Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

A very simple fact which left leaning people don't seem able to accept. You cannot continuously spend money you don't have.
If you try to, you will run into serious trouble. The principal is true whether its our household finances or our national economy.
Every Labour Govt. has done it (as did Osborne) and it always ended in tears, but they keep doing it.
Einstein,s definition of madness comes to mind.

Enough money to 'bribe' the DUP with £1 billion?
Enough money to find £100 billion for our 'European chums'?

Is this money we have or don't have?

As a taxpayer, if £1 billion was the price of making sure Corbyn didn't get so much as asniff of power, then its the best spent £1 billion of my tax money, in living memory.
As for our "European chums" I wouldn't give them a brass farthing. In fact we could send them a bill for a couple of trillion or so, for rescuing them from Hitler. They certainly didn't have the balls to rescue themselves. 
I do have some sympathy for people who have been on benefits long term and become virtually unemployable, because they were put in that position as part of a very cynical political game.
Brown basically made the welfare state a free for all, where anyone could tell a few porkies, or have a few kids, and get a monthly cheque bigger than the pay cheque of the average person in work.
Once in that system with little hope of escape, they were trapped in the classic Socialist trap, where the state takes care of you, the state controls everything, you have no ambition, genuine pride, no reason to want to better yourself etc. etc.
The only thing you need to do is vote Labour at every election and you don't have to worry about anything ever again.
I would like to see the Govt actually create jobs for disabled people where they could learn some skills and take some pride in earning their way in the world.
Istr there was some such scheme but Osborne withdrew funding ?
I'm mildly disabled but have worked all my life. Stephen Hawking is terribly physically disabled, but blessed with an IQ in 4 figures, he has worked all his life.
If the opportunities exist, most disabled people could do some kind of work.
To just assume they cant and pay them to sit at home, is an insult to them imo.
Of course, if people are very seriously disabled or in very poor health we as a society should take car of them. If someone who has worked for many years suddenly loses their job, they shouldn't starve. They should have food, heat, shelter and support to get back into employment.
However, when we have the usual suspects  screaming from the rooftops because welfare is limited to less than £600 pw, per household, when the vast majority of working households don't have that amount coming in, then we really are in la la land.

[Sir Tigger KC]

Brown basically made the welfare state a free for all, where anyone could tell a few porkies, or have a few kids, and get a monthly cheque bigger than the pay cheque of the average person in work.
Once in that system with little hope of escape, they were trapped in the classic Socialist trap, where the state takes care of you, the state controls everything, you have no ambition, genuine pride, no reason to want to better yourself etc. etc.
The only thing you need to do is vote Labour at every election and you don't have to worry about anything ever again.

Tax Credits introduced by Brown which cost the Treasury about £30-40 billion a year are a good example of this where the taxpayer are effectively subsidising businesses wage bill.  There is no incentive for any company to give any meaningful pay rise as they know that the government will top up peoples income, and big business in particular have ruthlessly exploited this situation.   Now that so many people rely on in work benefits, it would be political suicide for any political party to abolish Tax Credits. 

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

A very simple fact which left leaning people don't seem able to accept. You cannot continuously spend money you don't have.
If you try to, you will run into serious trouble. The principal is true whether its our household finances or our national economy.
Every Labour Govt. has done it (as did Osborne) and it always ended in tears, but they keep doing it.
Einstein,s definition of madness comes to mind.

Enough money to 'bribe' the DUP with £1 billion?
Enough money to find £100 billion for our 'European chums'?

Is this money we have or don't have?

As a taxpayer, if £1 billion was the price of making sure Corbyn didn't get so much as asniff of power, then its the best spent £1 billion of my tax money, in living memory.
As for our "European chums" I wouldn't give them a brass farthing. In fact we could send them a bill for a couple of trillion or so, for rescuing them from Hitler. They certainly didn't have the balls to rescue themselves. 
I do have some sympathy for people who have been on benefits long term and become virtually unemployable, because they were put in that position as part of a very cynical political game.
Brown basically made the welfare state a free for all, where anyone could tell a few porkies, or have a few kids, and get a monthly cheque bigger than the pay cheque of the average person in work.
Once in that system with little hope of escape, they were trapped in the classic Socialist trap, where the state takes care of you, the state controls everything, you have no ambition, genuine pride, no reason to want to better yourself etc. etc.
The only thing you need to do is vote Labour at every election and you don't have to worry about anything ever again.
I would like to see the Govt actually create jobs for disabled people where they could learn some skills and take some pride in earning their way in the world.
Istr there was some such scheme but Osborne withdrew funding ?
I'm mildly disabled but have worked all my life. Stephen Hawking is terribly physically disabled, but blessed with an IQ in 4 figures, he has worked all his life.
If the opportunities exist, most disabled people could do some kind of work.
To just assume they cant and pay them to sit at home, is an insult to them imo.
Of course, if people are very seriously disabled or in very poor health we as a society should take car of them. If someone who has worked for many years suddenly loses their job, they shouldn't starve. They should have food, heat, shelter and support to get back into employment.
However, when we have the usual suspects  screaming from the rooftops because welfare is limited to less than £600 pw, per household, when the vast majority of working households don't have that amount coming in, then we really are in la la land.

I would email this advice to a certain Mr D. Davis. He may as well try it and see what happens.

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

Brown basically made the welfare state a free for all, where anyone could tell a few porkies, or have a few kids, and get a monthly cheque bigger than the pay cheque of the average person in work.
Once in that system with little hope of escape, they were trapped in the classic Socialist trap, where the state takes care of you, the state controls everything, you have no ambition, genuine pride, no reason to want to better yourself etc. etc.
The only thing you need to do is vote Labour at every election and you don't have to worry about anything ever again.

Tax Credits introduced by Brown which cost the Treasury about £30-40 billion a year are a good example of this where the taxpayer are effectively subsidising businesses wage bill.  There is no incentive for any company to give any meaningful pay rise as they know that the government will top up peoples income, and big business in particular have ruthlessly exploited this situation.   Now that so many people rely on in work benefits, it would be political suicide for any political party to abolish Tax Credits. 

I'm not a big fan of tax credits. If a company is unable or unwilling to pay a living wage to it's employeees then it is simply not a viable business.

The downside being if the government removed tax credits unemployment and unemployment payments would rise.

Dilemma. I feel the 'working poor' always end up with the shitty end of the stick.

[Entwood]

Brown basically made the welfare state a free for all, where anyone could tell a few porkies, or have a few kids, and get a monthly cheque bigger than the pay cheque of the average person in work.
Once in that system with little hope of escape, they were trapped in the classic Socialist trap, where the state takes care of you, the state controls everything, you have no ambition, genuine pride, no reason to want to better yourself etc. etc.
The only thing you need to do is vote Labour at every election and you don't have to worry about anything ever again.

Tax Credits introduced by Brown which cost the Treasury about £30-40 billion a year are a good example of this where the taxpayer are effectively subsidising businesses wage bill.  There is no incentive for any company to give any meaningful pay rise as they know that the government will top up peoples income, and big business in particular have ruthlessly exploited this situation.   Now that so many people rely on in work benefits, it would be political suicide for any political party to abolish Tax Credits. 

I'm not a big fan of tax credits. If a company is unable or unwilling to pay a living wage to it's employeees then it is simply not a viable business.

The downside being if the government removed tax credits unemployment and unemployment payments would rise.

Dilemma. I feel the 'working poor' always end up with the shitty end of the stick.

Simple solution ... tax credits payable for a limited, set, period of time, after which the employer MUST pay the total amount (pay + tax credit) the employee was getting for at least twice the length of time the tax credit was claimed.

Would allow companies a period of time to get established and "test" any worker, and then give more permanent employment to the worker. Would prevent companies just taking on tax credit workers as "cheap labour" ... and would stop the employer getting rid of the worker as soon as the set period was up...

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Good idea, although in the current hysterical climate, it would probably be hailed as a new form of Nazism by the snowflakes.
Maybe the answer is to let TB cull the snowflakes and their ilk, and then sort our problems properly. 

[Mister Rog]

I seem to recall that some time ago there was a "no politics" rule on OOF,  that seems to have gone by the board   

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Politics used to cause huge arguments, with lots of dummy spitting, toys out of the pram, members leaving etc etc.
I was as guilty of anyone else of letting things get out of hand, and taking it all too personally.
Nowadays, it seems we can discuss things in a more calm fashion without all the ballyhoo. Lets hope it continues. 

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

Way back in the seventies the government of the day rolled out a scheme called YTS......youth training scheme. For 16-18 year olds if memory serves.

Rogue employers loved it because it gave them  access to free labour for the six month period of the scheme. It was usually around the six month period the employer would suddenly find their employee (who they paid SFA) was actually a bone idle work shy ne'er do well and would be dismissed.

They would then hire another innocent victim for six months unpaid work.

 

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

I went on a YTS course in the 70,s, I lasted one day, walked out and found a real job. It was a shite job, but a real one. 
Tbh though, despite a degree of abuse by rogues being inevitable with any scheme like this - its better than having the nations youths sat on their arse playing computer games, while the taxpayer pays for their ciggies and dope.
Those with a little bit of pride and ambition could graft, prove themselves and make employers want to keep them on.
Those without these attributes can be sent by the coachload to visit TB in Brackley. 

[Mr Gav]

I started my apprenticeship on a YTS in the early eighties as did many others, first year paid by the Government and then taken on for the following two and a half years if you were good enough.

