The moronic inferno strikes again

DougS

It's another failure of nerve by politicians.

At this rate we'll never get the deficit down. Every time a cut is announced there'll be an outcry - the media will find an example of somebody who is going to lose out - CallMeDave will be put on the spot and invited to apologise and hey presto the cut will be watered down or reversed.

How pathetic!

Magpie

There a few things round the edges need polishing - ie the 2 income versus one income point - proper means testing would be better. But the principle is sound - however, in return I want to see an axe taken to benefits that keep the idle jobless in playstations, and somali immigrants in 6 bedroom mansions

wonderfulforhisage

Dave is not a leader he's a follower of focus groups.

Normanc

You may have something here.

We (Conservatives) spent the last election lurching to the centre to capture Lib Dem voters and now that is seen to have been a failure perhaps the next ploy is going to be to totally abandon the 23% of people who voted Conservative, lurch further to the left (by targetting the 'undeserving rich' earning more than £44k) and pursue Labour voters?

Whilst I agree that universal Child Benefit is wrong, wrong, wrong, this policy smacks of back of a fag packet and should have been introduced along with the other promised measures.

To announce only this how else could the 'undeserving rich' see but as an attack solely on them?

A good basic premise, ill-thought through and dreadfully executed is how I'd sum up this week so far.

Alison Starr

"When will the politicians – and the newspapers – begin to realise that the people who use these forums are not remotely representative of public opinion?"

Last time I checked, I was a member of the public, therefore my opinion is part of public opinion. Or am I missing something in Liddle Land?

Robert Taggart

Oneself blames YOU !... well, all those overpaid, upper tax bracket, parent's / journo's.
They do not like it up 'em !

Wily Seacole Trout

Well isn't it always the loudmouth minority getting the better of the silent majority? Perhaps Yougov should poll how many people think any policy that pisses off the Mumsnet jabberers is worth supporting?

rod liddle

Yes Alison, you're missing several ounces of common sense. The answer is that your opinion counts as one in sixty million, as does mine. And this does not change if you are a member of Mumsnet or recently joined a Facebook campaign dedicated to banning pineapples. My point is that too much credence is given to these easily-generated expressions of outrage, these online petitions.

Noa Comment

Seems about right. neither pundits on the net or posters on blogs should take themselves too seriously.
The pollsters, writing those so tightly 'focused' questions will squirrel out the truth from and for us ABC'rs.

Except for this extremely wise and informed bog of course.

Tiberius

I would suggest that the policy would draw even more than 83% approval if it contained tapering provisions at the margin. It is not sensible to maintain that tapering (or means-testing, as Cameron put it) is too complex to administer.

Not that I've read Mumsnet nor the DT Comments, but I suspect the outcry is more about being pushed off a cliff at £44k, especially if the couple one step further back are rescued by a helicopter.

GaryO

Yup, I'm all for the child benefit scrappage scheme.

But I can't get my head around this:

"…trimming of our benefits system which is de facto a good thing…this seemed to be borne out by your replies to my blog on the issue."

"When will the politicians – and the newspapers – begin to realise that the people who use these forums are not remotely representative of public opinion?"

Hmm…

Forest Fan

Isn’t being a stay at home mum or dad a lifestyle choice?

rod liddle

Yes Noa, except for this one.

Manwithastick

Liddle,

The problem is that the 17% who are outraged by this are Tory voters. Take 17% off the Tory vote and they'll be left with sweet FA. Neither myself nor my wife will vote Conservative again if this inequitable poll tax (equivalent to an extra 6% income tax or 10% of net income)on middle income parents is enacted. 9 out of twenty of the households in our street (in a marginal constituency) are in the same boat. You do the maths. This is why the tories are worried. No point relying on the 83% who agree if 60% of those polled would never vote Conservative in the first place.

Occasional Ostrich

Noa, you did mean bog, didn't you?

