Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
fru-gal

Cameron's Real Intention Re Benefit Crackdown On Eu Migrants

Recommended Posts

Does anyone else think that Cameron's posturing on a benefit crackdown for certain EU migrants could be a cunning plan to actually curtail benefits for all in the UK? I have had this thought for a while that perhaps he has waited so long to act so that he could say that in order to reduce benefits for EU migrants (which would be a very popular policy) he has no choice (as per EU diktat) to apply these same benefit rules to British citizens. Perhaps this is his way of implementing radical welfare reform and blaming it on the EU?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else think that Cameron's posturing on a benefit crackdown for certain EU migrants could be a cunning plan to actually curtail benefits for all in the UK?

He is just scared the Tories are going to lose the next election because the Monster Raving Loony Party (aka. UKIP) will divide the traditional Tory vote and Labour will win a majority.

As a result his friends will not get as much tax payer's money as they are currently receiving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else think that Cameron's posturing on a benefit crackdown for certain EU migrants could be a cunning plan to actually curtail benefits for all in the UK? I have had this thought for a while that perhaps he has waited so long to act so that he could say that in order to reduce benefits for EU migrants (which would be a very popular policy) he has no choice (as per EU diktat) to apply these same benefit rules to British citizens. Perhaps this is his way of implementing radical welfare reform and blaming it on the EU?

One of the roles of a successful politician is to use the stupidity of the electorate to their advantage. In this instance getting the proles wound up over immigration and coming up with a populist policy that reduces a very large problem (benefits bill to the indigenous population) whilst appearing to solve a very small one (benefits bill to EU immigrants) is a win/win. The government gets what it wants and the proles think they have got what they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the roles of a successful politician is to use the stupidity of the electorate to their advantage. In this instance getting the proles wound up over immigration and coming up with a populist policy that reduces a very large problem (benefits bill to the indigenous population) whilst appearing to solve a very small one (benefits bill to EU immigrants) is a win/win. The government gets what it wants and the proles think they have got what they want.

Yes, exactly this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the roles of a successful politician is to use the stupidity of the electorate to their advantage. In this instance getting the proles wound up over immigration and coming up with a populist policy that reduces a very large problem (benefits bill to the indigenous population) whilst appearing to solve a very small one (benefits bill to EU immigrants) is a win/win. The government gets what it wants and the proles think they have got what they want.

Voters over the last 40 years have been incredibly stupid then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voters over the last 40 years have been incredibly stupid then.

Not stupid. Naive maybe, bearing in mind the last 40 years was mostly pre-internet and people didn't have access to the sort of information we have these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is just scared the Tories are going to lose the next election because the Monster Raving Loony Party (aka. UKIP) will divide the traditional Tory vote and Labour will win a majority.

As a result his friends will not get as much tax payer's money as they are currently receiving.

what is 'monster raving loony' about UKIP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what is 'monster raving loony' about UKIP?

The leader. The policies. The members.

Thinking that any political party in the UK represents the values of the majority or has their best interest interests at heart is naive.

They all protect the banking establishment and have done since the 1970. That is their only interest. UKIP is no different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is just scared the Tories are going to lose the next election because the Monster Raving Loony Party (aka. UKIP) will divide the traditional Tory vote and Labour will win a majority.

And he'll be worried he will go down in history as a minority prime minister and quite possible the 2nd worse one the UK has ever seen.

Edited by TheCountOfNowhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The leader. The policies. The members.

Thinking that any political party in the UK represents the values of the majority or has their best interest interests at heart is naive.

They all protect the banking establishment and have done since the 1970. That is their only interest. UKIP is no different.

hmmnn.. the leader.

He gets it right more often than the others.

The policies,

Well UKIP have spotted how EU open borders causing massive oversupply in unskilled labour and the stresses on housing, hospitals, schools, policing etc.

The members... is that not prejudiced of you to dismiss so many people as loony?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else think that Cameron's posturing on a benefit crackdown for certain EU migrants could be a cunning plan to actually curtail benefits for all in the UK? I have had this thought for a while that perhaps he has waited so long to act so that he could say that in order to reduce benefits for EU migrants (which would be a very popular policy) he has no choice (as per EU diktat) to apply these same benefit rules to British citizens. Perhaps this is his way of implementing radical welfare reform and blaming it on the EU?

