there will be and to some extent already has been an outcry over the benefit changes being made by the current administration. Labour has said that they do not agree with them, will hit the poor, disabled the hardest and that it's patently unfair. So if some want the benefit, welfare system that is incredibly costly, to change, how do they propose to do it. Many on here say that you shouldn't penalise those who are unemployed, but what if they have never worked. Some don't see that as right, that you should take out whilst never having contributed. So when the changes come into force April this year, will there be outrage, or a simple, about time. This will affect many, perhaps we should scrap the welfare state and start again from scratch. Only give to those who have earned it, paid into the system, and that would take out of the equation any more recent incomers who think that we are a soft touch. It seems that one is damned if you do and damned if you don't. I see that the system is patently unfair, that there are those who are work shy, never intend or intended to work, yet those who have, will also be punished, by the withdrawal of some benefits. Time we put our own house in order, indeed however that will take a lot longer, and be a damn sight more painful, and won't ever be right whichever way you look at it. To constantly give hard working tax payers money to those who haven't ever done a days work, there are exceptions of course, is morally wrong.
We can't have it all ways, make it fairer for those in work, and not so easy for those that haven't.