• The Forums are now open to new registrations, adverts are also being de-tuned.

The Dread Budget - Be very Afraid !

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow what a cleverly thought out and reasoned response! :rolleyes:

fwiw, I don't read any newspapers - does anyone anymore?
 
Ohhh now you've got me started.



The same long term able bodied unemployed should not be paid in cash but into an account where funds can only be accessed by a debit card that will only allow spending on certain products. (no more child benefit spending on fags booze or drugs)

.

This already happens. The Healthy Start scheme run by the Government gives claimants batches of vouchers worth £3.10 each to spend on fresh vegetables and milk. They can not be spent on booze or fags let alone drugs, in theory.

Of course if you make it harder for people to afford life's little luxuries, then they have a habit of circumventing your aims. Lost revenue on fags and booze already runs into £millions. Something in the order of 30% of fags are black market ones, and the booze market is full of duty evaded alcohol. Why pay £5+ a packet when you can buy them for £2.50? Your proposal will just make things worse.

And if you don't give them the cash then they will just steal it any way.
 
The same long term able bodied unemployed should not be paid in cash but into an account where funds can only be accessed by a debit card that will only allow spending on certain products. (no more child benefit spending on fags booze or drugs)

how about vouchers redeemable in supermarkets covering all the healthy food groups. The benefit to NHS will be a Brucie Bonus.

and the £400 per week limiit on housing benefit!!!!!!!! OMG that some size mortgage on Interest only.
 
Of course if you make it harder for people to afford life's little luxuries, then they have a habit of circumventing your aims. Lost revenue on fags and booze already runs into £millions. Something in the order of 30% of fags are black market ones, and the booze market is full of duty evaded alcohol. Why pay £5+ a packet when you can buy them for £2.50? Your proposal will just make things worse.

And if you don't give them the cash then they will just steal it any way.

They couldn't buy black market anything if we dont pay them in cash.

They say that 1% of society are responsible for 99% of crimes. The money we would spend on locking up the little gits permanently (3 strikes and out) could easily be found with all the savings on policing and insurance.

All I hear are nay sayers but no alternatives are forthcoming.
 
They couldn't buy black market anything if we dont pay them in cash.

.

Well its funny how the addicts manage to find the cash to feed their habit. Things get bartered and sold ultimately for cash. The black market would be awash with vegetables.
 
Well its funny how the addicts manage to find the cash to feed their habit. Things get bartered and sold ultimately for cash. The black market would be awash with vegetables.

You are kidding right? :D

Ultimately, it will turn the tales and just make getting a bloody job the easy option.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by s88
Fully agree, we eventually get to 50 % tax, by whatever means.
Could be more direct like Oz, but it all comes to the same thing.

I cannot help but feel there is raging inflation, like a shirt worth a fiver; shops claim is reduced from 80 quid to 60 and you are supposed to feel you are getting a bargain.
Amazing when it all comes out of the same far Eastern sweat shops. ( Countries)


We already live in one of the most unequal societies in the Developed World. As a result, we all suffer one way or another from the countless social problems that this produces.

Why would any sane person want to introduce such a regressive taxation policy that exacerbates the social divide and sees the wealthy keep a higher proportion of what they earn whilst the tax burden on the poorest would increase hugely in proportion to their disposable income.

The only party stupid enough to suggest a 'fair' flat rate of income tax at the last election was UKIP and thank goodness the electorate didn't give them a single seat.

Not sure the above reply is an answer to my original post??
 
Too many so called poor people have sat dishes and 50 inch plasmas, so that cannot be right.

Too many young girls get pregnant to get a house and claim no father around. That cannot be right.

Sadly as Dave edmunds sang, you have "to be cruel to be kind".
Unless you remove this reward for being an idle sponging sod then the situation will not change.
 
Too many so called poor people have sat dishes and 50 inch plasmas, so that cannot be right.

Too many young girls get pregnant to get a house and claim no father around. That cannot be right.

Sadly as Dave edmunds sang, you have "to be cruel to be kind".
Unless you remove this reward for being an idle sponging sod then the situation will not change.

50 inch plasmas don't make people happy, these are just scraps that are kicked down to poor people to shut them up. education, health and good prospects are what people need, but no government wants there electorate to be healthy and intelligent because if they were they might ask questions like, why have we bailed out privately run banks to tune of billions? why have we declared illegal war after war for the benefit of some well placed american shareholders? why have have we auctioned off all the public services and public companies for a fraction of there value so that the MP's that brokered the deal can one day sit on the board of directors of the same company? why do we have no manufacturing industry?
 
Wow what a cleverly thought out and reasoned response! :rolleyes:

fwiw, I don't read any newspapers - does anyone anymore?
I was just amazed by the suggestion that trying to force people off benefits and into non existent (for the unskilled in huge areas of the country) jobs would somehow reduce crime levels. It would do quite the opposite.

It's about as plausible as the idea of jailing people permanently for petty crime. I thought that this sort mentality went out of the window when we stopped sending people to Australia aboard convict ships for stealing bread.

Any politician silly enough to give public credence to either suggestion would be seen as deluded and rightly so.
 
Unless you remove this reward for being an idle sponging sod then the situation will not change.

I used to subscribe to this mindset but as I've got older I'm not so sure.

America uses this mindset and chooses to ignore the millions of uneducated people that live below the breadline. It doesn't work.

Mrs M has Multiple Sclerosis and would be entirely reliant on benefits if I wasn't around. Clearly her medical condition is such that it's not even a consideration that she should be "entitled" to these benefits, but there are levels of this condition where that's not so clear, how would suggest a reasonable assessment of these borderline cases is made?

My father is a good example, he has had a heart bypass and cancer and has never claimed a penny in his life, he's recently had his blue badge taken away as he can walk 10 yards under his own steam (he can't manage the 10 yards back though!), he's 74 and genuinely needs one of these badges - but the criteria is very black and white.

Also how do you assess how much effort someone is putting into trying to find a job, it's not easy to genuinely address.

The system we currently have has some obvious failings, but I'm not entirely sure what the answer is, you will always get an element of people slipping through the net that shouldn't be entitled to claim - but for the case that the greater good are cared for then that's something you have to live with.

I would like to see more severe penalties for transgressors and particularly serial transgressors that set out to defraud.

Some obvious failings have been addressed int his budget such as housing benefit caps that will stop the oddities of families of 15 getting a £5 Million house rented for them in Westminster, that's common sense and good to see.
 
Last edited:
Quote:
Originally Posted by s88
Fully agree, we eventually get to 50 % tax, by whatever means.
Could be more direct like Oz, but it all comes to the same thing.

I cannot help but feel there is raging inflation, like a shirt worth a fiver; shops claim is reduced from 80 quid to 60 and you are supposed to feel you are getting a bargain.
Amazing when it all comes out of the same far Eastern sweat shops. ( Countries)


We already live in one of the most unequal societies in the Developed World. As a result, we all suffer one way or another from the countless social problems that this produces.

Why would any sane person want to introduce such a regressive taxation policy that exacerbates the social divide and sees the wealthy keep a higher proportion of what they earn whilst the tax burden on the poorest would increase hugely in proportion to their disposable income.

The only party stupid enough to suggest a 'fair' flat rate of income tax at the last election was UKIP and thank goodness the electorate didn't give them a single seat.

Not sure the above reply is an answer to my original post??
It's an answer to anyone concurring with the idea of introducing a single flat rate of income tax.
 
Do you need any more evidence ???

If you really do then the following are useful starting points:

Social inequality gap remains, report finds - UK Politics, UK - The Independent
Why Britain's battle to bring down social inequality has failed | Society | The Guardian

The first one is actually a report commissioned by the last Labour government and highlights their own failings in trying to address the issue of massive social inequality.

However, anyone who can see beyond the end of their nose doesn't need reports and research as the evidence is there for anyone who cares to see it. Haven't you ever asked yourself why:
- The top 1% of the population owns nearly 25% of the nations wealth
- The lower 50% owns about 7%
- Our rates of crime are amongst the highest in the West - especially violent crime
- We have the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe
- So many of our young people still leave school with few if any qualifications
- We have over 1 million young people who are workless and not in any sort of training or education
- We jail a higher proportion of the population than any other developed nation apart from the USA (a society with even greater wealth disparity than our own).

There's your evidence for goodness sake.
Yes,13 years of Socialist misrule has much to answer for
 
Mudster, mail 53, thanks for the mail and I fully agree with you.
My father could not walk and was disabled, yet people came and interviewed him on a regular basis. The condition was never going to improve.
He even had one of those three wheeled vehicles, with a Villiers motorbike engine in that Stirling Moss wanted off the roads.
He worked or tried to for most of his shortened life.

There will always be genuine claimants.
I just think that I would be prepared to sweep the streets for my benefit payment.

Get them cleaning the road side verges!
And yes I still think prisoners should be breaking rocks or cleaning the M1!!
 
Mudster, mail 53, thanks for the mail and I fully agree with you.
My father could not walk and was disabled, yet people came and interviewed him on a regular basis. The condition was never going to improve.
He even had one of those three wheeled vehicles, with a Villiers motorbike engine in that Stirling Moss wanted off the roads.
He worked or tried to for most of his shortened life.

There will always be genuine claimants.
I just think that I would be prepared to sweep the streets for my benefit payment.

Get them cleaning the road side verges!
And yes I still think prisoners should be breaking rocks or cleaning the M1!!


if they are going to sweep the streets why not pay them a wage that a street sweeper would be paid?
 
Mention was made in the Budget Speech of instances of housing benefit of as much as £107000.:eek: Can that be an accurate amount and if so what sort of families qualify?
 
Yes,13 years of Socialist misrule has much to answer for

I don't think New Labour could reasonably be called 'Socialist' even with the loosest interpretation of the word. Agree with the '13 years of misrule' bit though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom