Not everyone can be a highly educated professional. To suggest that poor uneducated families (their fault ?) ought not to breed is starting to sound just a little worrying to me.
By all means cap the overall benefits paid to one household - if someone knows of decent websites / blogs reflecting on SE London economy please do tell - interesting comment SHG re NHS - you refer to Lewisham A&E???
Not everyone can be a highly educated professional. To suggest that poor uneducated families (their fault ?) ought not to breed is starting to sound just a little worrying to me.
It is worrying but so is the idea that Nigel Farrage is going to start blaming Bulgarians in 12 months time because there are high rates of unemployment outside of the M25 I know some experts in benefits and will ask them for a summary but my first thought is that benefits should be harmonised across the EU at least the bigger nations so that no one country is more or less attractive Perhaps corporation tax and the top rate of tax should also be harmonised across the EU so that there are no tax tourists as well but that's another story Of course the alternative, as Len suggests is to leave the EU but, without knowing all the numbers / answers, my gut feel is that we are better off staying in a larger bloc
Actually Off-it VAT doesn't work in that simplistic way. VAT is paid by the consumer but the seller can (and Starbucks - as do ALL these companies) offset this. They only pay VAT on the Value Added (the clue is in the name) by them to their own 'costs' which will include what they, notionally, pay for the coffee, overheads etc. I don't think there is much difference between us over the behaviour of these multinationals but I find it unhelpful (as well as being inaccurate) to identify one company as being marginally less worse than another. If Starbucks et al f*cked off leaving others to pay taxes which would help all of us get out of this economic shit we are in, then I, for one would be glad.
why dont Labour say "we are going to put up tax for anyone earning above say£300k a year---drop VAT back to 18%-----charge the banks more tax on profits---we will give back ALL the child benefit taken etc etc etc etc " you know get a set of bollox have some actual policies rather than just being the lieingTwofacedcheating SCUM that they are.
take the point but starbucks, amazon and itunes are all taking market share from both local suppliers and other chains by being subsidized through 0% effective corporation tax... I looked it up recently and only Spain and Italy have specific audit requirements re. transfer pricing... it is very handy to blame the banks for government deficits but I think there are a whole host of reasons
If you are churning out children with no qualifications or trade who leave school at 16/17 in the hope that 'something turns up' then, sorry to say, but you are part of the problem.
I presumed that not churning them out would be part of the solution ? I already said that not everyone can be highly educated which is of course fairly obvious. Given that we will always have and need people to do work highly educated people wouldn't do then what do you suggest. If your children won't be educated to a high standard. Don't have them. ?
If you are churning out children with no qualifications or trade who leave school at 16/17 in the hope that 'something turns up' then, sorry to say, but you are part of the problem.
I presumed that not churning them out would be part of the solution ? I already said that not everyone can be highly educated which is of course fairly obvious. Given that we will always have and need people to do work highly educated people wouldn't do then what do you suggest. If your children won't be educated to a high standard. Don't have them. ?
That is a huge stretch and you know it. I did not say they 'should not breed', I said that they should take responsibilty for ensuring that their kids enter the workforce with actual skills and qualifications.
This is the big problem, we all want to blame someone else other than ourselves don't we? If we don't push our children hard and make sure they understand that the world does not owe them a living and that they need to help themselves by either getting educated or getting a good trade then we are setting them up for failure.
In addition, and I hate to come over all Daily Mail here, but if you are a family on benefits and you are having multiple children (let's say more than two) on the tax-payers dollar then that is just plain wrong, you are basically abusing the system.
why dont Labour say "we are going to put up tax for anyone earning above say£300k a year---drop VAT back to 18%-----charge the banks more tax on profits---we will give back ALL the child benefit taken etc etc etc etc " you know get a set of bollox have some actual policies rather than just being the lieingTwofacedcheating SCUM that they are.
