Print

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

[scimmy_man]

most GPs will admit, they are good at medicine, but pay a practice manager to do the buisiness side of things.

[Amigo]

Whilst i'm not in favour of penalizing the "rich/richer" for thier success & resent them in no way on 44k you don't NEED that few quid a week. Yes i suppose it's a tad unfair but we need to claw back a huge debt & have to start somewhere. Any saving is going to upset someone.
   Once again i'm not racist but a bleeding heart do gooder on the radio today said this will hurt Bangladesh families who by thier nature like to have lots of children & happen to live in high rental property areas.

  Well would'nt we all like to have that choice & be paid for it?
      Yours, a worker.

[Vamps]

Whilst i'm not in favour of penalizing the "rich/richer" for thier success & resent them in no way on 44k you don't NEED that few quid a week. Yes i suppose it's a tad unfair but we need to claw back a huge debt & have to start somewhere. Any saving is going to upset someone.
   Once again i'm not racist but a bleeding heart do gooder on the radio today said this will hurt Bangladesh families who by thier nature like to have lots of children & happen to live in high rental property areas.
  Well would'nt we all like to have that choice & be paid for it?
      Yours, a worker.

Not quite in that arena but, we at work, have been muttering recently when doing financial checks of some families find that their net income is more than ours, and that is on top of rent and council house benefit.............

[Amigo]

Whilst i'm not in favour of penalizing the "rich/richer" for thier success & resent them in no way on 44k you don't NEED that few quid a week. Yes i suppose it's a tad unfair but we need to claw back a huge debt & have to start somewhere. Any saving is going to upset someone.
   Once again i'm not racist but a bleeding heart do gooder on the radio today said this will hurt Bangladesh families who by thier nature like to have lots of children & happen to live in high rental property areas.
  Well would'nt we all like to have that choice & be paid for it?
      Yours, a worker.

Not quite in that arena but, we at work, have been muttering recently when doing financial checks of some families find that their net income is more than ours, and that is on top of rent and council house benefit.............

Exactly. Once again i'm really not racist, i'd shout about it if i was & not care who i offended. I embrace multi culture & honestly could'nt care less who chooses to live here if they are self sufficient, as many are. They bring us food, music, fashion, are hard working & have a place here.
    Unlike many English white folk who choose to have a dozen kids & are still tucked up in bed when i leave my house on a cold dark morning. Sorry but it pees me off. I'd love to stay in bed but can't so why the flip should they?

[Marks DTM Calib]

I am quite bemused by the idea of GP,s being in charge of NHS budgets etc. Dont understand what the thinking is behind it. I know a couple of GP,s and they have no experience whatsoever of this type of thing, apart from having a practise manager to do it for them on a much smaller scale. They are nice, middle class, naive  (and hugely overpaid for what they do) people, who would get eaten alive in the cut throat world of dealing with large businesses. :-/

The press is reporting this very out of context.

What they are actually doing is allowing the GP to have control over which hospital gets yours and my pre-paid money (because the NHS is NOT free) for 'work to be done'.

For example, if you needed a hip replacement, the GP effectively can decide that he is sending his patients to hospital X rathr than Y.

A bit of competition, a good thing I think.

As for the child benefit, they can keep it, I dont really need it but, I really dont like seeing the great unwashed work shy romping round smoking, drinking and wearing fancy trainers and new cloths that you and I have paid for.....some of which I cant afford myself!

[Banjax]

I'm not racist.

But....


 

people actually still say that - brilliant 

[scimmy_man]

I'm not racist.

But....


 

people actually still say that - brilliant 

a bit like saying,, "no offence but"

[jerry]

Yep,"But" is such a great word isnt it, especially when followed by that pregnant pause
The issues debated here are all around the "nanny state" and the death of what used to be called the good old "protestant work ethic" (no offence to catholics/muslims etc  ). The plain fact is that-arguments over relative rights of pay and the rich/poor divide aside-it is those in work who pay 23% or whatever of their wages in tax and NI that support the benefits system . Im sure that none of us would bemoan certain groups the bennefits they get, but it sticks in the craw when we can all see (and thats the moot point ,because its so bloody obvious and shameless) flagrent abuses of the system all around us. A key factor in Labours  fall no doubt.

