Listening to the leader’s debate.
Cameron is really mad.
Try the logic:
1) He’ll cut government spending. This will reduce the size of the state and public sector.
2) This will increase unemployment.
3) He will cut benefits and refuse it to people who won’t work
4) But he’s ensuring there will be no work
In which case he’s actually saying he guarantees there will be an increase in poverty.
Nice!
Or mad.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
“He will … refuse (benefits) to people who won’t work”
And your problem with that is???
Actually all parties are saying they will cut government spending.
Peter – point 3 and point 4 work together
If point 4 was – there will be an abundancy of work and jobs you may have a point. But it doesn’t, so I’m afraid you don’t
@Online Accountant
Precisely
What I’m battling to grasp here is why is it OK for the private sector to cut jobs but not the public sector?
@JayPee
I’m struggling to think why you think either is OK