A lot of this comes down to the ridiculous rise in house prices, which has pushed up rents (costing the welfare state a fortune, which has then gone into the hands of property speculators and the like, thereby further inflating the housing market) and devalued the wage that workers receive, meaning that they struggle.
Until we see a rise in wages, people will rely on the state for handouts (even if they work in many cases) and those not working will be discouraged from seeking work (the welfare state was originally intended to be a 'hand up' rather than a 'handout', which it has become for some), leaving to resentment from those that pay for them to do sod all and understandably want something done about it. Unfortunately, those who need and deserve support are caught up in this situation and get hit by the collateral damage. It is not a good situation to be in for anyone apart from the finance industry and other multi-nationals, as far as I can make out....
A lot of this comes down to the ridiculous rise in house prices, which has pushed up rents (costing the welfare state a fortune, which has then gone into the hands of property speculators and the like, thereby further inflating the housing market) and devalued the wage that workers receive, meaning that they struggle.
Until we see a rise in wages, people will rely on the state for handouts (even if they work in many cases) and those not working will be discouraged from seeking work (the welfare state was originally intended to be a 'hand up' rather than a 'handout', which it has become for some), leaving to resentment from those that pay for them to do sod all and understandably want something done about it. Unfortunately, those who need and deserve support are caught up in this situation and get hit by the collateral damage. It is not a good situation to be in for anyone apart from the finance industry and other multi-nationals, as far as I can make out....
Very good post, ridiculous housing prices are a big factor in the UK and Australia.
Briefly, this is a bad idea for two reasons. Firsly, where are the jobs? There are about 5-6 million people who either want a job or want to work more because they haven't got enough hours. People not working (for whatever reason) are indirectly doing them a favour. Second, the health of the economy is measured by GDP, GDP is about how often £10 circulates in the economy. If someone gives you ten pound and you spend it, you are circulating it. If the place you spend it gives it to its employee, and he buys a pasty and a programme at The Valley with it , then the club give it to one of the ball boys and he buys a new top in Lewisham, that tenner has become £40 of GDP (this is a bit simplified but hey). If on the other hand you just give it to your bank, it remains £10. So, if you want money to circulate in the economy, you need to work out how to do that. One way is to invest in things that help stuff circulate (goods, people, data) such as new roads and railways. Another is to give it to poor people, because they spend it. It may be in Wetherspoons or betting shops or whatever. But spend it they do. Henry Ford worked this out in the 1920s, once he'd sold cars to the wealthy there was no one left to buy them, so he increased his workers' wages and cut his cars prices and sold them to his workers. For all the anecdotal stuff about what a grand time people have on benefits, I think these are extreme exceptions. Most people I know who've been on benefits recently hated it, never having any money is not something good. I've not had a pay rise in 4 years but I still think it's better for us all if people at the bottom end get more, not least because they will spend it. Have all those who benefited from Osbourne's 5% tax cut spent he extra, or is it stashed somewhere (probably offshore), contributing nothing to anything?
why dont Labour say "we are going to put up tax for anyone earning above say£300k a year---drop VAT back to 18%-----charge the banks more tax on profits---we will give back ALL the child benefit taken etc etc etc etc " you know get a set of bollox have some actual policies rather than just being the lieingTwofacedcheating SCUM that they are.
It had to happen.
It is a valid a point though. "New" Labour were in power for years and despite as much lip service as they paid to being the party for the people they still pandered to big business, continued selling off the country and did very little to sort out such tax loopholes. The rich got richer under them and the gulf between the rich and poor was wider than it had been for decades when they left.
Anyone who is in opposition at any time can criticise the government because they dont have to do it until they get in and then it all gets spun.
The biggest mistake the tories and lib dems made was not letting New Labour win the last election. Might have dressed things up and put a different spin on things but doubt they would have (been able to) do much different than the current wallies.
Politics is a pantomime like premiership football nowdays in this country. Corporations and money is the key driver and whilst they and the media concentrate on soundbites things like plebgate and calling for resignations (of members of all parties) rather than focusing on having constructive and meaningful debates about making things better for everyone then it will just continue to be the utter clusterfuck it is.
Actually Off-it VAT doesn't work in that simplistic way. VAT is paid by the consumer but the seller can (and Starbucks - as do ALL these companies) offset this. They only pay VAT on the Value Added (the clue is in the name) by them to their own 'costs' which will include what they, notionally, pay for the coffee, overheads etc.
Please, save me the lectures. I KNOW how it works, in theory, in practice, in the UK and across the EU. I'm trying to she'd some light on how most businesses dealing with sales to the public see VAT.
Fyi, in this particular case, The purchase of coffee beans isn't subject to VAT - so no VAT for the business to recover or offset there, although there will be VAT on some other overheads, but not staff costs or (some) property costs - which are likely to be three of the biggest costs.The sale of a cup of (hot) coffee from a coffee shop is subject to VAT, so this needs to be accounted for out of the price the customer stumps up.
You can have that for free. I could quote you the relevant law if you like, but then I'm afraid I would have to charge you.
SHG, Ormiston life long education is the answer - different people pick things up at different times in their lives and jobs. And whole careers change and even revolutionize within your working life time... obviously not everyone can be highly educated but vocational training, apprenticeships are much more available in other economies. Unfortunately central government cannot even run a train franchise auction properly so the idea of giving some kind of legal or licencing authority over breeding is a bit far fetched... hang on wait a minute didn't we have all that 50-100 years back with illegitimate children being shipped off to the far ends of empire / commonwealth?! So yes the answer is with family and striving etc... but also local society and economy ... and also national / international framework
Incidentally there's a book out at the moment called Chavs - not read it but saw it in a high profile place at Waterstones... think it's all about the politicisation of the anti chav rhetoric
Another is to give it to poor people, because they spend it. It may be in Wetherspoons or betting shops or whatever. But spend it they do.
I've no doubt you're right. But why take money off the workers (by way of tax) to give to the shirkers to spend down Weatherspoons or the betting shop ? Leave more with the workers, for them to spend down Wetherspoons or the betting shop.
Actually Off-it VAT doesn't work in that simplistic way. VAT is paid by the consumer but the seller can (and Starbucks - as do ALL these companies) offset this. They only pay VAT on the Value Added (the clue is in the name) by them to their own 'costs' which will include what they, notionally, pay for the coffee, overheads etc.
Please, save me the lectures. I KNOW how it works, in theory, in practice, in the UK and across the EU. I'm trying to she'd some light on how most businesses dealing with sales to the public see VAT.
Fyi, in this particular case, The purchase of coffee beans isn't subject to VAT - so no VAT for the business to recover or offset there, although there will be VAT on some other overheads, but not staff costs or (some) property costs - which are likely to be three of the biggest costs.The sale of a cup of (hot) coffee from a coffee shop is subject to VAT, so this needs to be accounted for out of the price the customer stumps up.
You can have that for free. I could quote you the relevant law if you like, but then I'm afraid I would have to charge you.
Starbucks US accounts have shown that they make massive profits in all EU major economies before various charges for coffee (from Switzerland!!!) and imaging / branding rights so the VAT offset will be quite low...
One of the reasons that VAT has gone up and up and up is that governments find it a lot easier to collect than other taxes like corporation tax and PAYE AND the value goes up as the economy grows so all good when you have never ending years of 2/3% growth... bit like fuel duty
A lot of this comes down to the ridiculous rise in house prices, which has pushed up rents (costing the welfare state a fortune, which has then gone into the hands of property speculators and the like, thereby further inflating the housing market) and devalued the wage that workers receive, meaning that they struggle.
Until we see a rise in wages, people will rely on the state for handouts (even if they work in many cases) and those not working will be discouraged from seeking work (the welfare state was originally intended to be a 'hand up' rather than a 'handout', which it has become for some), leaving to resentment from those that pay for them to do sod all and understandably want something done about it. Unfortunately, those who need and deserve support are caught up in this situation and get hit by the collateral damage. It is not a good situation to be in for anyone apart from the finance industry and other multi-nationals, as far as I can make out....
Very good post, ridiculous housing prices are a big factor in the UK and Australia.
The re-introduction of rent controls - "fair rents" - might help.
Briefly, this is a bad idea for two reasons. Firsly, where are the jobs? There are about 5-6 million people who either want a job or want to work more because they haven't got enough hours. People not working (for whatever reason) are indirectly doing them a favour. Second, the health of the economy is measured by GDP, GDP is about how often £10 circulates in the economy. If someone gives you ten pound and you spend it, you are circulating it. If the place you spend it gives it to its employee, and he buys a pasty and a programme at The Valley with it , then the club give it to one of the ball boys and he buys a new top in Lewisham, that tenner has become £40 of GDP (this is a bit simplified but hey). If on the other hand you just give it to your bank, it remains £10. So, if you want money to circulate in the economy, you need to work out how to do that. One way is to invest in things that help stuff circulate (goods, people, data) such as new roads and railways. Another is to give it to poor people, because they spend it. It may be in Wetherspoons or betting shops or whatever. But spend it they do. Henry Ford worked this out in the 1920s, once he'd sold cars to the wealthy there was no one left to buy them, so he increased his workers' wages and cut his cars prices and sold them to his workers. For all the anecdotal stuff about what a grand time people have on benefits, I think these are extreme exceptions. Most people I know who've been on benefits recently hated it, never having any money is not something good. I've not had a pay rise in 4 years but I still think it's better for us all if people at the bottom end get more, not least because they will spend it. Have all those who benefited from Osbourne's 5% tax cut spent he extra, or is it stashed somewhere (probably offshore), contributing nothing to anything?
SHG, Ormiston life long education is the answer - different people pick things up at different times in their lives and jobs. And whole careers change and even revolutionize within your working life time... obviously not everyone can be highly educated but vocational training, apprenticeships are much more available in other economies. Unfortunately central government cannot even run a train franchise auction properly so the idea of giving some kind of legal or licencing authority over breeding is a bit far fetched... hang on wait a minute didn't we have all that 50-100 years back with illegitimate children being shipped off to the far ends of empire / commonwealth?! So yes the answer is with family and striving etc... but also local society and economy ... and also national / international framework
Incidentally there's a book out at the moment called Chavs - not read it but saw it in a high profile place at Waterstones... think it's all about the politicisation of the anti chav rhetoric
Life long access to education would be fantastic, but is very expensive and is not going to happen in the current circumstances.
I've had some time lately and have dipped into a number of areas - I researched courses but I don't have the time to do them full time... so I'm just going to read myself - on the web, a couple of books, been to a couple of seminars etc.
Turns out The Open University (and others?) are pioneering FREE education in certain courses where content will be freely available as a loss leader to bring cudos, participation and revenue into other courses... I think the idea is that they will only charge for tutoring and possibly marking... So if the badge of qualification enhances job prospects then people will pay but if you just want to get guidance and a reading list then its free.
The web is here and I just bought a kindle so content is out there ...all that is needed is two things: drive from individuals (your point?) and structure...By structure I mean both academic and incentives - has to come from government, employers, teaching institutions and local society... not everyone can do it as they don't have the time or aptitude but I'm sure the UK has millions who can benefit
And in (a late) response to the issues raised re children, how about higher child benefits for those who take parenting courses???
I've had some time lately and have dipped into a number of areas - I researched courses but I don't have the time to do them full time... so I'm just going to read myself - on the web, a couple of books, been to a couple of seminars etc.
Turns out The Open University (and others?) are pioneering FREE education in certain courses where content will be freely available as a loss leader to bring cudos, participation and revenue into other courses... I think the idea is that they will only charge for tutoring and possibly marking... So if the badge of qualification enhances job prospects then people will pay but if you just want to get guidance and a reading list then its free.
The web is here and I just bought a kindle so content is out there ...all that is needed is two things: drive from individuals (your point?) and structure...By structure I mean both academic and incentives - has to come from government, employers, teaching institutions and local society... not everyone can do it as they don't have the time or aptitude but I'm sure the UK has millions who can benefit
And in (a late) response to the issues raised re children, how about higher child benefits for those who take parenting courses???
Very true, there are some great adult education courses out there, I took the previous poster to mean lifelong 'free' education where you can dip in and out as often as you please.
This is something that Tony Benn used to talk about, its a great idea in theory but very expensive in operation.
As to your last point, the problem would be that everyone would take the course to get the higher benefits but would they actually change their behaviour.
For my money, in terms of benefits at least, the government needs to draw a line in the sand and say from (let's say) June 30th 2015 we will only pay child benefit for your first two children.
This will be unpopular with some but if people understand the history of the welfare system in the UK then they will know it was set up as a safety net for WORKING people who had paid into the system, it was never supposed to be a lifelong crutch for people who had never worked at all.
60% of benefits affected go to those in work - so are they all scroungers? 30% of government spend goes on benefits and pensions NHS spend went up and up under the last government but this government refuse to touch it because they know it will cost them votes at the next election As Ormiston states, a skilled motivated workforce is what will get us, Europe, Australia and the US through this century...and at the same time a new approach to pensions, healthcare and lifelong education Meanwhile fringe and extremist politicians seek to exploit the lack of clear values and strategy with more than a touch of xenophobia to attract more and more votes I don't think it will take that much more for UK (& US and southern Europe) to get deficits under control - what it really needs is growth, jobs and more people in work paying taxes... and more bank lending to help this growth If I was claiming benefits on top of a low paid job then I expect every single penny would go on day to day life involving VAT, sales for businesses (more jobs) and helping create profits (corporation tax)... so not sure why taking a few quid away from this part of society really helps?
I havent read any of this. But here is my 2ps worth - which will be 2.02p very soon.
The rich are getting alot richer. Mostly by paying workers less and keppeing more for themsleves or shareholders. That ... the unions and now not only do people work for less but then after a few years when wages are fukced everyone starts moaning that benefits are too high and too near wgaes and most thick cunts in this country fall for it.
The press convinces all of us to fight with each other over scraps while their mates sit in luxury.
I dont care if a lose £3 a week in this which is what it will cost the average bod.
We have always had a defecit and from what ive read still are paying for WW2 - glad we won that eh?
Can we all add up what we paid the bastard banks, QE, illegal wars in countries we shouldnt be in, tax loopholes for individuals and big companies, the cost of new nuclear missiles (rumoured to be £100 billion) and then see what's what debt wise before we fine all of the hard working and not so hard working in this country? WTFF????
Why are people in work so bitter about "aving to go to work while people sit in the lap of luxury watching TV" - i for one would much rather work and get 10 times more than sit at 'ome.
The way capatilism works and to keep infaltion down you need unemployment as far as i can see it so they fucking love it.
Why the vilification of people who aint wokring - the vast majority are genuine.
Also i love our system that looks after those that need it. Its something to be proud of. Very proud of.
And i tell you what i get more upset about greedy rich bastards dodging tax and treating people like shit than i do some lazy git getting a few hundred quid.
This government move affects 300,000 nurses who will get less - happy with that everyone?
Part of me goes along with BIG_ROB. I know it wouldn't be very dignified handing over vouchers as it would mark you out but I know parents who spend their benefits on cigs n booze before they feed their kids!
Blaming the Tories for this mess is very short sighted imo,and I'm not one. Tony Blair did as much as anyone to turn this country into the overcrowded,under equipped and potless state it finds itself in today.
Comments
I know some experts in benefits and will ask them for a summary but my first thought is that benefits should be harmonised across the EU at least the bigger nations so that no one country is more or less attractive
Perhaps corporation tax and the top rate of tax should also be harmonised across the EU so that there are no tax tourists as well but that's another story
Of course the alternative, as Len suggests is to leave the EU but, without knowing all the numbers / answers, my gut feel is that we are better off staying in a larger bloc
You posted
If you are churning out children with no qualifications or trade who leave school at 16/17 in the hope that 'something turns up' then, sorry to say, but you are part of the problem.
I presumed that not churning them out would be part of the solution ? I already said that not everyone can be highly educated which is of course fairly obvious. Given that we will always have and need people to do work highly educated people wouldn't do then what do you suggest. If your children won't be educated to a high standard. Don't have them. ?
This is the big problem, we all want to blame someone else other than ourselves don't we? If we don't push our children hard and make sure they understand that the world does not owe them a living and that they need to help themselves by either getting educated or getting a good trade then we are setting them up for failure.
In addition, and I hate to come over all Daily Mail here, but if you are a family on benefits and you are having multiple children (let's say more than two) on the tax-payers dollar then that is just plain wrong, you are basically abusing the system.
Until we see a rise in wages, people will rely on the state for handouts (even if they work in many cases) and those not working will be discouraged from seeking work (the welfare state was originally intended to be a 'hand up' rather than a 'handout', which it has become for some), leaving to resentment from those that pay for them to do sod all and understandably want something done about it. Unfortunately, those who need and deserve support are caught up in this situation and get hit by the collateral damage. It is not a good situation to be in for anyone apart from the finance industry and other multi-nationals, as far as I can make out....
Second, the health of the economy is measured by GDP, GDP is about how often £10 circulates in the economy. If someone gives you ten pound and you spend it, you are circulating it. If the place you spend it gives it to its employee, and he buys a pasty and a programme at The Valley with it , then the club give it to one of the ball boys and he buys a new top in Lewisham, that tenner has become £40 of GDP (this is a bit simplified but hey). If on the other hand you just give it to your bank, it remains £10. So, if you want money to circulate in the economy, you need to work out how to do that. One way is to invest in things that help stuff circulate (goods, people, data) such as new roads and railways. Another is to give it to poor people, because they spend it. It may be in Wetherspoons or betting shops or whatever. But spend it they do. Henry Ford worked this out in the 1920s, once he'd sold cars to the wealthy there was no one left to buy them, so he increased his workers' wages and cut his cars prices and sold them to his workers.
For all the anecdotal stuff about what a grand time people have on benefits, I think these are extreme exceptions. Most people I know who've been on benefits recently hated it, never having any money is not something good. I've not had a pay rise in 4 years but I still think it's better for us all if people at the bottom end get more, not least because they will spend it. Have all those who benefited from Osbourne's 5% tax cut spent he extra, or is it stashed somewhere (probably offshore), contributing nothing to anything?
Anyone who is in opposition at any time can criticise the government because they dont have to do it until they get in and then it all gets spun.
The biggest mistake the tories and lib dems made was not letting New Labour win the last election. Might have dressed things up and put a different spin on things but doubt they would have (been able to) do much different than the current wallies.
Politics is a pantomime like premiership football nowdays in this country. Corporations and money is the key driver and whilst they and the media concentrate on soundbites things like plebgate and calling for resignations (of members of all parties) rather than focusing on having constructive and meaningful debates about making things better for everyone then it will just continue to be the utter clusterfuck it is.
Fyi, in this particular case, The purchase of coffee beans isn't subject to VAT - so no VAT for the business to recover or offset there, although there will be VAT on some other overheads, but not staff costs or (some) property costs - which are likely to be three of the biggest costs.The sale of a cup of (hot) coffee from a coffee shop is subject to VAT, so this needs to be accounted for out of the price the customer stumps up.
You can have that for free. I could quote you the relevant law if you like, but then I'm afraid I would have to charge you.
*wink
obviously not everyone can be highly educated but vocational training, apprenticeships are much more available in other economies.
Unfortunately central government cannot even run a train franchise auction properly so the idea of giving some kind of legal or licencing authority over breeding is a bit far fetched... hang on wait a minute didn't we have all that 50-100 years back with illegitimate children being shipped off to the far ends of empire / commonwealth?!
So yes the answer is with family and striving etc... but also local society and economy ... and also national / international framework
Incidentally there's a book out at the moment called Chavs - not read it but saw it in a high profile place at Waterstones... think it's all about the politicisation of the anti chav rhetoric
One of the reasons that VAT has gone up and up and up is that governments find it a lot easier to collect than other taxes like corporation tax and PAYE AND the value goes up as the economy grows so all good when you have never ending years of 2/3% growth... bit like fuel duty
Then there is the group that's has grown up in families on it and then follow the cycle themselves
TheY seem to revel in it
I've had some time lately and have dipped into a number of areas - I researched courses but I don't have the time to do them full time... so I'm just going to read myself - on the web, a couple of books, been to a couple of seminars etc.
Turns out The Open University (and others?) are pioneering FREE education in certain courses where content will be freely available as a loss leader to bring cudos, participation and revenue into other courses... I think the idea is that they will only charge for tutoring and possibly marking... So if the badge of qualification enhances job prospects then people will pay but if you just want to get guidance and a reading list then its free.
The web is here and I just bought a kindle so content is out there ...all that is needed is two things: drive from individuals (your point?) and structure...By structure I mean both academic and incentives - has to come from government, employers, teaching institutions and local society... not everyone can do it as they don't have the time or aptitude but I'm sure the UK has millions who can benefit
And in (a late) response to the issues raised re children, how about higher child benefits for those who take parenting courses???
This is something that Tony Benn used to talk about, its a great idea in theory but very expensive in operation.
As to your last point, the problem would be that everyone would take the course to get the higher benefits but would they actually change their behaviour.
For my money, in terms of benefits at least, the government needs to draw a line in the sand and say from (let's say) June 30th 2015 we will only pay child benefit for your first two children.
This will be unpopular with some but if people understand the history of the welfare system in the UK then they will know it was set up as a safety net for WORKING people who had paid into the system, it was never supposed to be a lifelong crutch for people who had never worked at all.
The rich are getting alot richer. Mostly by paying workers less and keppeing more for themsleves or shareholders. That ... the unions and now not only do people work for less but then after a few years when wages are fukced everyone starts moaning that benefits are too high and too near wgaes and most thick cunts in this country fall for it.
The press convinces all of us to fight with each other over scraps while their mates sit in luxury.
I dont care if a lose £3 a week in this which is what it will cost the average bod.
We have always had a defecit and from what ive read still are paying for WW2 - glad we won that eh?
Can we all add up what we paid the bastard banks, QE, illegal wars in countries we shouldnt be in, tax loopholes for individuals and big companies, the cost of new nuclear missiles (rumoured to be £100 billion) and then see what's what debt wise before we fine all of the hard working and not so hard working in this country? WTFF????
Why are people in work so bitter about "aving to go to work while people sit in the lap of luxury watching TV" - i for one would much rather work and get 10 times more than sit at 'ome.
The way capatilism works and to keep infaltion down you need unemployment as far as i can see it so they fucking love it.
Why the vilification of people who aint wokring - the vast majority are genuine.
Also i love our system that looks after those that need it. Its something to be proud of. Very proud of.
And i tell you what i get more upset about greedy rich bastards dodging tax and treating people like shit than i do some lazy git getting a few hundred quid.
This government move affects 300,000 nurses who will get less - happy with that everyone?
70% affected are working - happy with that?
Tony Blair did as much as anyone to turn this country into the overcrowded,under equipped and potless state it finds itself in today.