The People's Hero Posted 6 March 2006 Posted 6 March 2006 You're misrepresenting my argument. I really can't be bothered with this anymore. There's all sorts of allegations flying about, particularly the one about fascists, I was wondering how long it would be before that one came out.
TrickyTrev Posted 6 March 2006 Posted 6 March 2006 I'd be proud, too. JSA is less than £60 per week, if employers expect people to work for around that then they're taking the p1ss. Aye, and with the minimum wage at £5 an hour and a working week 40 odd hours it is hard to work out what maths these people are doing when they decide its not worth them working. You also have to provide evidence that your are actively seeking a job to receive the JSA, as in filling in application forms and going to interviews. I think people are deluded if they think that benefits are the major problem in this country. Yes a few unscrupulous people do take advatange of the system as it stands but that is definately a price worth paying to live in a country with a proper safety net.
The People's Hero Posted 6 March 2006 Posted 6 March 2006 Aye, and with the minimum wage at £5 an hour and a working week 40 odd hours it is hard to work out what maths these people are doing when they decide its not worth them working. You also have to provide evidence that your are actively seeking a job to receive the JSA, as in filling in application forms and going to interviews. I think people are deluded if they think that benefits are the major problem in this country. Yes a few unscrupulous people do take advatange of the system as it stands but that is definately a price worth paying to live in a country with a proper safety net. I never said it wasn't. All I've done is criticise those who are workshy and would turn down work where it is acceptable in favour of the easy route, free money. That is all. If you want to attack me on anything else, better to make sure it's actually something I believe first, eh?
Lemon Harpic Posted 6 March 2006 Posted 6 March 2006 There's all sorts of allegations flying about, particularly the one about fascists, I was wondering how long it would be before that one came out. I'm surprised it took so long. The parallels between what some people were proposing and estato corporativo are not hard to see.
The People's Hero Posted 6 March 2006 Posted 6 March 2006 Depends what you want to see. It appears that some people are willing to bend and manipulate other people's arguments to see what they want to see.
The Don Posted 7 March 2006 Posted 7 March 2006 Aye, and with the minimum wage at £5 an hour and a working week 40 odd hours it is hard to work out what maths these people are doing when they decide its not worth them working. You also have to provide evidence that your are actively seeking a job to receive the JSA, as in filling in application forms and going to interviews. I think people are deluded if they think that benefits are the major problem in this country. Yes a few unscrupulous people do take advatange of the system as it stands but that is definately a price worth paying to live in a country with a proper safety net. Ok, so Mum and dad, no job. What do they exactly obtain for free. Their housing is paid for, no Council tax. Job seekers allowance, child benefit. Yes they have to go to interviews, but if you don't want a job, its not hard not to get one. So between them, depending on the number of kids, they will get in cash, roughly £150 per week. Which is roughly 8k per year, paying for no housing. £5 per hour, 40 hours per week, just over 10K per year, but you have to pay for your house and council tax, yes you would get family working tax credit, but I think I would go for the easy no job option and stay in and watch sky all day.
Leicester City Posted 7 March 2006 Posted 7 March 2006 Depends what you want to see. It appears that some people are willing to bend and manipulate other people's arguments to see what they want to see. Why would i 'bend and manipulate' what i thought you said to see what i want to see. I certainly didn't want to see that. I apologise for what i said, of course. You should have been more clear in what you were saying. I did find it quite hurtful actually. Some people can't get jobs and it can take years for some people. I remember on Soccer Saturday a few years ago they were talking about a player that was depressed and one of them looked up and said '20 grand a week...' etc etc 'how can he be depressed?' All the others didn't like it. He has obviously never been depressed. When you go through a terrible time, some people need help and can't work. And of course some people can't for other reasons. That is all i'm going to say on the subject.
Guest Posted 7 March 2006 Posted 7 March 2006 British electorate is too stupid to allow it to be transferred to income tax without mistakenly feeling their taxes have gone up. VAT is the ultimate stealth tax because its completely out of mind. Which is why essentials are exempt from VAT. I'd rather choose to pay VAT than have income tax taken from me without any choice.Besides, it's not much of a stealth tax, if you aren't aware of VAT then there's something wrong.
The People's Hero Posted 7 March 2006 Posted 7 March 2006 Why would i 'bend and manipulate' what i thought you said to see what i want to see. I certainly didn't want to see that. I apologise for what i said, of course. You should have been more clear in what you were saying. I did find it quite hurtful actually. Some people can't get jobs and it can take years for some people. I remember on Soccer Saturday a few years ago they were talking about a player that was depressed and one of them looked up and said '20 grand a week...' etc etc 'how can he be depressed?' All the others didn't like it. He has obviously never been depressed. When you go through a terrible time, some people need help and can't work. And of course some people can't for other reasons. That is all i'm going to say on the subject. Yeah and I never said anything which was contrary to that.
The People's Hero Posted 7 March 2006 Posted 7 March 2006 Ok, so Mum and dad, no job. What do they exactly obtain for free. Their housing is paid for, no Council tax. Job seekers allowance, child benefit. Yes they have to go to interviews, but if you don't want a job, its not hard not to get one. So between them, depending on the number of kids, they will get in cash, roughly £150 per week. Which is roughly 8k per year, paying for no housing. £5 per hour, 40 hours per week, just over 10K per year, but you have to pay for your house and council tax, yes you would get family working tax credit, but I think I would go for the easy no job option and stay in and watch sky all day. Spot on. I know of poeple who don't work, have a nice car, housing, a good social life and kids. So less of this assuming that those who choose not to work are simply getting a couple of hundred quid a week JSA.. for many that is just the tip of the iceberg.
Lemon Harpic Posted 7 March 2006 Posted 7 March 2006 So less of this assuming that those who choose not to work are simply getting a couple of hundred quid a week JSA.. for many that is just the tip of the iceberg. A couple of hundred quid a week JSA? I've known Daily Mail readers who are more in touch with reality. JSA is £44.50 pw for 18-24 year olds, and £56.20 pw for those aged 25 and over. Jobseeker's Allowance.
The People's Hero Posted 7 March 2006 Posted 7 March 2006 I meant a month so kindly get off your high horse. I'm not an idiot and I certainly do NOT read the Mail.
TrickyTrev Posted 7 March 2006 Posted 7 March 2006 That is all. If you want to attack me on anything else, better to make sure it's actually something I believe first, eh? I never attacked you, I was just putting MY point of view across that whilst there are some that will take advantage of the sytstem it is definately a price worth paying. I agree with yout that those who take advantage of a gernous sytem are parasites but I think you should always present the benefits of a welfare state because there are those who have the twisted logic that the way to deal with benefit cheats is to remove the safety net completely. Which is why essentials are exempt from VAT. I'd rather choose to pay VAT than have income tax taken from me without any choice.Besides, it's not much of a stealth tax, if you aren't aware of VAT then there's something wrong Luxury goods that you can easily avoid like clothes and most foods! The point about VAT is people don't relaise they are being taxed because it is rarely listed on the price of what they are buying. If it is out of sight then it is out of mind, However, the main reason it is unfair is that it takes a disproportionate amount of income out of the poor because it is a flat tax. It is one of the reasons we have a regressive tax system in this country.
The People's Hero Posted 7 March 2006 Posted 7 March 2006 I agree with yout that those who take advantage of a gernous sytem are parasites but I think you should always present the benefits of a welfare state because there are those who have the twisted logic that the way to deal with benefit cheats is to remove the safety net completely. Think we've found common ground.
Knighton Matt Posted 7 March 2006 Author Posted 7 March 2006 josef goebbels is now reading this post. Wonder what he would have made of it all?
The People's Hero Posted 7 March 2006 Posted 7 March 2006 Dunno, I'm more shocked that he escaped execution for war crimes/crimes against humanity myself!