Noa

Occasional Ostrich@ 2:37pm.
I confess t'was indeed a malapropism, but this dogberry somehow seems so apt...

rod liddle

Well we don't know, but my guess is that it ISN'T largely Tory voters, but Labour oppositionism.

David Ossitt

Manwithastick.

Liddle?

Come on stick owner, where are your manners?

Mr Liddle, or Rod Liddle or even a familiar but friendly Rod.

He is a journalist not your valet.

BalhamBugle

Except Rod, as the UK Polling Report article you linked to highlighted, much of the anger about this policy is in the details not the principle; specifically the fact the problem of single income households vs. dual income. The same YouGov poll found that 46% (compared to 41%) thought that the what the policy was going to be implemented is wrong.

The Government could have won this one if they had done some basic preparation to show that the policy was fair as well as tough.

Nicholas

AB (After Blair) vociferous little pressure groups do squealing hysteria and governments do knee-jerk reactions to it. Nothing will break this puerile cycle until someone in government has the balls to respond with the verbal equivalent of Napoleon's "whiff of grapeshot".

As for Mumsnet John Knox's "Monstrous Regiment of Women" just about sums that lot up. Brat obsessed harpies who think the transient years of raising their children should take priority over everything else that happens in this country. Broody, selfish peabrains who spoil their children rotten and inflict the misbehaved little monsters on the rest of us, shrieking and screaming through restaurants, libraries and shops. But don't dare complain or say anything or you'll get the whole she-wolf protecting her cubs treatment.

rod liddle

Thank you, David.

Yes, Balham, accepted. Any change is going to contain a flaw but that was one they might have worked out a little earlier.

Adrian

It beggars belief that otherwise sensible professional people would think that the state should pay them to bring up their children. If the Tories lose votes from this reform it should be because it hasn't gone far enough. There is a ghastly whiff of faux revolt being stirred up by whingeing middle class media types (see Alison Pearson in today's DT) and that Munchausen's disease sufferer, David Davies. As for Mumsnet, Facebook groups etc., get a life. You don't need the money. There is a strange alliance of left and right over this which is an indication that it is a great idea. Now move on, Dave, to universal winter fuel allowance, free dentistry for Mumsnet breeding mares and bus passes for minted pensioners.

Woodbine Willy

Neither myself nor my wife will vote Conservative again if this inequitable poll tax..., writes Manwithastick.
Are you seriously describing loss of benefit as a tax?
In that case, I must be one of the most heavily taxed people there is , since I don't receive a penny in any kind of benefit.

Mr Adequate

Campaign to ban pineapples? Sign me up; they are EVIL!

I'll get going on a facebook page...

ElizaG

I am against the cuts, not on principal, but on the issue of fairness... it is bonkers how they are going to do it.

The Sun's YouGov poll shouldn't be a shocker. Think about who the pollsters are. Low income workers who hate the middle classes for their nice houses and well-manicured front lawns.

Those who will still be reaping their benefits and tax credits couldn't care a less about the better off... nope they'll just continue to take their taxes to spend on fags.

Edward

Scrap this benefit, ignore the squeals and move on - there are still about 694 that need chopping.

Fergus Pickering

I rad somwhere that 15% of people are in the upper tax brcket. Seems a bit hight to me, but OK, let's say 15%. Let's suppose one third of these are so FILTHY rich it doesn't matter to them. We are left with 10% of the population. Half of them will complain but they'll let it drop because it doesn't really matter to them. So we're down to 5%. Well, do we care? Not a row of beans! Sorry, you'll just have to redecorate the kitchen NEXT year. And anyone who sends their children to a public school can get stuffed. If you've got that kind of money you don't need a handout for Hannah and Piers.

