UK: Obese woman blames government

[kentonio]

You are the one who keeps bringing up comparisons between the US and the UK you know.

No, actually I'm not. It's you and a few other dickheads who keep shouting 'Oh and he's a CONSERVATIVE!' every time I say anything in support of decency or equality.

It's like watching a pack of retarded mongrel pups yapping when they hear the postman.

[Colonâ„¢]

Well, weren't you claiming you're a conservative?

[kentonio]

Well, weren't you claiming you're a conservative?

You clearly don't know **** about the UK conservative party, which supports universal healthcare, gay marriage and a whole raft of other policies that would be absolute anathema to the Republicans.

[Colonâ„¢]

You clearly don't know **** about the UK conservative party, which supports universal healthcare, gay marriage and a whole raft of other policies that would be absolute anathema to the Republicans.

But you weren't talking about gay marriage or universal healthcare.

It's funny that only now you're giving some sort of answer to the question I originally asked, after I was making another kind of question. It seems extremely hard for you to just give a straight answer.

[kentonio]

But you weren't talking about gay marriage or universal healthcare.

It's funny that only now you're giving some sort of answer to the question I originally asked, after I was making another kind of question. It seems extremely hard for you to just give a straight answer.

Not really, I just think you're a passive aggresive ***** who decided ages ago that you were going to give me **** any time we engage in any way. With that in mind why would I give a **** about what you think?

[Colonâ„¢]

Not really, I just think you're a passive aggresive ***** who decided ages ago that you were going to give me **** any time we engage in any way. With that in mind why would I give a **** about what you think?

I don't recall us having engaged for quite a while really. Sure, I was poking a little there, but I only reacted because your statement there struck me as particularly contradictory with your professed political allegiance. It's hardly the kind of stuff I wouldn't do to anyone else.

[Uncle Sparky]

Fatness in the UK can be blamed on fatty Government types like Sir Topham Hatt.

[Dauphin]

I don't recall us having engaged for quite a while really. Sure, I was poking a little there, but I only reacted because your statement there struck me as particularly contradictory with your professed political allegiance. It's hardly the kind of stuff I wouldn't do to anyone else.

It sounded like something out of a Cameron speech (from 10 years ago or last week) to me.

[Colonâ„¢]

Well, I'll admit ignorance over Cameron's speeches. I won't admit ignorance over the Tories' position towards business and welfare over the ages though.

[kentonio]

Well, I'll admit ignorance over Cameron's speeches. I won't admit ignorance over the Tories' position towards business and welfare over the ages though.

Without saying the words, you already did.

[Patroklos]

Keep telling yourself that. Most European countries have more history than all your states rolled into one.

So much history, so little to show for it

[Kidlicious]

Fatness in the UK can be blamed on fatty Government types like Sir Topham Hatt.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]176889[/ATTACH]

QFT

[Colonâ„¢]

Without saying the words, you already did.

Too bad I have a subscription on The Economist:

The Tories and benefits
Welfare wedgie
A promised freeze on benefits sets up an ideological battle
Oct 4th 2014 | BIRMINGHAM | From the print edition

IN HIS speech to the Conservative Party conference George Osborne left no room for doubt: the Tories are tough on welfare. “This country must pay its debts, drive down its deficit, pull down its taxes, and pull up its young people,” the chancellor of the exchequer told delegates in Birmingham on September 29th. He announced that he would cut social security spending by £3 billion ($4.9 billion) annually if his party won the next general election, due next May. He would do so by freezing most working-age benefits for two years, a move that will affect 10m Britons. He also committed to lowering the cap on household benefits from £26,000 to £23,000 and to limiting the time for which 18- to 21-year-olds could claim unemployment benefit.

Despite the talk of paying debts, these policies would save relatively little money. Cuts of £3 billion add up to 3% of the government deficit in the current fiscal year. Two days after the chancellor’s speech David Cameron, the prime minister, pledged tax cuts worth more than twice that. The benefit cap saves little, has proved expensive to administrate, and is in danger of making the Tories look heartless.

What, then, was Mr Osborne up to? The most obvious explanation is that cutting welfare is popular. A government study last year on views of the benefit cap found that voters support the policy by a margin of five to one. Another poll found that a majority—and even a sizeable minority of Labour supporters—agreed with freezing unemployment benefits.

The speech thus betrayed the influence of Lynton Crosby, the Conservatives’ increasingly powerful campaign guru. Mr Crosby is known for the rigour of his polls and focus groups; Tory strategists joke that he knows what voters are thinking before they do. He specialises in the use of political “wedges”: simple, eye-catching stances which prise swing voters away from opponents. The Labour Party is generally seen as soft on welfare and profligate, so (the theory goes) the more the Tories get voters to think about the difference on welfare between the two parties, the more likely they will be to vote Conservative. Mr Osborne’s announcement, stark and straightforward, was a classic Crosbyite wedge.

It was also about internal politics. The chancellor is sceptical about the “universal credit”, an ambitious attempt by Iain Duncan Smith, the welfare secretary, to consolidate six tax benefits into one payment. The scheme is delayed, over budget and fraught with IT problems. Mr Osborne is believed to want to kill it or at least control it—something the benefits cap enables him to do. By asserting his power over welfare, and tightening the screws on total household benefits, the chancellor was trying to protect the government’s reforms from his colleague’s bungling.

Finally, though a quintessentially tactical move, the chancellor’s announcement was also part of the government’s principled attempt to sharpen the incentives for work over inactivity. Senior Tories objected to the ballooning size and scope of the welfare state under the last Labour government not just because it was expensive, but because it bred dependency. Hence Mr Osborne’s insistence that the savings from the benefit freeze (which will disproportionately affect young people) should be spent on apprenticeships, and his distinction between “paying our young people for a life on the dole, or giving them the keys to a life of opportunity.”

If the Conservatives have picked welfare on which to fight the next election—and Mr Osborne’s speech suggests that it will be a central part of their pitch—that makes them the opposite of the Labour Party. Though shadow ministers avow that they will stick to the government’s spending plans, the party generally prefers to avoid the subject, instead calling for greater intervention in markets to boost living standards. The result will be a fascinating clash between a party that wants to pull the state back, and a party that would extend its remit. Next year’s election promises to be the most ideologically intense for decades.

From the print edition: Britain

More tory MPs also voted against gay marriage than for. Some gay-friendly party.

The reason you're reacting so fiercely to my poking isn't because I do it often, it's because your BS gets exposed and you're trying to deflect attention. Toodle-oo.

[kentonio]

More tory MPs also voted against gay marriage than for. Some gay-friendly party.

To understand the Tory party you have to understand that it's been a party basically at war with itself for at least 30 years. The number of stark divisions within the party are numerous. The most obvious one is Europe of course, but there are many others.

The reason you're reacting so fiercely to my poking isn't because I do it often, it's because your BS gets exposed and you're trying to deflect attention. Toodle-oo.

No, I just lump you in with the other ****wits who think they can tell a lifelong Conservative party voter about what a UK conservative is. Despite all the other UK posters pointing out that you're wrong.

[C0ckney]

it's one of the stranger things, and shows that either most posters don't know much about UK politics, or that they just enjoy winding ken up; probably a bit of both.

for what it's worth, ken is, in my view, a middle of road UK voter, who would fit quite comfortably in any of the major parties: a liberal 'one nation' tory; an orange book lib dem; or a blairite labour member - probably in the that order.