No.

Problem is, there is a big business lobby that likes waves of low-cost, non-complaining immigrants that will 'do jobs the British don't want' (Translation: work for less). Hence the default position has been 'hold the door open but keep it quiet'. And this lobby has the ears of all the main parties and the lib dems.

However, the politicians have finally started to notice that the voters are getting nervous about this. Puts them in a hard place, between the wishes of their corporate paymasters and the wishes of the people they are supposed to represent. Hence, the focus on denying benefits; this is not the problem, but it sounds good..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmnn.. the leader.

He gets it right more often than the others.

He does not want to reform the banking establishment or the monetary system. He is no different than Cameron, Thatcher, Blair or Miliband. All cut from the same cloth.

Well UKIP have spotted how EU open borders causing massive oversupply in unskilled labour and the stresses on housing, hospitals, schools, policing etc.

No. Immigration is just a scape goat. The stress on Housing, schools etc. comes from the nature of our money supply. The government should be able to create money interest free, we do not need a banking establishment charging interest on all their monopoly money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not stupid. Naive maybe, bearing in mind the last 40 years was mostly pre-internet and people didn't have access to the sort of information we have these days.

Even in the internet age most people don't really bother trying to inform themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He does not want to reform the banking establishment or the monetary system. He is no different than Cameron, Thatcher, Blair or Miliband. All cut from the same cloth.

No. Immigration is just a scape goat. The stress on Housing, schools etc. comes from the nature of our money supply. The government should be able to create money interest free, we do not need a banking establishment charging interest on all their monopoly money.

I appreciate he's no longer in the party, but he said this while in UKIP. Maybe you should give UKIP a chance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

Problem is, there is a big business lobby that likes waves of low-cost, non-complaining immigrants that will 'do jobs the British don't want' (Translation: work for less). Hence the default position has been 'hold the door open but keep it quiet'. And this lobby has the ears of all the main parties and the lib dems.

However, the politicians have finally started to notice that the voters are getting nervous about this. Puts them in a hard place, between the wishes of their corporate paymasters and the wishes of the people they are supposed to represent. Hence, the focus on denying benefits; this is not the problem, but it sounds good..

Serious question - how does this work in practice? Do the "corporate paymasters" buy them by contributing to Tory funds or by promising the earth to individual politicians in the form of favours and job promises once their political career has ended? How opaque is all this buying of parties and party policies?

Edited by fru-gal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate he's no longer in the party, but he said this while in UKIP. Maybe you should give UKIP a chance?

Thank you for the link. Never seen that video before. :)

If they made that a policy I would sign up tomorrow. I would campaign for them, run as a local candidate even.

But until they make that jump I don't really see much difference between them and any other political party.

http://www.ukip.org/issues/policy-pages/what-we-stand-for

I just checked their manifesto by the way and can't find any mention of the banking system at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else think that Cameron's posturing on a benefit crackdown for certain EU migrants could be a cunning plan to actually curtail benefits for all in the UK? I have had this thought for a while that perhaps he has waited so long to act so that he could say that in order to reduce benefits for EU migrants (which would be a very popular policy) he has no choice (as per EU diktat) to apply these same benefit rules to British citizens. Perhaps this is his way of implementing radical welfare reform and blaming it on the EU?

Cutting benefits in the UK may be his plan, A lot of people are happy living on benefits rather than working , so maybe they do need cutting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the link. Never seen that video before. :)

If they made that a policy I would sign up tomorrow. I would campaign for them, run as a local candidate even.

But until they make that jump I don't really see much difference between them and any other political party.

http://www.ukip.org/...at-we-stand-for

I just checked their manifesto by the way and can't find any mention of the banking system at all.

Wow, I'm genuinely impressed. You're obviously highly intelligent, as not many have the guts to say that. Good for you. :)

You're right, they don't mention it much, or state it in their manifesto. I think because they know that a huge majority of the voters still, sadly, want the QE/ZIRP/Help2Buy/Housing ponzi band wagon to continue, so it's impossible to explain how this ponzi scheme is actually destroying the country. The heavily indebted public don't want to know. They're not ready to listen yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A lot of people are happy living on benefits rather than working , so maybe they do need cutting.