Head Honcho Posted 7 March 2006 Posted 7 March 2006 Why would i 'bend and manipulate' what i thought you said to see what i want to see. I certainly didn't want to see that. I apologise for what i said, of course. You should have been more clear in what you were saying. I did find it quite hurtful actually. Some people can't get jobs and it can take years for some people. I remember on Soccer Saturday a few years ago they were talking about a player that was depressed and one of them looked up and said '20 grand a week...' etc etc 'how can he be depressed?' All the others didn't like it. He has obviously never been depressed. When you go through a terrible time, some people need help and can't work. And of course some people can't for other reasons. That is all i'm going to say on the subject. .............is that a promise
Knighton Matt Posted 7 March 2006 Author Posted 7 March 2006 Thought about this today. Instead of a 50% tax rate for high earners... Why not tax those with second domestic homes more harshly? The rise in people investing in UK property is wreaking havoc with the property market as it inflates the market meaning first time buyers or those on lower incomes struggle to get on the property ladder. I think it's a bit of a ridiculous situation when some families can afford to buy a house for their child to live in whilst they're at university (I'm sure renting for 3 years wouldn't hurt that much would it?), whilst others struggle to afford to get on the property ladder at all. I know one guy who got didn't pay a single penny in tuition fees despite the fact his dad is a multi millionaire and owns about half the student properties in Manchester, because his dad had no definable income as all his money was tied up in property. That is a joke!
Head Honcho Posted 7 March 2006 Posted 7 March 2006 Greater tax on those with holiday homes? I agree, as long as that doesn't include homes abroad!
Steven Posted 7 March 2006 Posted 7 March 2006 josef goebbels is now reading this post. Wonder what he would have made of it all? Some posters would be far too right wing.
freund Posted 7 March 2006 Posted 7 March 2006 Thought about this today. Instead of a 50% tax rate for high earners... Why not tax those with second domestic homes more harshly? The rise in people investing in UK property is wreaking havoc with the property market as it inflates the market meaning first time buyers or those on lower incomes struggle to get on the property ladder. I think it's a bit of a ridiculous situation when some families can afford to buy a house for their child to live in whilst they're at university (I'm sure renting for 3 years wouldn't hurt that much would it?), whilst others struggle to afford to get on the property ladder at all. I know one guy who got didn't pay a single penny in tuition fees despite the fact his dad is a multi millionaire and owns about half the student properties in Manchester, because his dad had no definable income as all his money was tied up in property. That is a joke! which website did you copy that from? you're really meant to give references when you quote
Knighton Matt Posted 7 March 2006 Author Posted 7 March 2006 Some posters would be far too right wing. :laugh:
Knighton Matt Posted 7 March 2006 Author Posted 7 March 2006 which website did you copy that from? you're really meant to give references when you quote I'll take that as a compliment. Surely with your 3 As at A-level and your economics degree you could do better though?
Guest Posted 8 March 2006 Posted 8 March 2006 Luxury goods that you can easily avoid like clothes and most foods! The point about VAT is people don't relaise they are being taxed because it is rarely listed on the price of what they are buying. If it is out of sight then it is out of mind, However, the main reason it is unfair is that it takes a disproportionate amount of income out of the poor because it is a flat tax. It is one of the reasons we have a regressive tax system in this country. Most food items are exempt from VAT. I don't care that it's a flat tax, you buy what you can afford. If you are on a low income, but decide to spend your money on expensive designer labels and expensive pre-prepared meals then you quite clearly have your priorities wrong, so shouldn't complain about paying extra tax.On a similar note, it's like road tax and tax on fuel. Why should someone who drives an economic car subsidise a housewife who uses a gas-guzzling 4x4 to drive her brood to school and back each day? Pay tax on what you use. I know that they've started to introduce these bands on the road tax, but it's not enough. And if the system was more secure (ie. proper vetting etc), people who really did need their vehicles (for health reasons) could be subsidised. It's not rocket science.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.