Fulcra 1537

Just goes to show how Labour's entitlement culture has seeped up from the benefit dependent underclass to infect the professions many of whom have done rather well out of the last regime's spending spree.Another avoidable presentational blunder but if they are serious about restoring the public finances the coalition are going to have to bite the bullet and brush aside this orchestrated whingeing and get on with it.Cameron's reaction in publicly offering some sort of future concession on marriage allowances to appease the middle class uproar simply reinforces a perception of weakness and offers more hostages to fortune when the next unpopular measure is announced and we haven't even reached the spending review when the fun will really start.

They are still obsessed by the residual self image of themselves as the "nasty party" so lethally implanted by the Nulab spin machine.Added to which is the spider's web of Harman's equality legislation seemingly accepted without demur,which could be a major obstacle to dismantling the client state without which the Big Society is so much BS.

Noa

A different take on Benefitgate, from James Delingpole, more acid than John Haigh's bath:-

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100057250/why-the-child-benefit-cuts-have-made-me-despise-camerons-conservatives-even-more-than-i-did-already/

Kennybhoy

Nicholas.

That second paragraph.Magnificent!

Archie

So, Mr. Liddle, we not of the general public should discontinue reading and responding to your articles as they are evidently of small import? And I respectfully suggest that we are far more representative of public opinion than those who have the time and inclination to go through the rigmarole of letters to the editor.

rod liddle

Archie, you haven't really got the logic of this, have you? The debate, exchange of opinions, expressions of anger etc are all great (theoretically and mostly in practice; 'though there is something strange about the speed with which people become enraged these days). My point is that Mumsnet is, as we've seen, not representative of public attitudes to the benefit cuts. Or those 40,000 Daily Mail readers were representative of listeners to Russell Brand's radio show and so on and so on. Why is this hard to grasp?

Jo

Also, the meedja seems to be glossing over the point that for the majority in this country, outside the inside-M25 ghetto, £44,000 is a whacking great salary, and seems to be producing sob stories of soon to be poverty-stricken Islingtonites. A recent caller to Radio 4 on £15,000 was soon shut up and told of the sufferings of a £44,000 earner trying to bring up one child in London. Maybe it's time to split the country! It's another planet out here.

rod liddle

Jo - that's absolutely right. There is a vast gulf between London and the rest of the country in economic, social and ideological terms. Our three main parties, meanwhile, compete for the London vote.

Brian Williams

Rod you are missing the point. You can't talk about fairness and implement an unfair cut. 2 people can earn more than a single high earner because household income and tax allowances are not pooled. If the joint income is pooled then high rate tax should be paid. The increase in tax income would help the deficit/debt. Equally, pooling the household allowances would enable the traditional nuclear family to survive.

Toby Calvin Forward

Is Nicholas the last person left in thew world who still thinks that John Know wrote about a monstrous regiment of women, as though they were an army? The rest of us know that he wrote about the monstrous 'regimen' of women, that is, rule by women. Not the same thing at all. Tut.

Nicholas

Toby Calvin Forward - I doubt it. Try Googling it and also see references to it (as deliberately misused) in some modern anti-feminism studies.

Of course "Regiment" is a better application to Mumsnet than "Regimen".

Nothing to do with King Tut btw.

Next time I'll add footnotes and a bibliography for prigs and pedants like you.

Mycroft

"The problem is that the 17% who are outraged by this are Tory voters. Take 17% off the Tory vote and they'll be left with sweet FA. Neither myself nor my wife will vote Conservative again if this inequitable poll tax (equivalent to an extra 6% income tax or 10% of net income)on middle income parents is enacted. 9 out of twenty of the households in our street (in a marginal constituency) are in the same boat."

The sheer bloody selfishness of this kind of response is almost enough to turn me into a socialist. This is coming from someone earning over £45,000 a year! Who on earth do they think is going to bearing the brunt of these cuts. Clearly: people who can barely afford it. And anyhow, if people like this don't vote Tory, who are they going to vote for who would leave them with more money (since their concer about their own income is clearly all that concerns them). A Labour party that would want to leave the top tax rate at 50%?

seanyprawny

Wonder how many of those 83% supporting the policy now feel the same given that Duncan Smith has now admitted that no one will be getting child benefit in 7 years' time. Undermines the argument in Rod's last post about how progressive this measure is - once a benefit is no longer universal it is a target for future cuts.

Fiona

The simple problem with this proposal is the fact that households with a single income of £44k will lose CB, while those on a higher joint income - potentially up to £86k - get to keep it. For now.

I think you've got to be a moron if you think that's fair.

John Steadman

Just to support our host on this one and others along the lines of Dave S (first post)and to lament the virtual disappearance of politicians with the backbone to put two fingers up to the headline writers when the circumstances warrant it.

philiphuw

My concern is that these child benefit proposals, kicking in in 2013, are forecast to save one billion pounds a year. Last month I seem to recall we overspent by almost 17 billion. In just one flippin' month! Are we not talking about a drop in the ocean of debt here?

Toby Zwingli Forward

Nicholas, be a man. Admit you're wrong.

Oedipus Rex

Boy am I enjoying this argument.

Desperate housewives, a Cameroonian conservative civil war, singles versus couples and regionalist envy - in London, I can assure you, there are stacks of people who earn way, way under £44k. Why do people think everyone in London works in the city or is a BBC manager?

As for the "inferno", why not fight fire with fire and start a Facebook campaign against Mumsnet?

And as for the single/joint income situation, just cap benefit at joint £45k or so.

Nicholas

Toby whateveryournameis, yes I was wrong about you being a pedant. You're more a creepy stalker.

Toby Huss Forward

Nicholas, I accept your apology, and I add my own apology to your nurse for upsetting you and increasing her work load.

The ghost of William Beveridge

I would hate to think you were "representative of public opinion"! This is the start of a shameless dismantling of the welfare state under the disguise of "reform". Mr Cameron wants to turn the clock back 180 years. Maybe as a social policy he will introduce a minimum wage for child labour when we send them back out to help their families!

Screwed by Smug Gits

Here's a bit of focus group ire for you.
I lived down the road from CallMeDave in my own house in Oxfordshire a few years ago and worked in London for the government (no choice in the matter viz location - obviously working for government was voluntary) on a lower salary than him. I paid my own mortgage and my own travel arrangements. I had no children and wasn't married. I paid my taxes and claimed nowt. Now I learn through the expenses scandal coverage that I was paying through my taxes for CallMeDave's mortgage and various sundries (only a bit of which he paid back, something about a conservatory wasn't it?) and of course you can bet he was claiming his child benefit in full.
What fucks me off on a personal level is that I subsidised CallMedDaves substantial Cotswold stone pile (way beyond a normal person's reach)and his life choice to have children and now just at the point where my wife (who has stopped work to bring up the children) could get something back, she is shafted by a Tory Eton boy who has never wanted for anything yet took everything he could get from the system.
None of these bastards seem to know what it means to stand on your own two feet as a middle class family. Anyone who thinks a high rate tax payer is de facto rich and can therefore afford to lose the money is not in touch.
Meanwhile the Swat Valley in Pakistan, which will still hate us 1000 years from now, gets money thrown at it by Gobshite Mitchell and immigrants still stand at the front of the queue getting undeserved and unearned benefits.

In short, fuck the Tories and fuck Labour. And yes, I know that neither of them give a shit about people like me, buit that's their mistake.

michael

Too much off the cuff politics, not enough governance.
-lack of trust
-lack of cohesiveness
-lack of internal consultation
-lack of experience
Talk!... for ideas about likely scenarios which can be dealt with collectively,
-- and not apologised for.

Comprehensiveboy

This single/double income debacle smacks of lack of careful thought on the part of the treasury. That said, here in North Staffordshire £44k seems like dreamland. No, I take that back, its only money. A few quid in this vale of tears.

Comprehensiveboy

And another thing. That Conservative tree logo has changed into a tree Union Jack. From a distance it's roughly the same shape as God fearing Ulster. No Suuuureeender!!!