If making people poorer motivates them to work then raising taxes would be a sure fire way to increase people's motivation to work- does that sound plausible to you?

The way to get people to work is not to make them poorer- it's to offer them the prospect of getting richer. This is the argument that is made against high taxation of the wealthy- so I guess it must apply to the poor as well- given that they are members of the same species.

The problem is that wages at the bottom are now so low that any benefit system that provided enough for a basic existence would still be a better choice.

If the choice is a secure income on benefits or a zero hours contract situation- with all insecurity that entails- and little or no financial difference in terms of lifestyle- which option would you choose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I'm genuinely impressed. You're obviously highly intelligent, as not many have the guts to say that. Good for you. :)

Thank you. :)

I think because they know that a huge majority of the voters still, sadly, want the QE/ZIRP/Help2Buy/Housing ponzi band wagon to continue, so it's impossible to explain how this ponzi scheme is actually destroying the country. The heavily indebted public don't want to know. They're not ready to listen yet.

If they reformed the monetary system 99% of the population would benefit but those in the middle (the remains of the middle class), which include journalists, academics and politicians, would not benefit to a huge extent and it is easier for them to cross their fingers and hope their housing portfolio keeps rising in price or that their final salary pension is not cut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If making people poorer motivates them to work then raising taxes would be a sure fire way to increase people's motivation to work- does that sound plausible to you?

The way to get people to work is not to make them poorer- it's to offer them the prospect of getting richer. This is the argument that is made against high taxation of the wealthy- so I guess it must apply to the poor as well- given that they are members of the same species.

The problem is that wages at the bottom are now so low that any benefit system that provided enough for a basic existence would still be a better choice.

If the choice is a secure income on benefits or a zero hours contract situation- with all insecurity that entails- and little or no financial difference in terms of lifestyle- which option would you choose?

As you say, raising taxation means less potential reward for more work.

But surely lowering benefits does not. In fact, quite the opposite.

I don't think questioning whether benefits are at the right level currently changes this basic argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. :)

If they reformed the monetary system 99% of the population would benefit but those in the middle (the remains of the middle class), which include journalists, academics and politicians, would not benefit to a huge extent and it is easier for them to cross their fingers and hope their housing portfolio keeps rising in price or that their final salary pension is not cut.

+1 Agreed

That's the problem. The 'winners' from the ponzi scheme never want it to end.

I think that's why the journalists were so desperate to snare Godfrey Bloom, and he stupidly gave them an open goal to remove him from the debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you say, raising taxation means less potential reward for more work.

But surely lowering benefits does not. In fact, quite the opposite.

I don't think questioning whether benefits are at the right level currently changes this basic argument.

Depends on who is on the benefits. A singleton barely gets enough benefits to pay for the basics, so not much of a lifestyle choice.

However some have made 'child raising' pay more than they could ever get by working.

And the great chunk of the benefits of any claimant goes to a landlord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else think that Cameron's posturing on a benefit crackdown for certain EU migrants could be a cunning plan to actually curtail benefits for all in the UK? I have had this thought for a while that perhaps he has waited so long to act so that he could say that in order to reduce benefits for EU migrants (which would be a very popular policy) he has no choice (as per EU diktat) to apply these same benefit rules to British citizens. Perhaps this is his way of implementing radical welfare reform and blaming it on the EU?

The UK has been advertising its-self around the world for the last decade or so as being 'the place to be'.

Swinging London its always having a boom.

International

Cosmopolitian

Multi-racial a new modern open city looking after the rest of the planet.

This has encouraged mass immigration into the UK .

I read an article yesterday about the refugee's in Calais who are waiting to get onboard what is now called a 'fish'n'ships'.

When asked just why do they want to go to the Uk ?

They all said for a job a future to earn a living they still seem to believe that the streets are paved with gold!

So where do they get this idea from that the UK is some sort of paraside?

It comes from those who have been marketing the UK abroad for years on end a never ending we are the best everywhere else is rubbish so please come over but.....not anymore because er.....its not true.

The UK only has its-self to blame but of course its all the fault of the EU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else think that Cameron's posturing on a benefit crackdown for certain EU migrants could be a cunning plan to actually curtail benefits for all in the UK?

Yes, without a doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   217 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.