Immigration is part of our heritage and tradition as well which is why most of the royals are descendants of immigrants and if you look back far enough so are most of us.
Anyway this is going the same way as most of these threads so I'm jumping ship now before the big torpedo comes and sinks it.
[cite]Posted By: razil[/cite] Making crims do hard work, satisfying as it is, actually costs more money than having them sitting doing nothing in supervision costs and would take jobs from non-crims
Maybe the way it's been organised up to date, but the womble idea is just the start of it. I'd have them in huge caged treadmills, they would not get out and would not be fed or watered until they'd clocked up a certain number of KWHs. Everyday they would provide clean energy for the nation, diminishing the need to buy Russian gas.
[cite]Posted By: LenGlover[/cite]General comment to the Royal family knockers:
Tourists visiting Royal buildings contribute far more to the economy as a whole in revenue than the cost of maintaining the Royal family to the State.
That said I see no harm in some of the more remote "Princess Alexandra" type royals way down the succession list supporting themselves although i believe that already happens to a large extent.
hidden cost - is the royals estates which generate huge incomes and should really go to the state...
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]Immigration is part of our heritage and tradition as well which is why most of the royals are descendants of immigrants and if you look back far enough so are most of us.
might not be a popular view but maintenance csa make people pay is v.low in my view (200 a month - income based) and doesn't even cover childcare costs (for before and after school) let alone anything else. It goes lower dependent on number of nights spent away per year, sure its a sensitive subject, but does seem a low figure to me considering how much people seem to moan about it.
[cite]Posted By: LenGlover[/cite]is it right that people with incomes over £50,000 receive child benefit ? (tax credits) ? - Yes. Benefits should be universal otherwise why will better off people pay in?
is it right to stop this payment even though these people have been paying income tax and NI at a higher rate ? - No see above
why should people get more money for having more kids ? get it for two ,dont get it after two - Not the fault of the kids that their parents are feckless and irresponsible
why should people get maternity leave regardless of how many kids they have? - See above
should unemployment benefits be cut to make lower paid jobs more attractive ? - There should certainly be a differential in favour of working. I would prefer removal of tax and Ni for lower paid workers and a flat rate of tax above a certain level.
should all imigration be stopped untill un-employment reaches 100,000 ? - Not sure about stopping all immigration but there is a definite argument for moving towards the American or Australian model and issuing visas to those we want or need. As members of the EU however we have ceded most of the controls over our borders so now only have the power to stop very limited numbers such as Gurkhas and Commonwealth citizens with historic links to this country.
can we afford the welfare state anymore - Yes if we cut elsewhere eg our contributions to the EU and also waste within public services. Why are there as many "suits" in the NHS as "white coats" for instance?
tax credits are based on household income
Why, when tax isn't?
You get less for 2nd child (benefit) based on the mother, and its a piddling amount anyway
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]Immigration is part of our heritage and tradition as well which is why most of the royals are descendants of immigrants and if you look back far enough so are most of us.
Anyway this is going the same way as most of these threads so I'm jumping ship now before the big torpedo comes and sinks it.[/quote] Are you talking about the Tridant sinking this mate? lol
[cite]Posted By: LenGlover[/cite]is it right that people with incomes over £50,000 receive child benefit ? (tax credits) ? - Yes. Benefits should be universal otherwise why will better off people pay in?
is it right to stop this payment even though these people have been paying income tax and NI at a higher rate ? - No see above
why should people get more money for having more kids ? get it for two ,dont get it after two - Not the fault of the kids that their parents are feckless and irresponsible
why should people get maternity leave regardless of how many kids they have? - See above
should unemployment benefits be cut to make lower paid jobs more attractive ? - There should certainly be a differential in favour of working. I would prefer removal of tax and Ni for lower paid workers and a flat rate of tax above a certain level.
should all imigration be stopped untill un-employment reaches 100,000 ? - Not sure about stopping all immigration but there is a definite argument for moving towards the American or Australian model and issuing visas to those we want or need. As members of the EU however we have ceded most of the controls over our borders so now only have the power to stop very limited numbers such as Gurkhas and Commonwealth citizens with historic links to this country.
can we afford the welfare state anymore - Yes if we cut elsewhere eg our contributions to the EU and also waste within public services. Why are there as many "suits" in the NHS as "white coats" for instance?
tax credits are based on household income
Why, when tax isn't?
You get less for 2nd child (benefit) based on the mother, and its a piddling amount anyway
Tax is effectively based on income but via personal allowances. Not sure of your point?
I find these threads fascinating, some well reasoned arguments start to flow then all of a sudden the red mist descends & a free for all starts resulting in a sunken thread. Keep it clean guys.
Any scheme that can force the people who clearly don't want to work to work should be considered, what about National service or is that too harsh?
Look geting rid of (or not) of the Royal Family isnt going to happen. Something(s) have to happen and they will regardless of political idiology. The question is what not IF.
Removing the lower rate of tax only works (good idea though) if enough people are then in work to make up the short fall in the lower rate of tax now missing.
What ever the benefit is called for kids you get it for the first two and then NOTHING after------ no maternity money --milk vouchers f**K all. IMO of course.
As we are in the EU we can not stop migrants from those countries coming here, but ALL imigration should be stopped ASAP from outside the EU untill un employment falls to a fraction of what it is now.
They are talking about a 2 or 3 year freeze on public sector pay ---------------- nice that considering within that sector are some of the lowest paid ! and how f**kin wrong is it the lowest paid will be subingthe bail out of the Bankers !!!!
Make the banks take on 1,000s of newly un employed people in admin jobs, etc etc etc they caused this f**k up they should be helping sort it out.
Cut taxloop holes so that companies pay the right amount of tax and not avoid. Deepen the investigation into off shore tax havens. Lose the illusion that anyone on benefit must be a shirker, we aren't.
Notice how Labour isnt going to make "real cuts" but savings on wast re public sector. So this wast only just poped up ? not been about for the last decade then ? and its 1 million British jobs this time not like the "2.5million British jobs for British workers" which turned out to be 2million jobs NOT for British workers. or how about the referendum on voting ? which will be like the referendum on the EU --- remember that one ? course not Brown lied on that but he REALY REALY REALY means it this time.
*ditch the Scotish--Welsh--Ulster assemblies that should save us a few billions.
Great to see them with the Union Flag as a back drop ------------------------- front of the arseholes is stunning.
[cite]Posted By: Goonerhater[/cite]bump for razil.
Notice how Labour isnt going to make "real cuts" but savings on wast re public sector. So this wast only just poped up ? not been about for the last decade then ? and its 1 million British jobs this time not like the "2.5million British jobs for British workers" which turned out to be 2million jobs NOT for British workers. or how about the referendum on voting ? which will be like the referendum on the EU --- remember that one ? course not Brown lied on that but he REALY REALY REALY means it this time.
*ditch the Scotish--Welsh--Ulster assemblies that should save us a few billions.
Great to see them with the Union Flag as a back drop
front of the arseholes is stunning.
To be fair every Government I have come across in my 50 plus years has talked about reducing waste in public services fromWilson to Heath - To Callaghan - To Thatcher to Balir to Brown. The only way any of them seemed to have been able to affect it is by adding to it by developing waste quangos and committees.
I agree with the tax credits and child benefit being means tested, but why should relief on childcare be given to one group and not the other? we already subsidise by paying more tax, ni (due to go up yet again).
another question is why did they hike GPs salaries? they get a huge amount comparatively approaching 100k for handing out pills which don't really cure anything.
Sir Michael Caine the man who's family was supported by the state but when his income went up off he sodded to a tax island in the sun to make erm... Jaws 3. Gotta hand it to him, from Sleuth to On Deadly Ground the guy did about three good films in twenty plus years. After a stint in Korea you'd think he'd know what real hard work is. Who doesn't get up for work before 6:30 and then work through till way past 18:00, getting home at the lovely 20:00?; with the occasional charlton life break...
Still I wish you people would leave Ricky Tomlinson alone he striked for this country.
Jesus some people have a real genius approach to cutting away over spend. Get rid of the Royal family and have the Royal estates contributing to the Crown erm. I mean presidency. Genius. The Estates do contribute, they were signed over to the state under George III. Is two hundred and fifty years long enough for you? It's only the Duchies that don't and that my boys is part of our rich constitution, which if you unwind for a President it's going to be a field day for Civil Servants.
Sure get rid of it, but how much do you think a President costs? A fuck load more and a hella of a lot more for another poorly subscribed voting system which becomes corrupted by dodgy billionaires. Now I'd love to be practically a Republican as I don't agree with the underlying theme of monarchy, that the individual is not equal and the monarch has been divinely selected, but Presidential races are monumental wastes of money and more open to corruption. How many paupers became US president, and how many were not in the pockets of big business? Before people say we do not need a head of state, then what happens to the legislative between governments?
Immigration stop resources being spent on it? I'm all for reducing the benefit system and if that's done then those pesky little immigrants are going to be out working even more than they do. What genius on here thinks that by stopping immigration benefits it's going to stop immigration especially illegal?
When two million plus jobs have been created in the last 12 years why aren't the same million plus long term unemployed putting there back into it? I couldn't care about a child in poverty from a feckless family, it's sad that some people will suffer but if you make the proper family unit the main tax benificiary as Clinton did then funnily enough the family unit starts becoming more important in society. I'm fed up with the feckless and useless pinging out babies and doing feck all. Provide the feckless with the basics and healthcare but that's it; and that is hugely more than most societies. Those who do work, and remain in the family unit should receive the most benefit and it should not be means tested; somebody with two kids, who has to pay for his house and earns 50,000 is a hella of a lot more important to society than a non-working household; who probably receive more in benefit than the worker mentioned net earns.
anyone who turns down work because they are better off on benefits should have benefits halved,
Once i take into account my rent(mortgage) my council Tax bill per month some of these scrounging feckers have more money left than me.
Why if you are on benefit should your housing be paid for and your council tax paid or a percentage of it.
on that programme benefit busters 1 bloke said he couldnt go to work for anything less than 250 take home per week because if he had to pay Council tax and rent he couldnt afford to live,
I am sorry but it just is too damn easy for these people to not work and no one will ever tell me differently.
I have never calimed any benefit i was not a well educated fella i took the pish at school didnt stay on and entered the big wide world.
it is a tough life and if someone keeps spoon feeding you then you will never get on with it.
if you are on the take fora year all benefits should be cut until you get a job.
i am unsure of the minimum wage amount but most places will pay you £250 per week for a 9 hour day the only thing holding these lazy sods back is that they have never had to pay for anything other than fags sky and booze
Immigarants have sucked the life out of this country, that put nothing in, and take everything out, the hard working people get nothing............a total disgrace
[cite]Posted By: WhenIwasLittleBoy[/cite]Immigarants have sucked the life out of this country, that put nothing in, and take everything out, the hard working people get nothing............a total disgrace
Complete bollocks.
Of course some immigrants are spongers, but most are of working age, which means they consume less of the services provided by the state, such as health care and education etc, and pay more in taxes pro rata. If they have contributed tax and NI contributions to the UK treasury when they work I see no reason why they shouldn't take some of that back in unemployment benefit etc if they lose their jobs, or maybe we should chuck people out once they lose work? Indeed Immigration has made a positive contribution to the GDP per capita of people born in the UK by creating a more robust labour market and there are many jobs - in IT, healthcare, education etc where we would struggle to fulfill the nation's needs where it not for overseas born teachers, nurses, doctors etc.
In the UK immigrants pay £2.5bn more in taxes than they take in benefits and therefore make a net contribution to GDP.
[cite]Posted By: WhenIwasLittleBoy[/cite]Immigarants have sucked the life out of this country, that put nothing in, and take everything out, the hard working people get nothing............a total disgrace
Complete bollocks.
Of course some immigrants are spongers, but most are of working age, which means they consume less of the services provided by the state, such as health care and education etc, and pay more in taxes pro rata. If they have contributed tax and NI contributions to the UK treasury when they work I see no reason why they shouldn't take some of that back in unemployment benefit etc if they lose their jobs, or maybe we should chuck people out once they lose work? Indeed Immigration has made a positive contribution to the GDP per capita of people born in the UK by creating a more robust labour market and there are many jobs - in IT, healthcare, education etc where we would struggle to fulfill the nation's needs where it not for overseas born teachers, nurses, doctors etc.
In the UK immigrants pay £2.5bn more in taxes than they take in benefits and therefore make a net contribution to GDP.
yes take back the Ducheys, never said anything about a Republic.
if we have to pay more tax cos of this huge financial crisis, everyone should shoulder some of it - raise income tax lower rate
On a related note perhaps people would work a bit harder in schools if they didn't think they would be looked after by the state, and be a bit more career focussed, having said that if you start removing this stuff you go back to extreme poverty and crime, and Victorian workhouses.
I just think they need to get the balance right, sure some income distribution, but to keep nudging it further and further just isn't right
But I have worked overseas where I was an *immigrant*.
Job one, I was employed because my employer wanted to expand and grow his customer base outside of Germany where around 90% of his business was based. With a recession in Germany at the time this was important because he could see enough of his core business disappearing (which it did) to kill his company. I helped them develop themselves internationally and kept them afloat. Plus I won a law case that could have sunk them, but that's another story. Job two...I joined a loss making company turned it into a profit making organisation which meant it started contributing tax revenues to the German government. Then the company was bought out at considerably more than it was worth when I joined and my ex-boss was last heard moaning about the amount of CGT he had to pay. In both jobs I grew sales, revenue and profit and taht allowed both companies to expand and employ people, so an immigrant helped job creation. Shocking. But then immigrants don't add value or create jobs I know because I read it on a website somewhere...
Then again there are emigrants like Mark Thatcher...
how can you say imigrants make a net contribution when there is actually no way of telling how many have come into the uk from the EU ? the UK being part of the EU keeps no records of travel between the countries --- but yet again someone come make an actual figure of how much we all benefit !!
Why is Thamesmead called little Lagos ? why is Woolwich the biggest Somali cummunity in the World outside Somalia ? neither of which are in the EU (yet).
I have suggested there should be NO imigration while we have mega un-employment, havnt suggested imigration is all evil or ever was.The Labour MP Frank Field has stated that if Italy can have laws to protect its own work force why cant we.
As for this thread it was about where (not if) the axe will fall and ways of making cuts which are coming. Some benefits have to be cut some TAxs will rise.VAT 20% is my guess.
Comments
Anyway this is going the same way as most of these threads so I'm jumping ship now before the big torpedo comes and sinks it.
Maybe the way it's been organised up to date, but the womble idea is just the start of it. I'd have them in huge caged treadmills, they would not get out and would not be fed or watered until they'd clocked up a certain number of KWHs. Everyday they would provide clean energy for the nation, diminishing the need to buy Russian gas.
hidden cost - is the royals estates which generate huge incomes and should really go to the state...
You bloody foreigner
tax credits are based on household income
Why, when tax isn't?
You get less for 2nd child (benefit) based on the mother, and its a piddling amount anyway
LOL
Are you talking about the Tridant sinking this mate? lol
Tax is effectively based on income but via personal allowances. Not sure of your point?
Any scheme that can force the people who clearly don't want to work to work should be considered, what about National service or is that too harsh?
Removing the lower rate of tax only works (good idea though) if enough people are then in work to make up the short fall in the lower rate of tax now missing.
What ever the benefit is called for kids you get it for the first two and then NOTHING after------ no maternity money --milk vouchers f**K all. IMO of course.
As we are in the EU we can not stop migrants from those countries coming here, but ALL imigration should be stopped ASAP from outside the EU untill un employment falls to a fraction of what it is now.
They are talking about a 2 or 3 year freeze on public sector pay ---------------- nice that considering within that sector are some of the lowest paid ! and how f**kin wrong is it the lowest paid will be subingthe bail out of the Bankers !!!!
Make the banks take on 1,000s of newly un employed people in admin jobs, etc etc etc they caused this f**k up they should be helping sort it out.
Yep.
It's what every man should be doing at 76 years old.
Notice how Labour isnt going to make "real cuts" but savings on wast re public sector. So this wast only just poped up ? not been about for the last decade then ? and its 1 million British jobs this time not like the "2.5million British jobs for British workers" which turned out to be 2million jobs NOT for British workers. or how about the referendum on voting ? which will be like the referendum on the EU --- remember that one ? course not Brown lied on that but he REALY REALY REALY means it this time.
*ditch the Scotish--Welsh--Ulster assemblies that should save us a few billions.
Great to see them with the Union Flag as a back drop ------------------------- front of the arseholes is stunning.
To be fair every Government I have come across in my 50 plus years has talked about reducing waste in public services fromWilson to Heath - To Callaghan - To Thatcher to Balir to Brown. The only way any of them seemed to have been able to affect it is by adding to it by developing waste quangos and committees.
..........
Says the man with a foreign born wife who is talking about emigrating to Thailand...
another question is why did they hike GPs salaries? they get a huge amount comparatively approaching 100k for handing out pills which don't really cure anything.
Still I wish you people would leave Ricky Tomlinson alone he striked for this country.
Jesus some people have a real genius approach to cutting away over spend. Get rid of the Royal family and have the Royal estates contributing to the Crown erm. I mean presidency. Genius. The Estates do contribute, they were signed over to the state under George III. Is two hundred and fifty years long enough for you? It's only the Duchies that don't and that my boys is part of our rich constitution, which if you unwind for a President it's going to be a field day for Civil Servants.
Sure get rid of it, but how much do you think a President costs? A fuck load more and a hella of a lot more for another poorly subscribed voting system which becomes corrupted by dodgy billionaires. Now I'd love to be practically a Republican as I don't agree with the underlying theme of monarchy, that the individual is not equal and the monarch has been divinely selected, but Presidential races are monumental wastes of money and more open to corruption. How many paupers became US president, and how many were not in the pockets of big business? Before people say we do not need a head of state, then what happens to the legislative between governments?
Immigration stop resources being spent on it? I'm all for reducing the benefit system and if that's done then those pesky little immigrants are going to be out working even more than they do. What genius on here thinks that by stopping immigration benefits it's going to stop immigration especially illegal?
When two million plus jobs have been created in the last 12 years why aren't the same million plus long term unemployed putting there back into it? I couldn't care about a child in poverty from a feckless family, it's sad that some people will suffer but if you make the proper family unit the main tax benificiary as Clinton did then funnily enough the family unit starts becoming more important in society. I'm fed up with the feckless and useless pinging out babies and doing feck all. Provide the feckless with the basics and healthcare but that's it; and that is hugely more than most societies. Those who do work, and remain in the family unit should receive the most benefit and it should not be means tested; somebody with two kids, who has to pay for his house and earns 50,000 is a hella of a lot more important to society than a non-working household; who probably receive more in benefit than the worker mentioned net earns.
Once i take into account my rent(mortgage) my council Tax bill per month some of these scrounging feckers have more money left than me.
Why if you are on benefit should your housing be paid for and your council tax paid or a percentage of it.
on that programme benefit busters 1 bloke said he couldnt go to work for anything less than 250 take home per week because if he had to pay Council tax and rent he couldnt afford to live,
I am sorry but it just is too damn easy for these people to not work and no one will ever tell me differently.
I have never calimed any benefit i was not a well educated fella i took the pish at school didnt stay on and entered the big wide world.
it is a tough life and if someone keeps spoon feeding you then you will never get on with it.
if you are on the take fora year all benefits should be cut until you get a job.
i am unsure of the minimum wage amount but most places will pay you £250 per week for a 9 hour day the only thing holding these lazy sods back is that they have never had to pay for anything other than fags sky and booze
Complete bollocks.
Of course some immigrants are spongers, but most are of working age, which means they consume less of the services provided by the state, such as health care and education etc, and pay more in taxes pro rata. If they have contributed tax and NI contributions to the UK treasury when they work I see no reason why they shouldn't take some of that back in unemployment benefit etc if they lose their jobs, or maybe we should chuck people out once they lose work? Indeed Immigration has made a positive contribution to the GDP per capita of people born in the UK by creating a more robust labour market and there are many jobs - in IT, healthcare, education etc where we would struggle to fulfill the nation's needs where it not for overseas born teachers, nurses, doctors etc.
In the UK immigrants pay £2.5bn more in taxes than they take in benefits and therefore make a net contribution to GDP.
Where do you live again ?
...........
In the UK.
Where do you live?
yes take back the Ducheys, never said anything about a Republic.
if we have to pay more tax cos of this huge financial crisis, everyone should shoulder some of it - raise income tax lower rate
On a related note perhaps people would work a bit harder in schools if they didn't think they would be looked after by the state, and be a bit more career focussed, having said that if you start removing this stuff you go back to extreme poverty and crime, and Victorian workhouses.
I just think they need to get the balance right, sure some income distribution, but to keep nudging it further and further just isn't right
Job one, I was employed because my employer wanted to expand and grow his customer base outside of Germany where around 90% of his business was based. With a recession in Germany at the time this was important because he could see enough of his core business disappearing (which it did) to kill his company. I helped them develop themselves internationally and kept them afloat. Plus I won a law case that could have sunk them, but that's another story. Job two...I joined a loss making company turned it into a profit making organisation which meant it started contributing tax revenues to the German government. Then the company was bought out at considerably more than it was worth when I joined and my ex-boss was last heard moaning about the amount of CGT he had to pay. In both jobs I grew sales, revenue and profit and taht allowed both companies to expand and employ people, so an immigrant helped job creation. Shocking. But then immigrants don't add value or create jobs I know because I read it on a website somewhere...
Then again there are emigrants like Mark Thatcher...
Why is Thamesmead called little Lagos ? why is Woolwich the biggest Somali cummunity in the World outside Somalia ? neither of which are in the EU (yet).
I have suggested there should be NO imigration while we have mega un-employment, havnt suggested imigration is all evil or ever was.The Labour MP Frank Field has stated that if Italy can have laws to protect its own work force why cant we.
As for this thread it was about where (not if) the axe will fall and ways of making cuts which are coming. Some benefits have to be cut some TAxs will rise.VAT 20% is my guess.