Why wont you be voting Labour?
Discussion
SGirl said:
I won't be voting Labour because of their utter inability to connect with the real world. And because they seem to think that our money is their money, and that taxpayers should just be given small allowances to live on while they run roughshod over our entire way of life. I appreciate we have to pay to continue services such as the NHS, and that's fair - but it's not fair to expect taxpayers to cough up for gastric banding surgery and other cosmetic surgery linked with drastic weight loss, sex changes, etc. Or for £500 laptops for the offspring (yeah, sure...) of their core voters, particularly when other people work hard yet can't afford even a cheap laptop for their children.
As someone else said on here the other day - our government should be there to help the needy. Not the "wanty". And that's where Labour falls flat on its face. People who've chosen to stay on benefits as a lifestyle know how to play the system and milk it for all its worth, while people who've worked all their lives and have lost their jobs can't get anything back because they have a small amount of savings. That's not fairness. That's paying to uphold an underclass that naturally would have either worked or starved to death. I have nothing at all against helping people who genuinely need help - but it has to be a two-way thing. You put in, you get out. No exceptions, unless someone is genuinely disabled or *completely unable* to work in some capacity, for whatever reason.
"Fair for all"? Please! They mean "fair for their core voters".
The trouble is that we've had 13 years of this. That's a long time. Some people probably couldn't countenance having to work again after years of being "on the sick" or "'unable' to get a job". If all their benefits were withdrawn, there'd be mass rioting. So what's the answer?
Well, whatever it is - it doesn't involve throwing even more of our money at them to keep them in flat screen TVs, Nike's finest tracksuits and Stella.
What a good post As someone else said on here the other day - our government should be there to help the needy. Not the "wanty". And that's where Labour falls flat on its face. People who've chosen to stay on benefits as a lifestyle know how to play the system and milk it for all its worth, while people who've worked all their lives and have lost their jobs can't get anything back because they have a small amount of savings. That's not fairness. That's paying to uphold an underclass that naturally would have either worked or starved to death. I have nothing at all against helping people who genuinely need help - but it has to be a two-way thing. You put in, you get out. No exceptions, unless someone is genuinely disabled or *completely unable* to work in some capacity, for whatever reason.
"Fair for all"? Please! They mean "fair for their core voters".
The trouble is that we've had 13 years of this. That's a long time. Some people probably couldn't countenance having to work again after years of being "on the sick" or "'unable' to get a job". If all their benefits were withdrawn, there'd be mass rioting. So what's the answer?
Well, whatever it is - it doesn't involve throwing even more of our money at them to keep them in flat screen TVs, Nike's finest tracksuits and Stella.
Edited by SGirl on Tuesday 27th April 10:56
![yes](/inc/images/yes.gif)
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff