The fact that everyone is forced to go to school means it is a fact that she did!
Stop making excuses for people who can't be bothered to take advantage of free compulsary education!
Oh dear, the benefit scroungers are scared!
- Thread starter 86JR
- Start date
The fact that everyone is forced to go to school means it is a fact that she did!
Stop making excuses for people who can't be bothered to take advantage of free compulsary education!
But you've already seen the evidence that overwhelmingly supports the theory that there are more job seekers than jobs. Your solution to this seems to be 'screw em'.
Would an extra (say) £100 in your pocket each year really make so much of a difference to you that you wouldn't mind increased rates of homelessness and crime, or would you not care as long as you didn't have to see it, for example by never visiting a city.
- Joined
- 9 Dec 2012
- Posts
- 1,457
Schools in run down areas don't have the same level of teaching that middle class areas do. You really have no idea about what is going on, you seem to live in a bubble, you follow the herd and blame the poor for being poor, yet most of the problems arise from the rich and politicians in this country.
The banking crisis was caused by the rich, not the poor, it was based on greed.
The poor always end up paying for the greed of the rich.
Look at my post regarding polices like affordable homes, fracking , expenses etc.. why should I pay towards the expenses of MPs children, they choose to have the kids they should pay for them, these MPs have money but want more and do not need it, the unemployed dont have money but need it. They claimed for there kids almost the same amount per year what it costs to pay the unemployed to live on.
Where does £100 a year come from? I wish I paid that little tax!
Well not all of your tax goes towards paying people jobseekers allowance. As it's impossible to work it out exactly I made a stupidly high guess.
If you can work out the exact figure from your tax bill that goes on JSA payments then feel free to substitute that.
If you can work out the exact figure from your tax bill that goes on JSA payments then feel free to substitute that.
I'd rather see other people earning £100 extra a year and building a CV of sorts, rather than wasting away on benefits.
Benefits are there to be relied upon in dire circumstances, not as a lifestyle choice, fault does not lie entirely with the people or the system, it also falls on society as a whole for somehow accepting this way of existing.
It needs fixed, there's only two ways to do that, painfully and quickly or slowly and expensively. Personally I have no preference, as long as there is change, people in work and less people on benefits for more than 12 months at any point in their lives. Nobody in my family has ever been out of work for more than a couple of weeks, most of us - myself included aren't particularly well qualified in anything, we just take whatever job we can get and fortunately in many cases that does actually work out for the best long term.
I'm unable to afford a second child with my wife due to the cost of child care, despite us having always wanted to have two or even three at one point, so I am VERY bitter when I see my neighbours having three or four kids whilst neither parent works and my taxes go to helping them have the family I want. Is that selfish - probably, but I'm extremely angry about it. I've never been out of work since I turned 16 and started working in a shop at weekends.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 9 Dec 2012
- Posts
- 1,457
Some people pay nothing but earn millions, your anger should be aimed at the rich and politicians of this country.
I would really like to see land tax imposed in this country and council tax abolished, its the only fair system that will never come into force in this country.
- Joined
- 9 Dec 2012
- Posts
- 1,457
BLAME THE RICH!
BLAME THE GOVERNMENT!
MAKE EXCUSES FOR THE LAZY POOR!
Sure I said this on page 2.... yet here we are still doing it
The regulations are design to keep the poor down. Why dont we have tax based on the value of the land and the size, because it will make they system fairer.
Look at the Olympic village how much it cost us, how much it was sold to private investor for, and how much those private investors sold it for.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 May 2004
- Posts
- 7,018
- Location
- England
Have you ever looked at debt to GDP charts over the last 50 years & compared the relative positions by political party?.
I'm guessing not.
Source: HM Treasury and UK Public Spending
Source: ONS
Looking at both charts you see no real deviation, you see two pronounced dips during the tenure of both political parties (mid 80's, early 00's), with the recent spike due to the global financial crisis - unless of course you blame Labour for that.
lol
socialist worker bs.
Associate
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 2,382
- Location
- Darwen
sorry... double posted.
