledge dropping it, dropped 2 points in the poll because of this.
It makes fiscal and political sense to keep it
Labour MPs know the state of the public finances and the wider economy yet still chose to pour billions more into a ballooning and obviously broken welfare bill over literally anything else. All this lot can do is spend money on the wrong things and then shout about not spending enough money on the wrong things
Stupid reaction:
On the basis that the replacement rate is 2.1 children and immigration/assimilation is considered a problem, the logical choice would have been to raise the child benefit cap to 3 children.
But it’s a stupid reaction [because] of the stupid decision not to cut the benefits bill as originally planned.
Pitting disabled people against improvised children is a great look for the Labour Party
What did people expect ? Opponents of welfare reform don’t care about costs to others. Someone will wind up paying for this decision, just not them so they’ll be happy
Labour’s approach to this has been abysmal from the start. Now they are u-turning, lack conviction, and look wet. They shouldn’t have gone down this road to start with as they should have known it would end in disaster. Trying to pick on the elderly and ill, tsk tsk.
Good, don’t get rid of the cap anyway. You got tax payers struggling to have kids while paying for people on benefits to just pop kids out…
I got a lot of shit for saying people shouldn’t have loads of kids if on benefits….like its literally nothing the amount they get…why put kids through that
This sub really loves punching down benefit claimants and expecting them to be happy about it.
Anyone else disappointed that the bill was so poorly planned, so opposed and failed so badly?
I feel that this is the country just accepting that everything is a distant second to welfare and social spending and that everyone not directly benefiting from it can go suck a fat one as they get taxed ever harder to fund it while services perform worse and worse
Shouldn’t be axed, ever. If you can’t afford kids, then you shouldn’t have them. Let alone pop one out every year for the extra cash and benefits.
Just a reminder, the UK is the ~12th highest Government revenue per capita country in the world (and most above it are much smaller countries Luxemburg, Switzerland, Iceland etc).
Yet we are still running a budget deficit.
The UK has a spending problem not an income problem. This needs to be fixed as a priority, we straight up can’t afford to spend as much as we are.
Why can’t they just left it and say 3rd child gets half of what child 1 or 2 get. It’s a softer blow, especially with the whole decline of birth rates in the U.K. meaning we could have a shocking surprise in the decades to come.
“Look what you’ve made me do!” says the bully punching the child in the face.
Ooo they get caught being shifty and their pathetic response is to divide those in need against those in need. We need better politicians.
You wouldn’t let us impoverish disabled people, so we’re going to continue to push kids into poverty.
What a position to take for a labour government.
All these problems stem from an out of control financial and monetary system, mega globalisation and high energy prices.