Accrington Web - View Single Post - Benefits for the poor are spent on drugs and gambling

gynn · 06-12-2011, 08:50

The "Compassionate Conservative" philosophy is to keep state intervention to a minimum, and plan for growth through private enterprise which will create the wealth to "look after" the more vulnerable and less well off.

That is fine while the wealth is being created, but where is "Compassionate Conservatism" in a time of recession? Osborne is faced with the dilemma of imposing cuts, but doing it in a way that doesn't discourage entrepreneurship. Therefore, the "rich" suffer less than the "poor", because expenditure on the less well off is considered "dead money" as it has no chance of generating growth.

The solution is to guarantee everybody a fair share of the cake, and every step should be taken to target the money at the wellbeing of the kids.

For Ian Duncan Smith to claim that benefits for ALL should be curtailed because of the spending priorities of the FEW is disgraceful. If some choose to spend their share on drugs rather than food for the kids, then in a Conservative world, that is their choice (aren't the Conservatives the party of choice?).

06-12-2011, 08:50	#8
gynn Senior Member+ Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 1,136 Liked: 10 times Rep Power: 4980	Re: Benefits for the poor are spent on drugs and gambling The "Compassionate Conservative" philosophy is to keep state intervention to a minimum, and plan for growth through private enterprise which will create the wealth to "look after" the more vulnerable and less well off. That is fine while the wealth is being created, but where is "Compassionate Conservatism" in a time of recession? Osborne is faced with the dilemma of imposing cuts, but doing it in a way that doesn't discourage entrepreneurship. Therefore, the "rich" suffer less than the "poor", because expenditure on the less well off is considered "dead money" as it has no chance of generating growth. The solution is to guarantee everybody a fair share of the cake, and every step should be taken to target the money at the wellbeing of the kids. For Ian Duncan Smith to claim that benefits for ALL should be curtailed because of the spending priorities of the FEW is disgraceful. If some choose to spend their share on drugs rather than food for the kids, then in a Conservative world, that is their choice (aren't the Conservatives the party of choice?).