ChatterBank0 min ago
so is "Call me David" finally showing his Thatcherite traits?
On Sky News this morning, his Chancellor, George Osborne was said to have ducked and dived in a Q and A session regarding child benefit and winter fuel payments, it is thought that the latter will now only be paid to the 66+ pensioners and not 60 as it is now, the child benefits will be reduced for the 2/3/4 child or more, which tbh cant be a bad thing, this may or may not stop the young girls going on to mass produce often with a different father each time.
It appears the elderly and the young are always the soft targets, why not the fat cats and the MPs contribute to the austerity cuts we are about to have? and catch up with the Tax evaders who don't pay a penny in revenue here....because the old and young don't shout so it's an easy option?
It appears the elderly and the young are always the soft targets, why not the fat cats and the MPs contribute to the austerity cuts we are about to have? and catch up with the Tax evaders who don't pay a penny in revenue here....because the old and young don't shout so it's an easy option?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Bobbisox. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
Has it occurred to anyone that means testing benefits would just result in any savings being swallowed up by salaries for even more civil servants 'attempting' to administer it?
The only way forward is for all depts to be amalgamated, HMRC, benefits, child support (what used to be CSA) and everything totted up. There should be a top line for anyone in receipt of benefits so that their income is equivalent to no more than anyone on minimum wage.
Child allowance should be £500 in equipment vouchers for the 1st child and nothing for any subsequent children.
And, for the record, Margaret Thatcher was the best modern PM that this country has had. Anyone who wanted to get on in life was able to under her government. People find their correct level in life, that's why we have entrepreners running huge corporations when they were raised in the gutter and others who were born to well to do families having little left.
Don't be jealous of people having what you don't; just decide that you are going to work, save, and get there as well!
The only way forward is for all depts to be amalgamated, HMRC, benefits, child support (what used to be CSA) and everything totted up. There should be a top line for anyone in receipt of benefits so that their income is equivalent to no more than anyone on minimum wage.
Child allowance should be £500 in equipment vouchers for the 1st child and nothing for any subsequent children.
And, for the record, Margaret Thatcher was the best modern PM that this country has had. Anyone who wanted to get on in life was able to under her government. People find their correct level in life, that's why we have entrepreners running huge corporations when they were raised in the gutter and others who were born to well to do families having little left.
Don't be jealous of people having what you don't; just decide that you are going to work, save, and get there as well!
bobbi....I quite understand your opinion of MT.
When you are a head of a country or indeed head of a large organisation, unpopular decisions have to be made, leading to suffering and in some situations, death.
You know full well that you and you alone will make that decision and you and you alone will know it will be unpopular in certain, not all, areas.
So why did she decide to shut down "some" of the mines?
Firstly, it was much cheaper to import the coal and secondly, most people and in some cases the miners themselves, were p11sed off with Arthur Scargill.
When you are a head of a country or indeed head of a large organisation, unpopular decisions have to be made, leading to suffering and in some situations, death.
You know full well that you and you alone will make that decision and you and you alone will know it will be unpopular in certain, not all, areas.
So why did she decide to shut down "some" of the mines?
Firstly, it was much cheaper to import the coal and secondly, most people and in some cases the miners themselves, were p11sed off with Arthur Scargill.
Steve, I don’t see a mob mentality, but I do see some common sense at last - and yes, the system is corrupt. That’s why we have serial leeches, with ‘bad backs’ living off us all their lives - and that is illegal. It‘s called fraud.
//But there are also others who would not because the system suites their lifestyles & accomodates them. which is also not illegal, but are treated as such by tabloids etc. //
And so it should be. It’s absolutely right that these people are exposed. There are millions of people who hate their jobs, but they do them because they have something the people you are championing wouldn‘t recognise if it jumped up and smacked them in the face. Self respect. Where would we be if it suited everyone’s lifestyle to scrounge off society? You may think you’re supporting the working classes but you’re not because they are the ones who provide the majority of the money that goes in benefits, and because the system is so easily manipulated they are the ones who find when they need help, there is no money available.
The working class a dying breed exploited by legislation? How do you work that out? If you mean that some people now aspire to better things then good for them. You’re an inverted snob Steve, you’re still waving the tatty union banners of the self-destructive working classes of the past, and you are failing to recognise that life has moved on. You can’t see the wood for the trees.
I asked you what you want, but you haven’t told me. Give us an insight to your ideal society.
mad maggot, good post.
//But there are also others who would not because the system suites their lifestyles & accomodates them. which is also not illegal, but are treated as such by tabloids etc. //
And so it should be. It’s absolutely right that these people are exposed. There are millions of people who hate their jobs, but they do them because they have something the people you are championing wouldn‘t recognise if it jumped up and smacked them in the face. Self respect. Where would we be if it suited everyone’s lifestyle to scrounge off society? You may think you’re supporting the working classes but you’re not because they are the ones who provide the majority of the money that goes in benefits, and because the system is so easily manipulated they are the ones who find when they need help, there is no money available.
The working class a dying breed exploited by legislation? How do you work that out? If you mean that some people now aspire to better things then good for them. You’re an inverted snob Steve, you’re still waving the tatty union banners of the self-destructive working classes of the past, and you are failing to recognise that life has moved on. You can’t see the wood for the trees.
I asked you what you want, but you haven’t told me. Give us an insight to your ideal society.
mad maggot, good post.
umm as i said wasnt to you. but rememebr the more tax you pay invariably the more money you have earned? whta im sayin is if people have the means to pay if they are pensioners or not then they should pay. the state isnt there to breastfeed them from cradle to grave. there are plenty without any savings or income and not necessrily because they were wasteful. in life there are doctors and lawyers and cleaners and shop keepers . its not india and there should be no cast system and if people worked all their life in a low paid job then they should get help that other better of pensioners take but dont need. heating allowance for people to buy presents at xmas or holidays says to me they dont need the money so use it where its nneded.people neeed to think of the government budget like their own household one. you cant buy a car etc if you dont have the money like you cant pay money to people who dont need it when the pot is empty
-- answer removed --
Steve, oh dear. Touched a nerve, eh? In your failure to respond rationally to the argument, and in your eagerness to resort to insults and an unqualified assessment of my personal history, you succeed only in demonstrating your complete and utter ignorance, and hence in very adequately proving my point. Thank you.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.