[Del Boy]

I don't think we should encourage anyone to have kids - if you want kids, fine, but don't ask me to pay for your little snot-nosed brats 

How very right wing.

I take it Banjax does not have children, Albs.

thankfully 

but i do pay a shedload for everyone elses from cracker-spawn mini-criminals to the brats of the super-rich - if we're going to talk cuts lets go 

Personally I don't get child benefits, but are you saying anyone that does their child must be a mini criminal and they're all snot nosed little brats? Or is it all children that are those things? That's how it reads to me, now I hope you wouldn't refer to everyones children like that?

[I_want_an_Omega]

mmm. I know one who has NEVER held down a job, he's now 50, there's nowt wrong with him cos he rides a Harley, gets a motability car, and goes off on pub crawls for miles with his mates!!
Can EASILY walk a couple of miles without problems.

hope they catch the rotter soon, and remove all his benefits!!

(partners ex.........)

Shop him - rat on a rat

[HolyCount]

Dont get me wrong Count, I have someone who works for me part-time, his fulltime job is with the council but whilst we are getting a pay increase this year he isnt and he didnt have one last year either. He, like many, is worried about his job security come March, although the council seems to be giving his dept an increasing workload so maybe he'll be safe.But whilst over the past few years he and his workmates have stayed stationary re payawards etc the middle management tier has been growing. Wont bore you with examples of injustice and waste as Im sure you get the point. Just agreeing that not all workers -or management-within the umbrella of "big government" are the same and that there are many who are hard working and want to do a good job and who now, like many, face uncertain times. I think that one of the dangers of the gamut of proposed cuts will be the growth of privatizations in these sectors. PCTs for example. Get rid of them and a lot of the works they do will still need doing and that will be done by private businesses. Ok, this will create job opportunities for those who will lose their jobs in the coming cuts, and privatization in itself is not a bad thing. But privatization is all about profit and shareholders and unless there is healthy competition I think we will all find a decline in services rather than an improvement. (And before anyone pipes up about the gvt passing the roles of PCTs to GPs being a very good thing because GPs  will naturally be more inclined to look after their patients needs just ask yourself how long you have to wait to see "your"GP, or how many late nights they make themselves available for you, or how much they earn compared with you. Make no mistake; GP practices are run as businesses). I do not disagree with the need for cuts or the need for improved efficiency but I do also worry about the casualties of such cuts. Sadly, I cannot but agree with you about the immunityof the Whitehall "mandarins" either.

Completely with you there Jerry.

[Webby the Bear]

you want kids you pay for them

[Del Boy]

you want kids you pay for them

I'm in totally 100% agreement here 

[24_Valve]

If someone earns over 44k they really shouldn't complain about losing their Child Benefit. It might be a handy top up, but seeing it this way is still a 'something for nothing' mind set & no different to the mind set of those whom they most resent, ie. those who choose benefits as a lifestyle choice...

Those on higher incomes >44k are sending out a very bad message if they complain about this measure. It's like saying I want it because "I'm entitled to it" which is the very attitude that has led this country down the pan. Yes they pay more tax but surely this is all the more reason, to want to see it spent, on the most necessary things?

Although every parent is entitled to CB, it doesn't automatically land in your bank account. You have to fill out a lengthy form to claim it... If my individual income was >44k I wouldn't fill out the form!!! If a very high earner moans about losing £20 pwk and then calls a single mum 'benefit scum' (for example) that makes them a hypocrite IMO.

Is the new system fair? NO but it is workable...

i) Tax Band vs Entitlement = easy!

ii) Means testing every joint income family = huge waste of resources & even more tax payers money!

My joint family income is <26k... swmbo is plod, I can't return to work (waiting for neuro-surgery). We give the Child benefit to my Son... "CHILD" benefit, not beer money!!!

[Marks DTM Calib]

I should add that I do think the 44K bit is poorly thought out, it should be on joint income not any single income.

They already have this info via the tax credits scheme.