Associate
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 2,382
- Location
- Darwen
Except pick up rubbish, I'd be interested to know what "help" you do.
BLAME THE RICH!
BLAME THE GOVERNMENT!
MAKE EXCUSES FOR THE LAZY POOR!
Sure I said this on page 2.... yet here we are still doing it
Total cost of benefits per year £5bn (this isn't just job seekers allowance before you start), total cost of tax avoiders and their chums £65bn a year.
No ones saying they shouldn't cut down the benefits bill but there are larger problems to solve before doing that.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 9 Dec 2012
- Posts
- 1,457
2007 /2008 the angle increased i wonder what happen there, hummm.
The ratio of UK income and unemployment benefits has always been the same with a fluctuation of +/- 5% difference, it has not increased but remained the same in proportion, but corporate welfare has increase greater than UK income.
I mistakenly thought it was a discussion but it turns out it's just a circle-jerk of selfishness. You make a good point.
Thinking this myself...
There is no tax dodging system that enables you to pay 0% tax.
So let me get this straight... because a few people claim silly amounts of benefits, I am supposed to blame people who pay over 40% tax for this? Your logic astounds me...what astounds me more is people actually believe this logic!
There are schemes that allow you to pay say, 13% tax (like Jimmy Carr) but when you think of it, 13% of a few million a year is a lot more paid tax than what....0% paid by people on benefits (who have the audacity to complain about council tax!)
Last summer I mowed 5 elderly peoples lawns every week, for free. The same 5 peoples, 2 lawns, strimming and clearing took me an hour ish give or take, that's 5 hours per week of manual labor...why? Because these are pensioners who have worked their whole lives and can't really afford to pay someone £30 to do it for them. So I did it. Now maybe that makes me scum as I am taking away a £30 hour job that anyone on benefits could do (but they can't be bothered so the point is moot).
The Christmas before last I donated 800 childrens books to charity. I didn't do this as a tax break, I paid their cost to my own company out of my own bank account, didn't claim it back as any form of expense before you assume.
Doesn't make sense... there isn't just one guy in the whole of govt who is capable of tackling this and can only manage one task at a time. There is no reason why both excessive spending on benefits and measures to reduce tax evasion (not necessarily all avoidance unless its particularly egregious) can't be carried out concurrently. This figures of tax not paid are always a bit silly and in reality no one knows for sure how much people didn't report etc... I've got no doubt it is huge but trying to place a figure on it like '65 billion' simply isn't credible.
Personally I'd like to see large performance bonuses paid to HMRC in relation to above target revenue they manage to bring in... why not start poaching tax advisors from the big 4, private banks etc... and give them heavy incentives to catch out on the tax evaders and advise on removing any particularly dubious loop holes their firms have been exploiting. Doesn't have to cost us much... I don't care if we end up giving some of these civil servants private sector pay and bonus packages as long as its directly linked to them bringing in additional revenue. Recruiting more staff to HMRC and empowering/incentivising them where it is useful to do so would likely pay for itself many times over. The private sector seems to recruit HMRC staff... why not have a bit of a push the other way around... tax advisors can both have a well paid career and actually do something useful for society rather than assist rich people in avoiding their obligations. Frankly it ought to be taken even further than this... with perhaps IT staff as Swiss banks being paid off for handing over data on a big scale (the UK clearly also has resources to throw at this in the form of GCHQ etc.. too if the political will was there to do so)... start actively targeting various tax havens and completely undermining at random, naming and shaming prominent figures who are caught out and imposing punitive fines until it becomes too much of a risk for the majority of people currently using them. Frankly all these tax dodging individuals are undermining UK plc... from hospitals, schools to the armed forces etc..
Regarding benefits - one of the biggest areas I could see for savings is housing... in particular in London. Shifting housing responsibility from local boroughs to covering London as a whole, removing the ability to pass on council houses, means testing council tenancies, selling off council property in prime areas of zone 1 and 2 and building significantly more council homes in zone 3 and 4 thus reducing the amount of housing benefits paid to private landlords.
Last edited: