Jump to content

14 million in poverty


Hamster
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

So we should just cease all the CEO’s earning and redistribute it to the workers? 

Did I say that? Or did you?

 

2 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

Whats stopping all those workers going and becoming CEO’s themselves? 

What's stopping a private in the army from becoming a brigadier? 

5 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

The man on the factory floor has invested and put in the same as the company CEO has he not,

What makes you think CEOs have more skin in the game than an employee who maybe has decades of his working life? And there are an awful lot of CEOs and senior management with no downside risk at all. https://www.forbes.com/sites/joshuarogers/2015/04/29/when-investing-seek-out-ceos-who-are-all-in/#c3fb809625c5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 498
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

12 hours ago, Hamster said:

So basically it can't possibly be true because you happen to disagree. 

I just sooooooo knew this would all be their own fault. 

Just for the sake of argument what do the massive believe poverty should mean ? Bloated stomachs walking bare foot with flies round the mouth or having to go to food banks ? 

 😏 Did you even watch the report ? 

Im sorry for having an opinion. And reports can be made to look how ever they want us the public to see. 

So im not saying its their fault. At no point did I say that, but I get bored of hearing people say they cant afford their rent or mortgage but can afford £80 on a phone contract, £100 on sky per month, £400 a month on a car. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ShootingEgg said:

I get bored of hearing people say they cant afford their rent or mortgage but can afford £80 on a phone contract, £100 on sky per month, £400 a month on a car.

+1 - not to mention the foreign sunshine holidays, skiing (surprising how many manage to afford that these days), weekend breaks away, eating out, £500+ on each child at Christmas etc.  People I worked with complained about being 'hard up' and having to borrow on their credit cards etc, but would think nothing of spending £75 or £100 and up on an evening out at an event/concert/show with a meal and drinks.

There are a lot who think they are poor - and relatively few who are actually poor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ShootingEgg said:

but can afford £80 on a phone contract, £100 on sky per month, £400 a month on a car. 

The thing is though, that these are examples of what are almost necessities of modern life. Every last Bangladeshi worker here in Saudi has a smart-phone, and their pay is $150 a month. The £400 for the car? Unless you have no deadlines to meet, bus services have been pared to the point of uselessness in most of the country. You can't get to work without a car, and if you can't get to work you can't work. Me, I'd buy a cheap car for cash. But then again I have a few thousand cash and spare income for incidental repairs. A lot of people have no choice but lock themselves into the never never. £100 for Sky? Well, it's not exactly necessary, but hardly a wild extravagance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Hamster said:

A third of them children 😞  some will blame the victims by saying they're all lazy/smoke fags/have iphones/buy big screen TV's/refuse to work/blah blah blah but I say it's shameful and unless the gap between the super rich/rich and the poor is addressed there will be riots (the likes of which we have never seen) within our life time. 

Sadly,  a large number do have the things you mention, and do have their priorities wrong!  Closing the gap is a two-way street ! At the recent Labour Party Conference, there was a side room with a placard outside, where  party members were treated to a discussion on people  having the "Right Not to work"! and yet still  receiving benefits!  It,s easy to target super-rich,  but at the same time you have to deal with the rot in society,  that allows people to think that they can sit on their backsides, and have those of us who do work, contribute to their  lazy lifestyle! And there are plenty of those living near me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

The thing is though, that these are examples of what are almost necessities of modern life. Every last Bangladeshi worker here in Saudi has a smart-phone, and their pay is $150 a month. The £400 for the car? Unless you have no deadlines to meet, bus services have been pared to the point of uselessness in most of the country. You can't get to work without a car, and if you can't get to work you can't work. Me, I'd buy a cheap car for cash. But then again I have a few thousand cash and spare income for incidental repairs. A lot of people have no choice but lock themselves into the never never. £100 for Sky? Well, it's not exactly necessary, but hardly a wild extravagance.

Remove some of the "extravagances" and they are no longer in the "poverty"  trap! I had 2 bad unemployed  periods in the 80,s....I cut back on everything, paid my household bills, and went out and got a JOB! In the last 20 years, 3 million migrants from the EU turned up here, and got jobs. Yet we had 2 million unemployed! And we still have 2 million unemployed! So, quite clearly, there are some who do not want to work, and who believe they have a right to  benefits provided by those of us who do go to work! They do NOT!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

+1 - not to mention the foreign sunshine holidays, skiing (surprising how many manage to afford that these days), weekend breaks away, eating out, £500+ on each child at Christmas etc.  People I worked with complained about being 'hard up' and having to borrow on their credit cards etc, but would think nothing of spending £75 or £100 and up on an evening out at an event/concert/show with a meal and drinks.

There are a lot who think they are poor - and relatively few who are actually poor.

Correct!

27 minutes ago, ShootingEgg said:

Im sorry for having an opinion. And reports can be made to look how ever they want us the public to see. 

So im not saying its their fault. At no point did I say that, but I get bored of hearing people say they cant afford their rent or mortgage but can afford £80 on a phone contract, £100 on sky per month, £400 a month on a car. 

Right!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lloyd90 said:

It’s all down to perspective. 

Some people shout about numbers - “Mr X earns £2,000,000 a year and after taxes he takes home £1,000,000 a year! A million pound a year!! That’s obscene! No one should earn that!!” 

Another perspective is that person pays 50% of their income in tax! And £1,000,000 in tax is more than most people will ever pay in their lifetimes. 

Dont the top 1% pay over 90% of all income tax? 

Income tax brought in from the middle class is a drop in the ocean compared to the tax payed by a few individuals. 

Ive also read that when you account for free school, roads, public health etc etc, everything you benefit from in society, your a net drain until you earn over something like £50k a year, meaning you get out more than you put in. 

The average household income in the U.K. is £28k, so most households let alone individuals are benefitting from taxes payed by these elitist rich folk that some despise so much. 

 

 

 

Don't know where you got that info from, the top 1% have schemes in place when often they pay no tax ! That's half the reason we're in this mess. How did you figure out that the middle class tax is a drop in the ocean ? 

Bear in mind tax is not just what we pay as stoppages but everything we spend our already taxed money on is taxed again via VAT, fuel tax, congestion charges etc, when seen as a percentage of ones income 😉  paying a fiver to pop over the Dartford crossing feels a lot worse to the average man than it would say a millionaire. 

This subject is actually very much connected to tax avoidance, a subject which I know from previous experience the PigeonWatch massive think is a sign of intelligence for the culprits and damn the rest. 

42 minutes ago, ShootingEgg said:

Im sorry for having an opinion. And reports can be made to look how ever they want us the public to see. 

So im not saying its their fault. At no point did I say that, but I get bored of hearing people say they cant afford their rent or mortgage but can afford £80 on a phone contract, £100 on sky per month, £400 a month on a car. 

Where is your PROOF that the majority of the 14 million fall into that category ? Opinion is one thing proof is another. Here we have an official report that maintains this number of people fall into what is today defined as poverty or below levels, then we have people coming on with one liners, rhetorics and opinion suggesting they don't agree with those findings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, pinfireman said:

In the last 20 years, 3 million migrants from the EU turned up here, and got jobs.

Sure, but you're not really comparing apples with apples. Firstly, not everyone has it in them to up sticks and move to a different country to work. And the people that do are, by and large, among the more outgoing and energetic from within their societies. Secondly, because of the difference in pay rates between Britain and, say, Poland, Polish immigrants can afford to work in jobs significantly beneath their normal pay grade and still earn a higher wage than they'd earn at home. Consequently they will naturally perform better in those jobs than the local who is working to the max of his innate ability and training and thus be the first choice of employers. You'd need to go back to the village in Poland and find the chap sweeps the road there before running down our own road sweepers....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hamster said:

This subject is actually very much connected to tax avoidance, a subject which I know from previous experience the PigeonWatch massive think is a sign of intelligence for the culprits and damn the rest.

I think you are being very misleading here;  The previous thread covered evasion (illegal non payment of tax) and avoidance (minimising your tax by following and complying with the law).

My recollection (and anyone is welcome to go back and look through the rather long thread) was that the PigeonWatch massive was firmly and unanimously against evasion, and considered following the law and using such government provided schemes as ISAs, Pension Tax Relief etc. to be what most people sensibly do.  There was general disquiet over  'offshore' schemes and complex types of self employment contract back type schemes - but the government remove/should changes these 'opportunities' and not expect people to voluntarily ignore reliefs the system appears to provide.

You are not a 'culprit' if you have been complying with the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, pinfireman said:

Sadly,  a large number do have the things you mention, and do have their priorities wrong!  Closing the gap is a two-way street ! At the recent Labour Party Conference, there was a side room with a placard outside, where  party members were treated to a discussion on people  having the "Right Not to work"! and yet still  receiving benefits!  It,s easy to target super-rich,  but at the same time you have to deal with the rot in society,  that allows people to think that they can sit on their backsides, and have those of us who do work, contribute to their  lazy lifestyle! And there are plenty of those living near me!

Two assumptions made, one that I (or leftist/Corbynists/Marxists/communists/whatever) think we should target the "rich", secondly that poverty is always the fault of the victim and it's because they're lazy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Hamster said:

Where is your PROOF that the majority of the 14 million fall into that category ? Opinion is one thing proof is another. Here we have an official report that maintains this number of people fall into what is today defined as poverty or below levels, then we have people coming on with one liners, rhetorics and opinion suggesting they don't agree with those findings.

Are you saying an official report is 'proof ' that something is true now?

Im basing my opinion on what I see and hear from real people, not on some government bashing think tanks 'report' that is just trying to score political brownie points, and convince us we would all be better off under socialism.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

I think you are being very misleading here;  The previous thread covered evasion (illegal non payment of tax) and avoidance (minimising your tax by following and complying with the law).

My recollection (and anyone is welcome to go back and look through the rather long thread) was that the PigeonWatch massive was firmly and unanimously against evasion, and considered following the law and using such government provided schemes as ISAs, Pension Tax Relief etc. to be what most people sensibly do.  There was general disquiet over  'offshore' schemes and complex types of self employment contract back type schemes - but the government remove/should changes these 'opportunities' and not expect people to voluntarily ignore reliefs the system appears to provide.

You are not a 'culprit' if you have been complying with the law.

Tax avoidance and evasion are one and the same thing, just because it's "legal" doesn't make it right, ISA's and saving schemes are not even in the same league as what we're really talking about when referring to individuals and companies who earn millions in revenue but pay a pittance in tax and store the money in offshore accounts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

Sorry mate but your making out that your Mrs only 2 options are to either sit at home and claim benefits or work part time. 

Youve ignored all the options you’ve taken on your way to getting there. 

Surely you and your Mrs knew what you earned and knew how much childcare costs before you had kids? As I said previously you must of because you already had 2. 

Then you went and had not only 1 child, knowing you make set amount and what childcare costs, but at some point you also decided that you’d even have another child. You also knew you already have 2 kids that you likely pay towards. 

Many people would say - I earn X amount - can I afford to have that many kids? 

My mates dad had 2 kids then had a vasectomy. 

Many people on here have posted laughing about having one also, so sorry we will have to disagree, we are not born to breed, some people think it through carefully before making those decisions. 

 

Lots of people think it through and decide that they will be not very well off whilst their kids are young, but they can go back to work when they’re older. 

You really are something else.

my mrs fell pregnant while on the implant, out of our control . 

She hadn’t any children but accepted my previous 2 . Did you want her to abort ? 

The same happened the 2nd time so I’ve had the snip. 

Now she can either sit at home or work. Their is no insentive to work anymore.

 

im surprised a man in your back ground would come up with the comments you have. 

You won’t even leave the house in the snow earlier in the year to help others( I’m not crashing my car for my boss ) your words I believe ??? 

I work 60+ hours each week so it’s fine for me to get no help ? 

People that put in should be rewarded .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Are you saying an official report is 'proof ' that something is true now?

Im basing my opinion on what I see and hear from real people, not on some government bashing think tanks 'report' that is just trying to score political brownie points, and convince us we would all be better off under socialism.
 

No, I am just saying yours is just an opinion :), of course reports too can be misleading, exaggerated, flawed, etc, but at that level they are based on certain statistical facts and figures so they'll be a tad more reliable than your average "opinion" based on ones immediate surroundings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dekers said:

2 adults making 4 children doubles the population, it causes grief, nature deals with numbers but apparently I have to pay a load of tax to support those that can't support themselves.  People make lifestyle choices, but why am I meant to pay for them?   The Social system in this country was designed to deal with those in hardship from unforeseen/tragic circumstances, it was not intended for people to have as many children as they wanted and others to pay for them.  If everyone took that attitude just who will pay, the Government has no money, its mine, so if I have loads of children and don't pay into the Government kitty and expect to be paid out, where does the money come from?

I had the children I could afford, the lifestyle I could afford and planned for my retirement, along the road it seems I also paid for a lot of other peoples.

Just saying!

:good:

 

2 with 2 partners. I can’t dictate to my mrs that she can’t have kids because my ex has . 

My mrs was on the inplant both times so I’m not asking her to abort. I’m sniped now tho . Let’s hope that works 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW I simply don't think the number of children has a meaningful impact on the magnitude of the problem, there are far more factors involved than whether someone decides to have 2 or 2.4 children, these things cancel one another out, the real causes are elsewhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Hamster said:

Tax avoidance and evasion are one and the same thing, just because it's "legal" doesn't make it right, ISA's and saving schemes are not even in the same league as what we're really talking about when referring to individuals and companies who earn millions in revenue but pay a pittance in tax and store the money in offshore accounts. 

WRONG: They are not one and the 'same thing'.  One is illegal, the other is not.  That is all the difference in the world.  For one you go to jail (or pay a big fine), for the other - you get a bit more cash in your (or your shareholders) pockets quite legally.

If the tax rules (as the law) are wrong and there are legal ways for "individuals and companies who earn millions in revenue but pay a pittance in tax and store the money in offshore accounts." - then the laws must be changed.  You cannot expect people and companies to pay additional tax just because you think the law is in error.

It is the duty of a company board to maximise the companies returns for the owners (usually shareholders) and that includes both complying with the law and minimising the tax the company should pay. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

WRONG: They are not one and the 'same thing'.  One is illegal, the other is not.  That is all the difference in the world.  For one you go to jail (or pay a big fine), for the other - you get a bit more cash in your (or your shareholders) pockets quite legally.

If the tax rules (as the law) are wrong and there are legal ways for "individuals and companies who earn millions in revenue but pay a pittance in tax and store the money in offshore accounts." - then the laws must be changed.  You cannot expect people and companies to pay additional tax just because you think the law is in error.

It is the duty of a company board to maximise the companies returns for the owners (usually shareholders) and that includes both complying with the law and minimising the tax the company should pay. 

It's "legal" because laws are made to suit the rich, don't you see what is being done ? The collusion is 100% intentional. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know someone who earns over 25K a month, not in the UK, and has one house worth around 250K and another around 7-800K. He meets his wife wife at various locations around the globe and spends just the right number of days in the UK so he does not pay his whack in tax.

The rich get richer/greedier and the poor poorer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Hamster said:

It's "legal" because laws are made to suit the rich, don't you see what is being done ? The collusion is 100% intentional. 

The law is set by Parliament.  That is how a democracy works.  They are not set to suit the rich any more than the are made to suit the poor, or the pensioners, or the accountants,or single parents, or any other group.  They are set to provide a fair and balanced system that gives money for the government to spend on the country.  Of course there will be errors and the law will need changing and updating from time to time.  I agree that laws on offshore and big international companies needs updating, but that is for the government, NOT for people to make voluntary additional payments to solve!

You cannot expect people to pay more than they are legally bound to do ........ just because you happen to think that law is wrong or out of date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, henry d said:

I know someone who earns over 25K a month, not in the UK, and has one house worth around 250K and another around 7-800K. He meets his wife wife at various locations around the globe and spends just the right number of days in the UK so he does not pay his whack in tax.

The rich get richer/greedier and the poor poorer.

Maybe he doesnt like the weather ? 😃

Is he breaking any laws ? On the run ?
Lewis Hamilton amongst many others does far worse, is he a greedy so and so too ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, team tractor said:

You really are something else.

my mrs fell pregnant while on the implant, out of our control . 

She hadn’t any children but accepted my previous 2 . Did you want her to abort ? 

The same happened the 2nd time so I’ve had the snip. 

Now she can either sit at home or work. Their is no insentive to work anymore.

 

im surprised a man in your back ground would come up with the comments you have. 

You won’t even leave the house in the snow earlier in the year to help others( I’m not crashing my car for my boss ) your words I believe ??? 

I work 60+ hours each week so it’s fine for me to get no help ? 

People that put in should be rewarded .

See, I told you this would get emotive and personal. Your taking this as a personal dig at you. 

But without looking at it from your personal perspective, your Mrs fell pregnant not once but twice whilst on the implant. Why didn’t you get the snip after the first time the implant failed? Clearly it wasn’t effective. 

Why didn’t you use a condom? You appear to be trying to blame me because of what happened. Maybe you should look closer to home. 

 

Your Mrs didn’t have any kids of her own... have you considered that maybe she didn’t get pregnant TWICE by accident? Surely the first ‘accident’ was a give away that what you were doing wasn’t effective, so you did it again 😣 isn’t the definition of insanity doing something over and over and expecting different results? 

 

 

Not sure what me not driving in dangerous conditions has to do with anything? 

Maybe I should go around running into burning buildings trying to help people, putting myself at risk to show off what a great person I am? 

 

Clutching at straws there aren’t you? 

End of the day you could have aborted if you CHOSE TO. Lots of people make that decision everyday for a variety of reasons. You CHOSE to have 4 kids. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...