Home   |   Browse       NEW: (hypothetically starring) VIC REEVES as LUKE SKYWALKER .. in "Waiting for Godot, the hollywood version".

The anti-robin-hood policies which led us to the era of Time's-Up Theresa and her posse of incompetents.   Share:  
Thrust of argument: Tom Colclough writes 'There is no other way than to see this budget other than a perverted inversion of Robin Hood. A wave of cuts and freezes - which amount to more cuts after inflation - mean that scores of Osborne's beloved 'hardworking people' will be indeed working hard, but earning even more poverty for their work than they did before'. Direction of resistance / implied resistance: Colclough puts Osborne the ex public schoolboy to shame, telling us 'All is not lost, however. BBC and its budget calculator offer up algorithms that allow you to find out whether you should be grateful enough to warrant a trip down to Clinton's Cards or go all the way and splurge on a John Lewis Voucher. 'I'm £5 better off under this budget; I've just spent it on a fucking card again.'

This budget, outlining £12 billion worth of welfare savings is like almost every one before; an attack on young people, with the attacks now extended to anyone born in the last 25 years. Housing benefit has been scrapped for 18-21 year olds, the new minimum wage will not apply to anyone under 25 and maintenance grants for poorer university students are gone, replaced with another loan. Our poorest students will now leave university with a higher debt than those from more affluent backgrounds.

Housing benefit is a huge relief to almost 20,000 18 - 21 year olds, among them care leavers, young people estranged from their families and others escaping violent relationships. According to homeless charity Shelter, the result of removing housing benefit from these vulnerable people will be more homelessness and despair for an already ostracised group of people. They warn that this policy will take us back to a 1980's level of rough sleeping.'

 

I WOULD TRADE NOW ON:
bae (at half strength)
AT APPROX 565.00 capita (at half strength)
AT APPROX 486.20 centrica AT APPROX 145.00 directline AT APPROX 358.70 g4s AT APPROX 252.90 gkn AT APPROX 298.40 glencore AT APPROX 343.00 m&s AT APPROX 319.30 rollsroyce (at half strength)
AT APPROX 839.50 rsa (at half strength)
AT APPROX 601.00 standardlife AT APPROX 417.90

THIS IS NOT TRADING ADVICE. CLICK HERE FOR MORE DETAILS.

 

Enter your DOMAIN NAME to
collect this point:

 

Removal of resistance: In a world where we have all that we have, how is it intelligent for us to not ensure even distribution? To not ensure people all have somewhere good to sleep and live. Not just the homeless. The huge crisis of bad housing. Over a third of private housing for rental, and much of the 'public' housing. Unification: That was the situation even before Theresa May's era, in which the problem has clearly worsened considerably. Dissatisfaction is very high. A lot of people are crying out for Corbyn. Theresa May's lack of intelligence is directly proportional to the time it takes her to resign. The distance between the next election and the next Conservative government, should there ever be another one, is also directly proportional to May's lack of intelligence.
Rebut this point   Support this point   Edit this point

(TVhobo's estimated size of readership since 2013, mainly in the UK and USA, with Germany in third place:
over 200,000 readers across approximately 200 cities/towns

 

Copy/paste point into your work:

Type: Open statement

3 versions:

1. Server time: 11:13:11 on 24/11/2017
2. Server time: 11:14:6 on 24/11/2017
3. Server time: 11:14:42 on 24/11/2017

Related points:

References:

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/07/14/britains-budget-a-punch-dressed-as-a-kiss/

 

 

previous point on the grid   |   next point on the grid

 

Click here to read about Shams Pirani, the editor and chief author on this grid - note, if you can actually prove anything written above wrong, I would gladly, if the proof is sufficient, correct what I've written and what I think - if I could, however, prove your attempted proof wrong, then I would accordingly say so and maintain whatever point of view is completely based on fact and proof.