The Budget™ 2009
- Thread starter cheets64
- Start date
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 12,681
- Location
- Tyneside
Would you really like to live in a country that lets it's weakest people rot in the street.
Do you have ANY idea how inadequate welfare payments are in reality, despite the well planted propaganda-like stories about benefit cheats conning us all out of tens of thousands of pounds. People unfortunate enough to be forced to live on benefits have a horrible time.
Those who choose to modify their lifestyle to deliberately live off benefits have a squalid unenviable day to day existence as well.
The flaw in your argument is that f benefits were cut, the good and law biding would simply suffer even more, while a lot of those you write off as lazy would indeed be motivated to get off their backsides to earn a little extra cash - but they wouldn't work for it they will often turn to petty crime.
When I was on benefits (over 14 years ago I might add) it wasn't bad. I managed to go out most weekends and enjoy life. I certainly don't see it as hardship and they need more money.
Hell people on benefits get the rent, council tax, medicine paid for them which is pretty much the essentials then get given extra cash for day to day living. It's certainly not a hardship unless they want to waste the money on narcotics, booze, etc. instead of food or transport / clothes to get out of the situation.
M.
Hell people on benefits get the rent, council tax, medicine paid for them which is pretty much the essentials then get given extra cash for day to day living. It's certainly not a hardship unless they want to waste the money on narcotics, booze, etc. instead of food or transport / clothes to get out of the situation.
M.
Obviously your example is due to downright stupidity but what about people who need medical help for things such as playing football, smoking , drinking, STD's, falling off a bike, getting pregnant blah blah blah .. charge them also?
You just repeated your previous post?
NHS funding is not specifically taken from NI, it's taken out of the general tax pool. The only thing I can think of that's specifically funded by NI is benefits, everything else comes from all the sources combined. It's a slipperly slope as JBuk mentioned, first it's dunkeness, then it's obesity and smoking, then sports, then driving, at which point your paying for virtually everything.
Last edited:
There is of course a difference between people's circumstances. Living at home with parents - benefits can become just extra pocket money.
Married with kids and no external financial support from friends and relatives - then benefits would pay SOME of your rent, SOME of your council tax, and yes - free medical support. But your laughably inadequate ittle list of things that are essentials ignores a weekly shop of most basic food, water rates, gas bills, electricity bills, transport costs, clothing, internet, and the non-trivial cost of job hunting to name a few. Families on benefits don't enjoy the beer swilling, cigarette smoking utopia you imply. They are sick with worry wondering how to pay the next bill and fearing visits from the bailiffs.
May I ask why?
The usual OcUK reason... Jealousy tax.
Yeah, I've no doubt the people who've been constantly calling for spending cuts paid for by efficiency improvements will be very unhappy when the government actually announces that they're doing just that
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
Scrap it except for those on the breadline.
Whilst I had a good rant earlier about hardworking people without kids (or with kids who have left home etc) supporting families to pop them out willy nilly you couldn't cut it for everybody as that would punish too many people.
I can see the point of child benefit but just like every other benefit it is applied with too wide a brush.
What they need to do is scrap the NHS. Have a bare essentials health service for those who cannot afford health insurance and everybody else pays insurance.
I'm not saying this lightly as I need the NHS to keep me alive but having experienced it for 34 years I can tell you it is dying on its feet and needs an overhaul just like the benefit system.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
Simple logic. The more you earn the more you should pay towards your countries upkeep.
I don't think so. Germany has a progressive sliding tax system and I think we should. I'd certainly have no problem paying a higher tax percentage (say 50%) if I earned over 100K (well 50% of what i earned over 100k)
Yeah, I've no doubt the people who've been constantly calling for spending cuts paid for by efficiency improvements will be very unhappy when the government actually announces that they're doing just that
I'll be happy for that, it's just far too late given how screwed the economy and budget already is thanks to our government...
I'm an advocate of scrapping every individual benefit and simply means testing everyone who needs support based on disabilities, dependants etc.
Given that you don't earn over £100k, I imagine you would be happy now... Whether you'd be happy if you were actually earning it is another matter.
Sliding tax systems are not fair, they punish people for earning more. A flat tax system is fair.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2006
- Posts
- 6,552
- Location
- Bournemouth
Hopefully the tax on booze will go up dramatically, that way i perhaps won't have as much of it and lose a bit of weight.
Yes, that's what happens already ...
That's uncharacteristically childish of you.
So explain why if you earn over £100k you should have to pay a higher percentage of tax ...