TIGHTCHOKE Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 Down here spuds are maybe £60 a ton, pheasants £1 a brace, rabbits £2, 4 pints of milk a £1, hospital catering £3 for 3 meals a day. They dont need food banks, what they need is education Indeed they do! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
four-wheel-drive Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 The problem is so much has changed over the years when I was young we did not have a car tv washing machine fridge etc etc but then only the well of people had stuff like that so it did not worry us not having things. but young people today see everyone for the most part has all of this stuff and if you do not have it you are the odd one out there are lots of people who are not that bright so could not get good GCEs at school so find it hard to get a job add to that people from all over Europe probably better educated snapping up all of the basic jobs is it any wonder our people get annoyed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead-Eyed Duck Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 (edited) The problem is so much has changed over the years when I was young we did not have a car tv washing machine fridge etc etc but then only the well of people had stuff like that so it did not worry us not having things. but young people today see everyone for the most part has all of this stuff and if you do not have it you are the odd one out there are lots of people who are not that bright so could not get good GCEs at school so find it hard to get a job add to that people from all over Europe probably better educated snapping up all of the basic jobs is it any wonder our people get annoyed. The problem as I see it is that 'some' want anything for doing nowt. They skive at school and then expect to get the benefits obtained by those that work hard to get the qualifications. When I went to school discipline was strict, and if you misbehaved you got the ruler whacked on your hand or the slipper on your legs. Brutal it may have been, but by and large it worked. If you were not 'bright' then when you left school you found work in menial tasks and many then went back to night school to get suitable qualifications there. Many parents now don't enforce discipline, and when they object to teachers being strict they harangue the teachers for being too tough. Then they have the bare-faced cheek to blame the school for the lack of discipline and respect their little dears have. My kids got pocket money for keeping their rooms tidy and taking turns with the washing up. If they wanted to object (as they were entitled to), they got nowt. No wonder foreigners think that they have found El Dorado when they come to the UK...... Edited October 16, 2014 by Dead-Eyed Duck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxie Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 I came from a 2 up 2 down background, with a toilet in the backyard. When the wife and I got married we did without - no phone in the house for many years; no washing machine for 2 years and no tv for 6 months etc., etc. What gets my goat is to see people in the food banks with mobile phones to their ears, wearing designer clothes etc. I have no doubt whatsoever that things have got worse for some, but hey, just in case you haven't noticed, the country is bust. Skint. Mainly because good olde Gordon Brown and Co borrowed too much. If you think that things cannot get worse then look at the likes of Greece etc who also borrowed too much and wanted everything now. Hands up the person who doesn't think that Milliband and Co wouldn't try and borrow their way again, to be thought of by the unthinking, that things are getting better? The Cons have got many things wrong, in particular that they are not "taxing" those on £squillions of bonuses when everyone else is tightening their belts. No one of a rational mind likes unfairness. But, one of the things that they are trying to do is reduce the national debt that was bleeding the country dry. Why has the national debt increased every year the Conservatives have been in power?I thought they were trying to reduce it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpkiller Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 They may not be using food banks because they cant afford food its most likely they cant afford all the other bills first that keeps a roof over their heads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 (edited) Why has the national debt increased every year the Conservatives have been in power?I thought they were trying to reduce it. dont spoil it. oh and it seems like king nige has shiny face very very worried? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29642604 KW Edited October 16, 2014 by kdubya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grrclark Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 Why has the national debt increased every year the Conservatives have been in power?I thought they were trying to reduce it. They are reducing the deficit, the actual debt will continue to rise until such time as we run a budget surplus, circa 2018-19. They could have stopped incurring a deficit immediately, but that would have been absolutely brutal and made the austerity activities currently experienced seem wonderfully benevolent. The problem was the level of public spending committed to by the last government, when Labour exited power their excessive public spending didn't exit with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpkiller Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 (edited) Im no labour supporting socialist I read all the manifestos and voted for this tory government in the hope they would fairly sort the country out, but it was all lies and they reverted to type screwing the poor and helping their rich friends. Under this government its the poor doing the paying sometimes with their homes and even their lives. Edited October 16, 2014 by pimpkiller Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grrclark Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 The problem as I see it is that 'some' want anything for doing nowt. They skive at school and then expect to get the benefits obtained by those that work hard to get the qualifications. When I went to school discipline was strict, and if you misbehaved you got the ruler whacked on your hand or the slipper on your legs. Brutal it may have been, but by and large it worked. If you were not 'bright' then when you left school you found work in menial tasks and many then went back to night school to get suitable qualifications there. Many parents now don't enforce discipline, and when they object to teachers being strict they harangue the teachers for being too tough. Then they have the bare-faced cheek to blame the school for the lack of discipline and respect their little dears have. My kids got pocket money for keeping their rooms tidy and taking turns with the washing up. If they wanted to object (as they were entitled to), they got nowt. No wonder foreigners think that they have found El Dorado when they come to the UK...... I agree with that. There is a huge entitlement culture in this country and it is a terrible sickness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catweazle Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 (edited) I have no doubt whatsoever that things have got worse for some, but hey, just in case you haven't noticed, the country is bust. Skint. Mainly because good olde Gordon Brown and Co borrowed too much. If you think that things cannot get worse then look at the likes of Greece etc who also borrowed too much and wanted everything now. Hands up the person who doesn't think that Milliband and Co wouldn't try and borrow their way again, to be thought of by the unthinking, that things are getting better? The Cons have got many things wrong, in particular that they are not "taxing" those on £squillions of bonuses when everyone else is tightening their belts. No one of a rational mind likes unfairness. But, one of the things that they are trying to do is reduce the national debt that was bleeding the country dry. Just because people keep saying it doesn't mean it's true.... http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/02/david-cameron-rebuked-for-telling-porkies-about-the-national-debt/ The truth is that his government will increase Britain’s debt by 58 per cent, and by more over five years than Labour did over 13 years. And let's not forget that a huge part of Labours borrowing ( about £500 Billion I think ) was borrowed to buy shares in banks to save them from failing - these same shares look like making a profit so that money will come back. What will Cameron get back from his borrowing ? Not much I suspect, but you can be sure he'll be crowing about "paying down debt" again once the bank shares are sold. Politicians ? I dislike them all. Edited October 16, 2014 by Catweazle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catweazle Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 I should add, I think the UK economy is a basket case that no party can fix. Austerity is not an option - it's the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grrclark Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 (edited) Im no labour supporting socialist I read all the manifestos and voted for this tory government in the hope they would fairly sort the country out, but it was all lies and they reverted to type screwing the poor and helping their rich friends. Under this government its the poor doing the paying sometimes with their homes and even their lives. They are sorting the country out, they are significantly reducing the level of social subsidy and wasteful spend that went on under Labour. No matter what the controlling power is the very wealthy will always float above the level of pain and it will always be those at the bottom and the middle that will be squeezed the most. If you put in place hugely punitive tax rates for the ultra wealthy they just move away. I agree that more could and should be done to improve the level of tax take from the very wealthy, but it is simply wrong to suggest that the poor are being shafted for the benefit of the wealthy. The poor are being shafted because the country is living beyond its means and the poor rely on the state, but the state has less money to spend. It is a vicious circle with lots of academic answers to resolve it, but in practice they are unworkable so long as our political environment is a popularity contest. Catweazle, that blog in the spectator is just as disingenuous as the language used by the politicians. The level of debt has been forecast to increase up to 2018-19 right from the very start, the deficit is reducing however. The article is simply semantics on terminology of debt v's deficit. See my previous post, if this government wanted to actually cut the debt in this parliamentary term then the austerity we see now would have been extravagantly generous by comparison. Incidentally in 2007, still under Labour stewardship and prior to the banking crisis, the UK debt was forecast to rise to 70%+ of GDP in 5-10 years because of the level of borrowing and velocity of increasing public expenditure, pretty much where it is now. Edit to add, the actual cash cost of the banking bailout was around £130bn, the other £300bn or so was as a guarantee against default on liabilities, but that has not actually been spent, but of course has to be reflected in the national accounts as a provision just in case. Edited October 16, 2014 by grrclark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 (edited) absolute horlicks, he knew what he meant and had the crassness to even elaborate on it mindless piece of filth. KW so they aint taking the labour vote then? did you see the heywood result? KW yes they are they are doing well but i think it will hit the torys hardest Im no labour supporting socialist I read all the manifestos and voted for this tory government in the hope they would fairly sort the country out, but it was all lies and they reverted to type screwing the poor and helping their rich friends. Under this government its the poor doing the paying sometimes with their homes and even their lives. they dont call em the nasty party for nothing, never mind they can always afford to go to war Edited October 16, 2014 by overandunder2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead-Eyed Duck Posted October 17, 2014 Report Share Posted October 17, 2014 yes they are they are doing well but i think it will hit the torys hardest they dont call em the nasty party for nothing, never mind they can always afford to go to war Sorry, but what on earth are you on about? The last major wars that we were involved in was our good old friends Tony Bliar's involvement in Iraq when he cosied up to George Bush Jnr. Then the involvement in Afghanistan was also Labour lead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
four-wheel-drive Posted October 17, 2014 Report Share Posted October 17, 2014 Its a funny old world if all of this money that is spend on waging wars that cannot be won was spent on helping people one has to think what life for us all would be like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted October 17, 2014 Report Share Posted October 17, 2014 Its a funny old world if all of this money that is spend on waging wars that cannot be won was spent on helping people one has to think what life for us all would be like. Even more crowded than it already is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keg Posted October 17, 2014 Report Share Posted October 17, 2014 I came from a 2 up 2 down background, with a toilet in the backyard. When the wife and I got married we did without - no phone in the house for many years; no washing machine for 2 years and no tv for 6 months etc., etc. What gets my goat is to see people in the food banks with mobile phones to their ears, wearing designer clothes etc. I have no doubt whatsoever that things have got worse for some, but hey, just in case you haven't noticed, the country is bust. Skint. Mainly because good olde Gordon Brown and Co borrowed too much. If you think that things cannot get worse then look at the likes of Greece etc who also borrowed too much and wanted everything now. Hands up the person who doesn't think that Milliband and Co wouldn't try and borrow their way again, to be thought of by the unthinking, that things are getting better? The Cons have got many things wrong, in particular that they are not "taxing" those on £squillions of bonuses when everyone else is tightening their belts. No one of a rational mind likes unfairness. But, one of the things that they are trying to do is reduce the national debt that was bleeding the country dry. So do those that earn those huge bonuses not pay tax? I agree the size of them may be obscene. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead-Eyed Duck Posted October 17, 2014 Report Share Posted October 17, 2014 So do those that earn those huge bonuses not pay tax? I agree the size of them may be obscene. You possibly misunderstand what I am saying. I am not saying that tax rates above the current 40% should be 90% above a £100k earnings, as this will simply drive the rich away to find better states to reside in (the past is full of such examples). What I am saying is that the super rich must be seen to bear some pain like the rest of us - otherwise most will shout "Unfair". We have all heard the drivel that pay for the super rich (including the heads of state run enterprises) must be so, otherwise these icons of capitalism will simply go elsewhere. It is simply a matter of striking a balance - if we bear some pain then so should they. Too much unreasonable pain will send them elsewhere - it is the message to those at the bottom of the pile that matters. We have to attract the entrepreneurs in our society to stay here, otherwise why should they (would you, if you lost 80% of your earnings in tax? See what is happening in France where the socialists seem to rule the roost - where is their economy going?). It is all a matter of balance, and I do accept that balance from a socialist point of view may be totally different from a capitalist viewpoint Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fisherman Mike Posted October 17, 2014 Report Share Posted October 17, 2014 Rather than use your one way only spin and manage a dig at UKIP why not simply condemn a nasty vicious callous piece of dog manure oh sorry forgot he's a con. KW Hey... get your head out of you **** for a minute and listen to the take of Freud's comments from the Father of a disabled son who actually wholeheartedly agreed with them. His comments have been completely misconstrued and taken out of context. I wasn't having a dig at the u KKK ip party at all... but your vexatious condemnation of a man who has made a genuine mistake just about illustrates what it and you are all about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted October 17, 2014 Report Share Posted October 17, 2014 Hey... get your head out of you **** for a minute and listen to the take of Freud's comments from the Father of a disabled son who actually wholeheartedly agreed with them. His comments have been completely misconstrued and taken out of context. I wasn't having a dig at the u KKK ip party at all... but your vexatious condemnation of a man who has made a genuine mistake just about illustrates what it and you are all about. it is mate it is, and you are defending a buffoon who did not make a mistake as well you know ,can you not lose an argument without being personal or is it you just hate being wrong all the time,either way wind your neck in. KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sitsinhedges Posted October 17, 2014 Report Share Posted October 17, 2014 With regards to the statement that disabled people aren't worth the minimum wage. Surely if a more capable able bodied person is only worth the minimum wage logic would say a less able person must therefore be worth less, as politically incorrect as it is to say so in the times we live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted October 17, 2014 Report Share Posted October 17, 2014 With regards to the statement that disabled people aren't worth the minimum wage. Surely if a more capable able bodied person is only worth the minimum wage logic would say a less able person must therefore be worth less, as politically incorrect as it is to say so in the times we live. nothing to do with being PC more to do with decency KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fisherman Mike Posted October 17, 2014 Report Share Posted October 17, 2014 With regards to the statement that disabled people aren't worth the minimum wage. Surely if a more capable able bodied person is only worth the minimum wage logic would say a less able person must therefore be worth less, as politically incorrect as it is to say so in the times we live. This is what he was trying to say in fact albeit badly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sitsinhedges Posted October 17, 2014 Report Share Posted October 17, 2014 nothing to do with being PC more to do with decency KW I thought when you employed someone you paid them according to their ability, otherwise it's just more charity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted October 17, 2014 Report Share Posted October 17, 2014 We can give money, like it's going out of fashion, to overseas dictators and just about anyone who wants a share of our cake, but Freud is reluctant to pay disabled workers in our own country. Cameron isn't supporting Freud. If Freud has done nothing wrong, why is he back-tracking? Freud is a disgrace. 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.