It was a far better system than the NVQ f**k up that exists now!

[Rods2]

Brown basically made the welfare state a free for all, where anyone could tell a few porkies, or have a few kids, and get a monthly cheque bigger than the pay cheque of the average person in work.
Once in that system with little hope of escape, they were trapped in the classic Socialist trap, where the state takes care of you, the state controls everything, you have no ambition, genuine pride, no reason to want to better yourself etc. etc.
The only thing you need to do is vote Labour at every election and you don't have to worry about anything ever again.

Tax Credits introduced by Brown which cost the Treasury about £30-40 billion a year are a good example of this where the taxpayer are effectively subsidising businesses wage bill.  There is no incentive for any company to give any meaningful pay rise as they know that the government will top up peoples income, and big business in particular have ruthlessly exploited this situation.   Now that so many people rely on in work benefits, it would be political suicide for any political party to abolish Tax Credits. 

I'm not a big fan of tax credits. If a company is unable or unwilling to pay a living wage to it's employeees then it is simply not a viable business.

The downside being if the government removed tax credits unemployment and unemployment payments would rise.

Dilemma. I feel the 'working poor' always end up with the shitty end of the stick.

Simple solution ... tax credits payable for a limited, set, period of time, after which the employer MUST pay the total amount (pay + tax credit) the employee was getting for at least twice the length of time the tax credit was claimed.

Would allow companies a period of time to get established and "test" any worker, and then give more permanent employment to the worker. Would prevent companies just taking on tax credit workers as "cheap labour" ... and would stop the employer getting rid of the worker as soon as the set period was up...

Unfortunately, the tax paid part before the employer cost cuts in would be the length of employment or contract if it is cheaper to employ a new person in their place. The reason unemployment is so high in mainland Europe, especially youth unemployment is due to the cost of employing people and restrictive practices. What seems like a good idea, all too often falls foul of the law of unintended consequences.

Unskilled mass migration, since 1997, has contributed to unskilled / semi-skilled wages going down which have been topped-up with tax credits. Climate fraud and high energy costs have driven many medium one-to-many manufacturing businesses and jobs offshore which has contributed to wage deflation and falls in productivity. Brexit is the short term may cause a recession in 2019, but handled well with Free Trade Agreements and a non-EU tree hugger energy policy it could make the UK a good manufacturing base for Europe with more higher paying jobs.

[Lincs Robert]

I don't like Violence, but since there is direct correlation at least 9850 sick and disabled have died since (and as a direct result of) the Bastard Tories brought in changes to sickness benefits, and the way that they are assessed as fit for work or placed in a work group.
I often rather wish scum like May and Johnson were rounded up and shot, but that just isn't what we British do. No we attend a party conference, getting through security without a problem because we don't have a gun in our bag, and politely hand a fake P45 to the prime minister, who hasn't a oppsing clue what it's like to live in the real world.

I think handing her a bag of burning dog turd would have been more appropriate.

Charming

[omegod]

I don't like Violence, but since there is direct correlation at least 9850 sick and disabled have died since (and as a direct result of) the Bastard Tories brought in changes to sickness benefits, and the way that they are assessed as fit for work or placed in a work group.
I often rather wish scum like May and Johnson were rounded up and shot, but that just isn't what we British do. No we attend a party conference, getting through security without a problem because we don't have a gun in our bag, and politely hand a fake P45 to the prime minister, who hasn't a oppsing clue what it's like to live in the real world.

I think handing her a bag of burning dog turd would have been more appropriate.

Charming

I'd happily light the bag of turd !

[New POD]

I don't like Violence, but since there is direct correlation at least 9850 sick and disabled have died since (and as a direct result of) the Bastard Tories brought in changes to sickness benefits, and the way that they are assessed as fit for work or placed in a work group.
I often rather wish scum like May and Johnson were rounded up and shot, but that just isn't what we British do. No we attend a party conference, getting through security without a problem because we don't have a gun in our bag, and politely hand a fake P45 to the prime minister, who hasn't a oppsing clue what it's like to live in the real world.

I think handing her a bag of burning dog turd would have been more appropriate.

Charming

I'd happily light the bag of turd !

Even posh scousers like you hate the Tories ? I find that hard to believe 

I'm not getting sucked in to this argument but would request any people who are fortunately " distanced " from the harsh realities of the current benefit system find and watch this film, I Daniel Blake,  if anything it's got much harsher since it was made   

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5168192/

I cried at that film, during the "Food Bank Scene" because that's what it's like

My wife works on reception at the CAB in a Seaside town at the top end of the Merseyrail Northern Line. Just one day a week.
 
That's all her emotions can cope with. 

There are alot of people on the bones of their arses and it's those unable to fight back that end up dead (or worse)