Donate SIGN UP

Better Defence or fewer Benefits cuts?

Avatar Image
Whoever | 12:42 Thu 30th Sep 2010 | News
48 Answers
If you were in charge, what would you choose - - fewer cuts to Defence spending or fewer cuts to the Benefits budget?
Gravatar

Answers

21 to 40 of 48rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Whoever. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
there's certainly a lot to debate on defence fair enough. But if we are looking for cuts then the 120bn a year benefits bill should be a major target.
"History tells us that our two most dangerous enemies are France and Germany"

History is right, then.
R1 Geezer,
can you imagine any circumstances where the UK would use atomic weapons if the USA wasn't involved?
gromit # The logical answer is for Europe to stop expensive duplication of effort by each individual country, and have a centralised european army. #
We are supposed to have a European Army it's called Nato but it's only as good as its members want it to be . For much of the past 60 odd years France hasn't even been in it . Maybe that's not such a bad thing in view of their abject performance in 1940 and we know what sort of co-operation we are getting from our European partners in Afghanistan.
Unfortunately when it comes to defence we can't rely on anyone . All the 1930s treaties turned out to be useless, as was the old League of Nations when it came to the crunch.
I'm not getting into a miltary debate here, the permission thing is bollux, end of, now can we stop giving free money to workshy scum please Sandy?
R1: "none of you lefties", "workshy scum", "anti British rhetoric" - is that what the alternative *has* to be for a vegetable like you?

I tell you what, you utter pr!ck, you obviously have personal anger issues based on fantasy - deal with them before you continue to try and communicate in the real world.
"end of" as in "what I say goes ...don't argue with me" classic dictatorial dogmatic tripe. Get a life you sad fat grebo.
To get back to your question Whoever, IMO the benefit system is there to help people back onto their feet career wise. F*ck defence, our defences are adequate for a country of this size IMO -concentrate on the economy of the potential work force.
LOL "I'm not getting into a miltary debate here", yeah right.

How the F*CK do you know all about your "workshy scum" ? From reading The Sun ? Do you have any idea what it's like to be UNVOLUNTARILY UNIMPLOYED you utter w@nker ? You can stick your "workshy scum" thicko, tabloid reading fantasy up your @arse.
So youngmafbog, what was your answer to Sandy's 'jest' ?
I suppose she is now dismissed as a "leftie" - what say you ?
angry, me, look at your own lefty ar5s for that answerprancer!

This is not a question about defence strategy but about were to cut, I gave my view shame you didn't agree with it. Still Iv'e alwas said that you lefties cannot stand being disagreed with.
no I don't know what it's like to be unemployed because I always get a job, geddit? So it's all; comming out so how much have you sponged off the tax payer then eh? So I see you are including yourself in the workshy scum bracket. What a J'Arthur, end of!
geezer for everyone of the people getting loads of benefits you read about in the papers there are thousands who come out of work who can claim very little. one lady near me never got a single penny from the dwp for 10 months, it took the cab legal person 2 months to get her a payment , she still has problems 12 months later. one day you may find yourself unable to work and you are in for a hell of a big shock.
I'm talking about career unemployed with onsite baby factories and accompanying state milking facilities. Oh and Answerprancer!
i agree there are a few but please remember the word FEW . if it took the cab legal person 2 months of letters and phone calls how long do you think it would take a person like you. the cab have a direct line phone number to the dwp.
a few? perlease!
the only ones that seem to do well on benefit are the ones with kids and those that have been on it for over 15 years
In the spirit of debate - a cornerstone of the AB, shall we agree to put our points calmly, and disagree in an adult fashion?

the exchange of insults on this thread is getting in the way of a simple exchange of views, so let's not be rude to each other because we disagree.

Truce R1 and Answerprancer?
Fair comment Andy, I'll cool it with the obscenities but I won't back off from bitter bullyboys with chips on their shoulders.
R1. you are a wannabe right-winger who clearly knows nothing about unemployment in the real world vis a vis the difference between "career unemployed" and the genuinely in need struggling to get back on their feet.
You presume about me like the one or two of "your sort" tend to do on here, fuelled by your Daily Mirror brainwashed fantasies.
Having made my point, yes I'm happy for a truce now.
I see where your language is coming from, AP

http://journals.lww.c...se_to_pain.99989.aspx

(That just won an Ig Nobel Peave Prize)

21 to 40 of 48rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Better Defence or fewer Benefits cuts?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.