Poll: Poll: Prime Minister Theresa May calls General Election on June 8th

Who will you vote for?

  • Conservatives

  • Labour

  • Lib Dem

  • UKIP

  • Other (please state)

  • I won't be voting

Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tefal said:
of course you do because you are a recipient of that redistribution.

you want others to subsidies your life because you're unwilling to do what they have done and move and improve.
Click to expand...
Last post for now.

1. I believe everybody, regardless of income, should have a right to security of dwelling. That doesn't mean home ownership necessarily, but the rental market in this country is too deregulated to offer security of dwelling as it stands. Rents higher than mortgages are a cruel joke also.

2. Not everybody can earn the average wage or better, by definition. There will always be low-paid workers, and I don't want to live in a world where low-paid workers have a miserable existence, and no entitlement to security of dwelling.

3. Due to house prices, and in part due to planning permission restrictions*, low-paid workers cannot enjoy a modest, low-cost house (*they can't build their own below-spec shack). This is where the market fails. It services the middle- and upper-class but can and does ignore the needs of the poor. It is a market failing, caused by high demand and chronically low supply, coupled with allowing people to buy more than they need as an "investment vehicle" (plus foreign speculation).

Because of the above I feel the current system is forcing the low-paid to be dependant on the state. This isn't a case of "parasitic" layabouts leeching off the virtuous high earners. This is a case of creating a situation where the low-paid can do nothing but accept hand-outs, because the market is so hyper-inflated that it has long ago ceased to function normally.
 
Tunney said:
What are you talking about? The whole country is putting in four times as much now as it did under British Rail. You're subisidising Londoners more than before.
Click to expand...
Crossrail - 15 billion... HS2 - 80 billion (and rising)

Investment elsewhere... /tumbleweed
 
drs101 said:
you keep saying this, whats it based on?
Click to expand...
People keep saying it because it's true, somebody made a very good post explaining it a few pages back, the jist is that services are much better now than they have ever been, stations that were closed during nationalisation have re-opened, passengers numbers are well up on nationalisation figures, quality of services improved. Basically BR was a mess that due to nostalgia people have started seeing through rose tinted glasses and forgotten it was even worse than what replaced it.
 
dowie said:
nope... doesn't make your suggestion that spending 350k to save 50k is any less stupid though
Click to expand...

I dont see why. One way I will have spent £350k on myself on hookers and cocaine and whatever else i fancy and the other way I will have paid the government £50k.
 
I'm still waiting for an answer as to how my old man is meant to pay for care provision for my Ma with Pick's Disease. (Frontal lobe dementia) He only gets a few hours respite from carers each week, and now they want him to pay towards it out of the little money he has.

He doesn't own property, has no savings.

If my Ma were to go into a care home, it would cost the state 4-5 times the amount so I really don't understand the Government's stance on this.

Admittedly it's a grey area, but more and more people are developing this savage disease in their 40s and 50s.

The stress of the situation, he's just had a heart attack himself. Wish I could do more but i'm 150 miles away with a 60 hour a week job and 2 young kids. Awful situation. I'll be in a position to pay towards it when i'm not forking out £700 a month for nursery fees, but until then it's a ticking timebomb.

Just no idea what you are meant to do.
 
ubersonic said:
People keep saying it because it's true, somebody made a very good post explaining it a few pages back, the jist is that services are much better now than they have ever been, stations that were closed during nationalisation have re-opened, passengers numbers are well up on nationalisation figures, quality of services improved. Basically BR was a mess that due to nostalgia people have started seeing through rose tinted glasses and forgotten it was even worse than what replaced it.
Click to expand...
so not based on any facts, the things you point out can be explained in many different ways depending on your ideological stance, the truth is we dont know how it would be on a mass scale as things have changed and moved on
 
Tefal said:
but with over quater of a million in assets your mother is "rich"
Click to expand...
Not at all.

Compared to others of her generation, probably in the bottom 20%.

Compared to generations that came after her, probably in the bottom 40%.

That's part of the problem tho, isn't it... the market as it stands is increasingly screwing succeeding generations, to the point of being unsustainable. Still waiting for the bubble to burst, or the social unrest to come.
 
The_Abyss said:
In what world do you think £8 per month is going to solve the funding for social care?!
Click to expand...

Well with 32 million people that equates to 3 billion which is 2 billion more than this new scheme proposed by the Tories on houses so yes, it would more than pay for the part of social care that the Tories are looking at funding.

It would mean the government would have to put 2 billion less than it does now into social care each year.
 
Greebo said:
Well with 32 million people that equates to 3 billion which is 2 billion more than this new scheme proposed by the Tories on houses so yes, it would more than pay for the part of social care that the Tories are looking at funding.

It would mean the government would have to put 2 billion less than it does now into social care each year.
Click to expand...

so you'd be happy with people on minimum wage (as the person who suggested this apparently is) paying more in taxes to support other people who have six figures worth of assets and could afford to pay for the cost of their care themselves?

this just gets funnier - people are coming up with rather odd ways to justify their opposition to this... partly simply because it was the Tories proposing it rather than Labour
 
ubersonic said:
People keep saying it because it's true, somebody made a very good post explaining it a few pages back, the jist is that services are much better now than they have ever been, stations that were closed during nationalisation have re-opened, passengers numbers are well up on nationalisation figures, quality of services improved. Basically BR was a mess that due to nostalgia people have started seeing through rose tinted glasses and forgotten it was even worse than what replaced it.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that the increase in passenger numbers and stations has nothing at all to do with the fact the population has grown so much...

BR wasn't as amazing as people believe, but I don't get how you can possibly think the current situation of tax payers paying for the infrastructure and foreign owned companies taking the profits is better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom