aris Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 aris what some of these bleeding heart liberals don't want to admit is that the problem is, to get a job you actually need to try and get one. Indeed, and you might actually have to move to another town. But of course everyone has a god given right to live near mum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnleydave Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 Indeed, and you might actually have to move to another town. But of course everyone has a god given right to live near mum.So true mate. I was brought up with the values of a honest days pay for a honest days graft and that you go to wherever the work is. Problem you might find on here is that some of the posters will be overprotective of their benefit money. Remember though they think they deserve it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aris Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 (edited) The sad thing is that our entire economy appears to be linked to benefits. It allows companies to pay below-subsistence wages, which are then topped up by the tax payer. If your wages to up too much, you lose the benefits. So where is the incentive to actually improve your lot though education, training, or god forbid - you take a risk and start your own business. I'm all for 'benefits' as a safety net, but the economy cannot go on forever paying people not to work, or topping up one persons wages out of other peoples wages. Unfortunately this will be next to impossible to change - at least not quickly - we can thank the previous labour regime for that. Edited June 2, 2013 by aris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnleydave Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 A philosopher said that 'when the electorate realise they can vote in gifts for themselves then democracy is dead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 Indeed - at this rate we will be a nation of benefits claimants reliant on the state. Anyone who actually generates wealth will have left as they no longer get anything back for their hard work. Not even a university education for their children. Half of eastern Europe appears to have found jobs. Funny that. nowt to do with them being paid less than the min wage IE exploited by the likes of you with your oh so ever predictable blame the feckless for it all reasoning, and of course the ever present let them work for a bowl of gruel attitude. clueless mate you simply are. KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aris Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 (edited) nowt to do with them being paid less than the min wage IE exploited by the likes of you with your oh so ever predictable blame the feckless for it all reasoning, and of course the ever present let them work for a bowl of gruel attitude. clueless mate you simply are. KW You appear to be aware of people being illegally paid below the minimum wage so please name and shame them. I'm sure the authorities would love to know. I think this is more of an urban legend though. It is a very convenient excuse for not working. Most of the eastern Europeans I come across either professionally or encounter working in shops/restaurants appear very eager to work - and do their jobs well. They WANT to work. They are most likely also studying to improve themselves at the same time. I think that is the difference, but if you're given more money for not working - it's not a difficult choice for many people. Edited June 2, 2013 by aris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 You appear to be aware of people being illegally paid below the minimum wage so please name and shame them. I'm sure the authorities would love to know. I think this is more of an urban legend though. It is a very convenient excuse for not working. Most of the eastern Europeans I come across either professionally or encounter working in shops/restaurants appear very eager to work - and do their jobs well. They WANT to work. They are most likely also studying to improve themselves at the same time. I think that is the difference, but if you're given more money for not working - it's not a difficult choice for many people. oh I know plenty (got any farms around you or anyone wanting an extension built? ) ask yourself a little question IE can you live on the min wage? nah you know you cant it has to be topped up with benefit in the form of tax credit, so come on who is kidding who? I am fortunate I was lucky when younger and took a chance a chance that paid off,a chance taken I might add when work was a plenty (pre the old crow days) I now pay more tax a year than the average wage, do I begrudge one penny of it going to those on benefit? do I heck not whilst one stinking festering career politician or company director can lie cheat and swindle the nation day in day out, if you want people to work give them a decent job with decent pay, even if it meant a scrap and build policy, at least that way something goes back in rather than all out as with the stupid artificial system we have now that benefits no one apart from those who believe the daily wail headlines and extreme examples ARE the order of the day. KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 No one who earns a taxable income and is not in dire need should receive any kind of benefit at all. There are far too many benefits. The system should be drastically simplfied, rigorously means tested and strictly time limited. Universal benefits that pay money purely as a political bribe to well off people who do not need it is a disgrace, and in economic terms, idiotic. Taking a pound from someone in taxation, passing it through a maze of government bureaucracy until it is worth 25p, then giving it back to its original owner as a "benefit" is utterly moronic, and typically socialistic. Taxation should not be misused as a Pavlovian reward system. If decent hard working, self-reliant people are entitled to "something back" that merely indicates that they were charged too much tax in the first place. Don't bribe them with their own money, don't take it from them to start with. Nor should there should be any bribe to encourage procreation. There are too many people in the world already. If you can't afford to raise children. don't have them. If you have them and suffer financial misfortune, assistance should be temporary, and repayable. The welfare state is a fool's paradise, and it has ruined us, socially, intellectually and economically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aris Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 If you want a decent job with decent pay - you will have to work for it and make sacrifices. That means - educating yourself. Acquire a qualification and a skill worth paying for. Avoid looking like a human notice board (excessive tattoos and piercings). Be prepared to move to a different town/city away from your comfort zone and family (if only temporarily to gain experience). Don't rest on your laurels, and continue to educate and add to your skillset. If you just have mediocre O levels - your chances of anything but minimum wage are not that great. The bar has been raised for some time now. Of course, that doesn't mean you CANNOT succeed with no qualifications - but either way you will have to work very hard. There is no easy ride in life - unless you are on benefits of course. I find the idea that peoples wages are topped up by the tax payer to be preposterous. It is wrong and people should be paid a decent wage to live on - but why should employers contemplate doing this when they know full well that someone else will top up their employees earnings. These employers are in effect making huge profits off the tax payers back (and many of them then go ahead and avoid tax all together). The solution sounds almost impossible though. I despair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 If you want a decent job with decent pay - you will have to work for it and make sacrifices. That means - educating yourself. Acquire a qualification and a skill worth paying for. Avoid looking like a human notice board (excessive tattoos and piercings). Be prepared to move to a different town/city away from your comfort zone and family (if only temporarily to gain experience). Don't rest on your laurels, and continue to educate and add to your skillset. If you just have mediocre O levels - your chances of anything but minimum wage are not that great. The bar has been raised for some time now. Of course, that doesn't mean you CANNOT succeed with no qualifications - but either way you will have to work very hard. There is no easy ride in life - unless you are on benefits of course. I find the idea that peoples wages are topped up by the tax payer to be preposterous. It is wrong and people should be paid a decent wage to live on - but why should employers contemplate doing this when they know full well that someone else will top up their employees earnings. These employers are in effect making huge profits off the tax payers back (and many of them then go ahead and avoid tax all together). The solution sounds almost impossible though. I despair. see your not far off at all apart from the tattoo's of course. KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aris Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 see your not far off at all apart from the tattoo's of course. KW Tattoos have certainly become more socially acceptable - but if you have a tatooed neck or knuckles or a face like a pin cushion - you are pretty much excluding yourself from a good chunk of the well paying job market. A good friend of mine is a goth, has a mohevian (dyed black), and a pierced lip (amongst others), only wears black Is very well off, but he has a masters degree in computer science, and runs his own software company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 kdubya - not much wrong with what you say, but many will never be convinced.Be careful about asking Dave around Not sure about his negotiating skills, but he is a dab hand at room makeovers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 A philosopher said that 'when the electorate realise they can vote in gifts for themselves then democracy is dead Really? http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Alexander_Fraser_Tytler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unapalomablanca Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 No one who earns a taxable income and is not in dire need should receive any kind of benefit at all. There are far too many benefits. The system should be drastically simplfied, rigorously means tested and strictly time limited. Universal benefits that pay money purely as a political bribe to well off people who do not need it is a disgrace, and in economic terms, idiotic. Taking a pound from someone in taxation, passing it through a maze of government bureaucracy until it is worth 25p, then giving it back to its original owner as a "benefit" is utterly moronic, and typically socialistic. Taxation should not be misused as a Pavlovian reward system. If decent hard working, self-reliant people are entitled to "something back" that merely indicates that they were charged too much tax in the first place. Don't bribe them with their own money, don't take it from them to start with. Nor should there should be any bribe to encourage procreation. There are too many people in the world already. If you can't afford to raise children. don't have them. If you have them and suffer financial misfortune, assistance should be temporary, and repayable. The welfare state is a fool's paradise, and it has ruined us, socially, intellectually and economically. Hi gimlet, i heard someone on the radio suggesting that people who get a public sector pension, should have their state pension either stopped or reduced depending on what they receive, and the contributions they made to it refunded. What do you think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 (edited) I wonder if you could use your negotiating skills and come round my way in order to help the young find non existent jobs. KW My grandparents came down to London to find work when there wasn't any in the North East. That's how these things are supposed to happen. Natural economic movement of people. My other grandparents left the land in Oxfordshire and found work in the industrial Midlands for the same reasons. Today the remnants of my family that's left in the North East are all unemployed and are frankly a waste of oxygen. Their kids have never worked and now the grandchildren are destined follow the same tradition. Oh yes and they are all staunch Labour voters, surprise surprise. Stop all their benefits tomorrow and they would find work when there was no other choice. Tough love. They don't work because they don't have to and never have had to. Edited June 2, 2013 by Vince Green Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 Hi gimlet, i heard someone on the radio suggesting that people who get a public sector pension, should have their state pension either stopped or reduced depending on what they receive, and the contributions they made to it refunded. What do you think? what a good idea and why stop there lets stop or reduce the state pension of those who have private pension scheme's as well. KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustJon Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 what a good idea and why stop there lets stop or reduce the state pension of those who have private pension scheme's as well. KW Public sector policy and reward should match private sector - pension, pay, hours, health insurance etc... it doesn't and the public sector is therefore perceived as draining the private sector - especially when times are hard as now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unapalomablanca Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 what a good idea and why stop there lets stop or reduce the state pension of those who have private pension scheme's as well. KW The point of the debate was to try to get real, and reduce the massive pensions bill. As far as i am aware, a privately funded pension doesnt add to that bill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 (edited) The point of the debate was to try to get real, and reduce the massive pensions bill. As far as i am aware, a privately funded pension doesnt add to that bill. we can reduce it even more, lets not award it till your 120! back to real, public sector workers earned their pensions in the form of low pay over years of work, that is conveniently forgotten about KW Edited June 2, 2013 by kdubya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unapalomablanca Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 we can reduce it even more, lets not award it till your 120! back to real, public sector workers earned their pensions in the form of low pay over years of work, that is conveniently forgotten about KW no, you said private pensioners should have their state pensions reduced, i said private pensioners, probably like yourself add nothing to the state bill and also provide the public sector pension. I am merely mentioning a radio article, they said nothing about pension age being increased, you are the one 'sexing it up'. My old man gets a state and public sector pension, i hardly would want him to lose it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 , public sector workers earned their pensions in the form of low pay over years of work, that is conveniently forgotten about KW In the past that may have been true, but the private sector has been on virtual pay freeze for a good few years ,and the public sector have pulled ahead,couple that with the generous holiday entitlement and also the extremely generous sick pay and there is a lot to be said to working in the public sector. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/9697750/Public-sector-workers-earn-86-more-a-week-than-private-sector.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustJon Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 In the past that may have been true, but the private sector has been on virtual pay freeze for a good few years ,and the public sector have pulled ahead,couple that with the generous holiday entitlement and also the extremely generous sick pay and there is a lot to be said to working in the public sector. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/9697750/Public-sector-workers-earn-86-more-a-week-than-private-sector.html Agreed, doesn't stack up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catweazle Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 I find the idea that peoples wages are topped up by the tax payer to be preposterous. It is wrong and people should be paid a decent wage to live on - but why should employers contemplate doing this when they know full well that someone else will top up their employees earnings. These employers are in effect making huge profits off the tax payers back (and many of them then go ahead and avoid tax all together). Nail on the head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malik Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 (edited) Why shouldn't those who pay get something back. In my opinion high earners shouldnt be paying for benefit claimants, benefit claimants should be forced to get a job. Why should someone better themselves just to ave to pay 50p in the pound. No wonder so many of our highest earners are now based and pay tax abroad Couldnt agree more dave. Its been reduced to 45% now, but its still ridiculous. The system appears to be punnishing sucess. If you dropped the rate to 35% and watch some more millionaires come in. Give them an entrepreneur visa like america for 2 years. Let their money kick start th ecomomy and create jobs. Less people sucking off the state and money money in tax! 100 millionaires being taxed 45% raises less renevnue than 1,000 being taxed at 35%, thats a competitive rate too! Stop all their benefits tomorrow and they would find work when there was no other choice. Tough love. They don't work because they don't have to and never have had to. My dad came from Pakistan, 2 of his brothers died from malnutrition. Mother had little money. Thats real poverty. No benefits over there. He came here when he was 16 purely to work. Worked 2 jobs. Several years later... Without wanting to sound complacent, he has done extremely well for himself. I am not saying go to that extreme. But if they really experienced poverty, they'd work whatever hours for whatever pay because they know. There is no safety net! Edited June 2, 2013 by Malik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustJon Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 The government should rebate any tax I pay at 40% so I can afford my first home ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.