Man criticised by Labour MPs for saying something sensible Man criticised by Labour MPs for saying something sensible
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Posts 1 to 10 of 19
  1. #1

    Obstinate Git

    Mich the Tester is NOT a disguised employee

    Mich the Tester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Euroland
    Posts
    27,890

    Default Man criticised by Labour MPs for saying something sensible

    So this chap Hunt suggests that people who don't have any money should think it over a bit more before producing lots of children, and Labour call that "unreasonable and very cruel".

    Cap on family benefits will make claimants 'take responsibility' for their large families, Jeremy Hunt claims - Telegraph


    FFS
    And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

  2. #2

    Prehistoric

    thunderlizard is too good to be a permie


    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    5,826

    Default

    At least he's learned something from the old Keith Joseph business: say stuff like that after you've won the election, not before.

  3. #3

    More fingers than teeth

    TimberWolf is too good to be a permie

    TimberWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    17,505

    Default

    You should hear the criticism you get if you use the word "deserving poor".

  4. #4

    The beerded one

    EternalOptimist is NOT a disguised employee

    EternalOptimist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Castle Saburac
    Posts
    22,444

    Default

    If it's not right to punish the kids for the irresponsibility of the parents (by slashing the cash), the irresponsible parents (in this case the mum) should be prevented from being irresponsible, which means sterilisation

    is this where the labour position will eventually lead us to?



    (\__/)
    (>'.'<)
    ("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to Work

  5. #5

    My post count is Majestic

    d000hg - scorchio!

    d000hg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    My house
    Posts
    32,775

    Default

    Someone suggested this on CUK the other week, and I'll admit I said it was a stupid idea that'd never happen... it seemed unbelievable a government would have the balls, or get away with it.

    Of course, suggesting it is not the same as implementing it. For instance putting a cap on families who already have the children is problematic, you can't really just say "tough" and give benefits that genuinely are not enough to buy food, in a country with a welfare state... that would lead to homelessness and more importantly, bad PR.
    Quote Originally Posted by MaryPoppins View Post
    I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
    Quote Originally Posted by vetran View Post
    Urine is quite nourishing

  6. #6

    Obstinate Git

    Mich the Tester is NOT a disguised employee

    Mich the Tester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Euroland
    Posts
    27,890

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    If it's not right to punish the kids for the irresponsibility of the parents (by slashing the cash), the irresponsible parents (in this case the mum) should be prevented from being irresponsible, which means sterilisation

    is this where the labour position will eventually lead us to?



    Scary thought indeed, and I know that once the kids are born they have to be looked after; but that doesn't mean giving the money directly to parents who clearly can't take responsibility. The money really needs to be administered by someone who can take responsible decisions with it.
    And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

  7. #7

    Obstinate Git

    Mich the Tester is NOT a disguised employee

    Mich the Tester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Euroland
    Posts
    27,890

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by d000hg View Post
    Someone suggested this on CUK the other week, and I'll admit I said it was a stupid idea that'd never happen... it seemed unbelievable a government would have the balls, or get away with it.

    Of course, suggesting it is not the same as implementing it. For instance putting a cap on families who already have the children is problematic, you can't really just say "tough" and give benefits that genuinely are not enough to buy food, in a country with a welfare state... that would lead to homelessness and more importantly, bad PR.
    I can see there are problems with this, but you can't call it cruel to raise the issue and make the suggestion. After all, it would seem to me to be quite normal to expect people to consider their family finances before taking on the responsibility of raising a chiild.
    And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

  8. #8

    doGlike

    SupremeSpod has no reputation

    SupremeSpod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by d000hg View Post
    Someone suggested this on CUK the other week, and I'll admit I said it was a stupid idea that'd never happen... it seemed unbelievable a government would have the balls, or get away with it.

    Of course, suggesting it is not the same as implementing it. For instance putting a cap on families who already have the children is problematic, you can't really just say "tough" and give benefits that genuinely are not enough to buy food, in a country with a welfare state... that would lead to homelessness and more importantly, bad PR.
    Re-assess the claimants needs.

    Simples.

  9. #9

    Suffers Fools...Badly!

    shaunbhoy is always on top

    shaunbhoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    South Devon
    Posts
    30,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mich the Tester View Post
    Scary thought indeed, and I know that once the kids are born they have to be looked after; but that doesn't mean giving the money directly to parents who clearly can't take responsibility. The money really needs to be administered by someone who can take responsible decisions with it.
    Sod giving them money. Give them food and clothing vouchers.
    “The period of the disintegration of the European Union has begun. And the first vessel to have departed is Britain”

  10. #10

    Obstinate Git

    Mich the Tester is NOT a disguised employee

    Mich the Tester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Euroland
    Posts
    27,890

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shaunbhoy View Post
    Sod giving them money. Give them food and clothing vouchers.
    indeedy
    And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •