shoes said:
The issue is reducing government spending as far as I can see. The rich do not rely on government handouts, the middling people have minimal benefits and the poor generally rely on the government. When reducing government spending on welfare it is obviously those who are most reliant on welfare who will get hit the hardest.
I'm not sure I see a way around this, which is fair. Have you any suggestions?
Hmm, I wonder where this person has been the last 3 years. Government finances were in surplus and had the lowest level of debt for a generation mainly due to a failure to make sufficient allocation of funds to public services despite rising affluence for the rich. The then Government borrowed £60bn to give to the irresponsible super-rich bankers and this new government is cutting support ($6bn this year more next) to the the victims of the banks to pay for it.
My suggestion is that given that these banks have just declared half year profits of £15bn and record bonuses they should repay the tax payer (which was the original plan) so we don't have to make any cuts at all. If in addition we stopped tax avoidance as the Lib Dems promised we could raise an additional £40bn a year which could be used to eliminate poverty and rebuild our economy! I am sure Philip Green, who pays no tax, can live without another gold plated Lear jet.
But as we live in a selfish 'winner takes all' society that will never happen.