Sunday, 7 November 2010

The Cost of Dismantling the Welfare State does Not Add Up

This was my response to an article in The Gaurdian headlined as above.


It adds up if you are a Tory Boy and Dealer Dave Cameron is certainly one of those.

His comments "The thought of prisoners getting the vote makes me feel sick" and "People (on housing benefit) should not be living in houses they could not dream of owning" place him somewhere out there with Hitler. Dave of course plans to starve us to death instead of murdering us.

How can Nick Clegg continue to ally himself to the dealer while he is taking the food out of the mouths of children and the sick with one hand while slipping £35000 a year to the man who takes his photo with the other.

What we are paying for with the money Dave has stolen from us is the re-inforcement of Tory ideology.

Cameron was NOT GIVEN A MANDATE TO DO THIS. HE DID NOT WIN THE ELECTION. HE IS IN DOWNING STREET BY DEFAULT.

We saw how Thatchers destruction of the welfare state could not be repaired by Labour over 13years. Dealer Dave realises he probably only has one term to achieve his aims so he has set out immediately to undo the repairs Labour were able to afford to make.

The "URGENCY" behind his cuts is to protect the Banks and the Stock Market. The "Urgency" has nothing to do with the ordinary people of this country

Because of the actions of those with money in this country, those without money are being kicked while they are down.

The dismantling of the Welfare State, while stigmatising those too ill to work, and outrageously labelling as "work shy" those who are unable to find work, especially at a time when the actions of the government are about to cause millions to lose their jobs, are criminal acts.

It must be clear to even the stupidest fan of Dealer Dave that as the Job Market becomes flooded with those whose jobs have crumbled, that the disabled, the sick, and the long term unemployed will have no chance of obtaining the jobs that are available.

I still wait for an MP or a Paxman or a Non Murdoch Journalist to ask how these radical changes are being funded. If 85% of Incapacity Benifit desicions were overturned at tribunal how much did those tribunals cost, and how does that compare to the money "saved" from the other 15%.

No comments: