Does anyone think that the people in this country would ever take part in one like the French and Russian Revolutions or are they too laid back and not bothered enough ?

Yes, no and no.
Edit:
It's remotely possible, no and no.

We were doing revolution before the French or the Russians ever considered it.



However, by the 1840s, when the rest of Europe was getting a bit unsettled, there was little major chance of it happening over here.

We will occasionally riot, though. And I suspect that we might find that the bedroom tax becomes Cameron's poll tax.

It's not a "bedroom tax" it's a "Spare Room Subsidy".

I wonder which wonk of a SpAd dreamed that one up?

I'm also interested to know how much Cameron will be charged for all his spare rooms at No.10 and what reduction in 2nd home benefits will be applied to MPs. Seeing as they are all sponging accommodation off the state and "we're all in it together"

Ooooh, great topic.

You could say that England had its anti-monarchy revolution earlier than France ... i.e. the English Civil War and Charles I losing his head outside the Guildhall.

Or you could look at the early days of the industrial revolution during and just after the Napoleonic wars when, seeing the Luddites and the mass meetings of workers rising up against the owners and the established order, the authorities were mightily worried that the UK might be on the brink of revolution a la France.
Hence the jaw-droppingly brutal and swift suppression (hangings, cavalry charges etc etc) in many towns and cities (e.g. The Peterloo massacre).

Not to mention all the spare bedrooms in Buckingham Palace, Sandringham, Windsor Castle, Clarence House, St James' Palace, Balmoral, etc.

If we do I hope somebody writes a book as good as "A Tale of Two Cities"

Thank f'ck I don't get housing benefit, we have 4 spare since the family went.

I cant believe people seriously oppose the plans to tax spare rooms in council properties?

Like many government plans, the idea behind it is sound, the implementation is shocking.

Fair enough, I've not looked into the detail.

Its not a tax, you have to stop calling it a tax, its not a tax, tax on properties, it sends Tories into spasms of fear at what happened last time, its not a tax, just like JSA isn't a wage, its not.

What it is is an ill conceived plan to cut benefits payments, nothing more.

Remember June 2010 when the newly elected Cameron sent his Ministers away and told them to come back with plenty of ideas on how to cut their public spending budgets ?

They went away and spoke to all manner of advisors, civil servants, and university graduates like themselves, you know, people with real life experience, and they came back with a whole long list of ideas, some of which were even reasonable, some were a bit impractical, and others were just "Fekk off, they'll never stand for that".

Well, nearly three years on and the country is still borrowing more money than ever and they've gone down the lists again and now its time for the ones that were on the "Fekk off, they'll never stand for that" list, with a new foudn confidence that if you just blame all of these people then the rest will agree, a sort of Jeremy Kyle Does Politics.


The proof of the pudding is in this newspaper article, ok so its The Mirror and you wouldn't expect them to agree, but read it anyway ... [urlhttp://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/bedroom-tax-farce-just-50-1745529[/url

Even if The Mirror is 100% out in its numbers then its still a national disgrace that is being perpetrated on the most vulnerable in our society where they have no choice but to hand back some of their housing benefit simply because there is nothing else on offer.

Its not selfishness that makes people have one or even two spare bedrooms in their council house, its circumstances and the fact that there is no other size dwelling available, if there were tens of thousands of one bed accomodation standing empty because no-one would take it then the anti-council tenant rhetoric would have some standing, but the fact is that its a perfect benefit cut because there is no get-out clause.

Spot on.
When will people realise that the Conservative agenda is not economics-driven but is ideology-driven?
They are trying to do what even the evil witch Maggie wouldn't have dared to do, which is to eradicate the last vestiges of the welfare state, state ownership and state responsibilities.
Give them enough time and it won't just be the NHS that gets privatised but ieverything... all emergency services, schools, roads, national security, you name it... everything.
They will deny it but they will be lying in the same way that Cameron lied about the NHS.

They are, of course, helped by decades of Thatcher, Major and Blair all trying to under-tax each other so that tax is now a dirty word.
Tax is part of our contribution towards a better country for all ... and that "[ifor all[/i" bit is the part that the mean and selfish bstrds in the Conservative Party hate most of all.

The reality of the shirkers and skivers and the bedroom tax.
My mate, unemployed presently.
Renting a modestly small two-bedroom cottage. (I know for a fact there are no one bedroom properties available in the town).
His rent is £85 a week. (lets say £340 a month for convenience).
He recieves a housing benefit of £276 every four weeks.
A deficit of £64 which he now has no alternative but to pay out of his Job-Seekers allowance.
He receives £71 a week JSA so lets say £284 a month.
£284 a month minus £64 a month he has to put too for rent.
Doing the math that leaves him with £224 a month.
That'll be £56 a week to feed, clothe and pay his water rates, electricity and gas bills.

But hey up, wait on a minute.
He has an extra small box bedroom in the property and has now been told the newly vaunted bedroom tax will involve a £13 weekly reduction in his housing benefit.
That'll now leave him £43 a week to feed, clothe and pay his water rates, electricity and gas bills.

But hey up, wait on a minute.
He's now been informed by his local council that he will have to pay 25% of his council tax. Something that used to be paid for him when unemployed.
I think it works out at roughly £20 a month he will now have to contribute, so roughly another £5 a week he never previously had to pay.

£38 a week to feed, clothe pay his water rates, gas and electricity bill.

But he doesn't want a job, honest.
He's living a life of Riley.

No wonder he keeps his bedroom curtains fooking shut!

Have a read of that link I gave to the Daily Mirror, there might be a glimmer of hope if its true about the definition of a habitable room vs a "box room", if that wins an appeal then a good percentage of the victims of this persecution may have a get out clause.

Of course it means that their local council may also have been overcharging them for years for something they called a bedroom that was actually just a cupboard - an 8 foot square 3rd bedroom would not qualify as a bedroom.

Just read it.
Apparently only applies to council and housing association tenants?
Didn't realise that.

He'll be happy but disgusting Tory scumbags all the same.

Like Saddened, I don't know the precise ins and outs of the policy.

What I will say, though, is that it is unfair that I cannot afford a spare room but have to subsidise other peoples' spare rooms.

This sounds like the kind of policy which will throw up the odd harsh or exceptional case, however I actually think the government are right to address this issue.

And not the hundreds of thousands of our poorest citizens that JC's link refers too?

[i"But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast and be false to the truth."[/i

Figures can be distorted to say almost anything.

One such 'poorest citizen' is begging for sympathy in my local rag this week. He has children from a previous (unmarried) relationship,who stay with him and his new (unmarried) partner for only 3 nights a week. Therefore, the bedroom he needs for his first lot of children is to be 'taxed' because, officially, they are not counted when calculating his housing benefit.

Behind nearly every story is a social failure. Sometimes it's the State's fault; more often than not it's the claimant's. The one thing which is certain is that 100% of the welfare bill is picked up by the taxpayer, who may have their own problems to deal with.

I see what you did there, with your 'odd exception' from your previous post.
Good work.

Incidentally, is it all them bastads running about being the real issue that's playing with your head?

But you aren't - and that is the whole point.

Its coincidental if someone takes council or HA property that under the NEW rules falls into the category of having an "extra" bedroom, the plain and simple fact is there are insufficient numbers of "correctly" roomed dwellings to satisfy the NEW rules.

Let me give you an example - you are a two parent, two child family, you have a boy aged 9 and a girl aged 8 years, you apply for LA or HA accomodation and you are in receipt of housing benefit, they offer you a three bedroomed house which being of a typical british standard is two double bedrooms and what we normally call "a box room", you accept it because it means that your children can have their own bedrooms.

From April 1st your housing benefit will be reduced by 14% because, according to the NEW rules your two children should be sharing one bedroom, despite the fact the the LA or HA never offered you a two bed unit and cannot offer you one still.

Just to rubber stamp the arbitory and punative nature of the NEW rules, if your two children were two boys and aged 14 and 15 then your housing benefit would still be reduced because some fekkwit decreed that they too should be sharing one bedroom.

This new housing benefit rule should have been laughed out at the first cabinet meeting, should have been rejected at the second meeting with a whisper in Camerons ear "Margaret wants to ask if you remember the poll tax", but we've reached a point where there are no new ideas in Plan A, no more screws to tighten, the presumed slack in public services that the whole shaky policy was based on has been proved to be somewhat smaller than envisaged then when it was all the rage at Oxford during those PPE debates, its time to step up the divide and conquer tactics - I dread to think what rhetoric is to follow in the next few weeks to try and justify their plan, or u-turn as the case may be.

Well they've got you hooked, good and proper.

If you lived in Poland in 1939 you'd be pointing out your local Jews to the police as "social failures".

Probably gone to ask the almighty why he allowed them 6 million defenceless men women and children turn into smoke?

Either that or he's gone to feed his rabbits.

Why shouldn't two teenage boys share a room???

And if the HA of LA can't offer you suitable accommodation, why not look to the private sector?