The fastest growing demographic aren't exactly contributing anything to the pot though
Families need £36,800 to live acceptably.....
- Thread starter Castiel
- Start date
The fastest growing demographic aren't exactly contributing anything to the pot though
I think it was his wife who paid more tax that what some other's were earning.
He was too busy fighting illegal wars around the globe
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
To be fair no wonder you feel good. You can live like a king in Staffordshire for 45k. The locals have only just gotten used to getting electricity...
No need? It's a strong biological need for starters. Secondly I think telling people they cannot start a family, a fundamental human right just because they don't earn quite enough to provide everything for it?
I have no issues supporting working families who want children. I have no problems support anybody who has need. We are all not far removed from falling on hard times and needing help from the Government.
To be fair no wonder you feel good. You can live like a king in Staffordshire for 45k. The locals have only just gotten used to getting electricity...
lol you're not far off tbh, I have no gas, no ADSL2 and no virgin media where I am
hmm I missed this gem earlier....
remind me again what it is Prince Harry does for a career? Prince William?
You'll find people from all walks of life in the forces - people from council estates, people from poor areas of the Caribbean, Fiji, Nepal etc.. people who went to Eton, people who've graduated from Oxford, Cambridge etc...
Richest British person at the moment is the Duke of Westminster - IIRC he's a Major General in the TA - he didn't join as an officer right away, started out as a trooper....
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 7,172
Take no notice of Oldcoals, in fact you would be better served putting him on ignore, his views are ridiculous.
As for the original post, I agree with the fact that its entirely dependant on where you live. A two bedroom house is around £1100 minimum around here to rent and upwards of £275k to purchase (under 100k 12 years ago). How on earth this is sustainable I don't know. Property prices and rents are what's causing a lot of these problems.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Jun 2010
- Posts
- 7,058
- Location
- Bedford
This is what I have been thinking aswell.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 7,172
Good post, agree entirely.
I disagree with you on the above point... I've chosen not to have kids, can I have a government funded GT86 instead, it'll cost less in the long run and I'll pay tax on keeping/maintaining/using it.
I know this doesn't relate to your point above, but what about these people?
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18421674
A biological desire isn't a real need though, a person can survive without having children. The can't without shelter, food and water.
Why does a person need to have more than 2 kids though?
The average fertility rate in England, funnily enough, is 2.06
You want more, fine, but you need to be able to support them, no reason for other tax-payers to foot the bill.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 7,172
There is a problem when it costs more than minimum wage to rent a small two bedroom house. Now while this is bad for those people looking to live in areas they have their whole lives (people who work). For people living on benefits its no problem at all.
Just pushes people into poverty who work hard.
Indeed. Houses around here (while cheap compared to elsewhere in the country) have pretty much tripled in price in the 12 years I've lived here.
The house I'm in now was around £20k to buy in 2000, they go for around £65k now.
I have no idea how people in expensive areas are meant to even get anywhere near getting a foot on the property ladder when 1bed flats and the like are going for 200k+
Then why say such things?
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 7,754
- Location
- Cornwall
this is true. i get paid weekly, so some months i get £824, other months i get £1030. my rent is £550 a month, which leaves me with very little some months to cover all the other bills, let alone eat.
Thank you please!
Marines are not exactly squaddies, are they.
Squaddies, in my experience (perhaps this is just ones from stafford) are generally of lower intelligence, higher aggression, love to drink and can't handle their beer after having been on tour so end up falling about the place whilst trying to act up the hard man.
Never see any marines out and about - they're there. They can see you. You just can't see them
Actually it was in response to the posts being put forward about relative success and education level......the post illustrated anecdotally how ridiculous the quoted poster was being as the fact that my wife had a state education and by the quoted posters benchmark meant that his contention was not representative of the level of education offered by many state schools when compared to relative incomes between the State and Private sector.
If you want to complain about thread derailment then you should aim them at Shoes and those who are actively moving the discussion away from what I asked in the OP and into an ideological attack on families and the social responsibilities of the State.
Last edited:
It was aimed at your position of relative education to earnings and the claim that State education was rubbish, it was an anecdotal illustration that your position was flawed given the criteria you have been applying to relative wealth.
He was too busy fighting illegal wars around the globe
I fought in no illegal wars whatsoever. Unless you have specific, legally supported evidence to contrary I would refrain from making spurious assumptions.....thankyou.