The Politics Thread

[thebish]

And? We didn't have a car when I was a kid, didn't stop my mum walking the mile or so to Asda and back

i bet you take your car...

[BWFC_Insane]

I'd like to know what all the unpaid tax from the FTSE 100 companies, their execs, etc is spent on.

I'd rather know what OUR MONEY there is being spent on than a few benefits claimants who have the audacity to smoke and get a taxi.....

[BWFC_Insane]

And? We didn't have a car when I was a kid, didn't stop my mum walking the mile or so to Asda and back

i bet you take your car...

Yes but anyone on benefits should be made to live a life of purgatory as a punishment for being someone Mr Cameron has deemed doesn't deserve a job and made redundant.

Or for having the audacity to have children.

Basically anyone who has ever received child benefit should

1) Not have a car
2) Walk everywhere
3) Not smoke
4) Not buy alcohol or junk food
5) Buy a lottery ticket....

[Bruce Rioja]

And? We didn't have a car when I was a kid, didn't stop my mum walking the mile or so to Asda and back

i bet you take your car...

Yes but anyone on benefits should be made to live a life of purgatory as a punishment for being someone Mr Cameron has deemed doesn't deserve a job and made redundant.

Or for having the audacity to have children.

Basically anyone who has ever received child benefit should

1) Not have a car
2) Walk everywhere
3) Not smoke
4) Not buy alcohol or junk food
5) Buy a lottery ticket....

You're correct on the numbered points, but, as ever, you're full of shit on the rest of it. Try a little sugar, it'll help your bitterness

[Bruce Rioja]

And? We didn't have a car when I was a kid, didn't stop my mum walking the mile or so to Asda and back

i bet you take your car...

Of course, but that's not the point

Actually, I don't always, seriously.

[BWFC_Insane]

And? We didn't have a car when I was a kid, didn't stop my mum walking the mile or so to Asda and back

i bet you take your car...

Yes but anyone on benefits should be made to live a life of purgatory as a punishment for being someone Mr Cameron has deemed doesn't deserve a job and made redundant.

Or for having the audacity to have children.

Basically anyone who has ever received child benefit should

1) Not have a car
2) Walk everywhere
3) Not smoke
4) Not buy alcohol or junk food
5) Buy a lottery ticket....

You're correct on the numbered points, but, as ever, you're full of shit on the rest of it. Try a little sugar, it'll help your bitterness

Bitterness?

Nah....

I'd just like to create a society where we lose the "I'm alright jack" mentality and create one where we look to give everyone the best opportunites and chances possible and realise that some may need more help than others. And rather than depriving those people, we try and help them.

And we also stop turning a blind eye to the massive amounts of money the top 5% take out of our country, and away from the tax payer. And with it look at stopping folk from earning ridiculous salaries and then compounding that with massive "self appointed" bonuses.

Not bitter. Just got my eyes open.

[Bruce Rioja]

So taxes for taxis then (and tabs, ale and scratchcards). Reet-oh.

[thebish]

Actually, I don't always, seriously.

only when you're having your leather seats buffed or the chauffeur has the day off!

[Bruce Rioja]

Actually, I don't always, seriously.

only when you're having your leather seats buffed or the chauffeur has the day off!

Nah, when I've just ran out of wine

[Worthy4England]

And? We didn't have a car when I was a kid, didn't stop my mum walking the mile or so to Asda and back

i bet you take your car...

Yes but anyone on benefits should be made to live a life of purgatory as a punishment for being someone Mr Cameron has deemed doesn't deserve a job and made redundant.

Or for having the audacity to have children.

Basically anyone who has ever received child benefit should

1) Not have a car
2) Walk everywhere
3) Not smoke
4) Not buy alcohol or junk food
5) Buy a lottery ticket....

You're correct on the numbered points, but, as ever, you're full of shit on the rest of it. Try a little sugar, it'll help your bitterness

Bitterness?

Nah....

I'd just like to create a society where we lose the "I'm alright jack" mentality and create one where we look to give everyone the best opportunites and chances possible and realise that some may need more help than others. And rather than depriving those people, we try and help them.

And we also stop turning a blind eye to the massive amounts of money the top 5% take out of our country, and away from the tax payer. And with it look at stopping folk from earning ridiculous salaries and then compounding that with massive "self appointed" bonuses.

Not bitter. Just got my eyes open.

I think you may have your eyes open, but you're obviously wearing sunglasses and it's midnight.

The question was around capping benefits based on the average national wage - so you know the average that working households actually get, before (I think) they pay tax. I don't see any major problem with that to be honest. If most working people can manage on that amount or less, then so should claimants be able to do so.

Sure, there's a wider discussion about other benefits etc. but on the principle that some benefits claimants would get nothing like the national average wage in benefits, then maybe capping those claimants who are clearly taking the piss, could provide more for those claimants who aren't.

[BWFC_Insane]

Yes but anyone on benefits should be made to live a life of purgatory as a punishment for being someone Mr Cameron has deemed doesn't deserve a job and made redundant.

Or for having the audacity to have children.

Basically anyone who has ever received child benefit should

1) Not have a car
2) Walk everywhere
3) Not smoke
4) Not buy alcohol or junk food
5) Buy a lottery ticket....

You're correct on the numbered points, but, as ever, you're full of shit on the rest of it. Try a little sugar, it'll help your bitterness

Bitterness?

Nah....

I'd just like to create a society where we lose the "I'm alright jack" mentality and create one where we look to give everyone the best opportunites and chances possible and realise that some may need more help than others. And rather than depriving those people, we try and help them.

And we also stop turning a blind eye to the massive amounts of money the top 5% take out of our country, and away from the tax payer. And with it look at stopping folk from earning ridiculous salaries and then compounding that with massive "self appointed" bonuses.

Not bitter. Just got my eyes open.

I think you may have your eyes open, but you're obviously wearing sunglasses and it's midnight.

The question was around capping benefits based on the average national wage - so you know the average that working households actually get, before (I think) they pay tax. I don't see any major problem with that to be honest. If most working people can manage on that amount or less, then so should claimants be able to do so.

Sure, there's a wider discussion about other benefits etc. but on the principle that some benefits claimants would get nothing like the national average wage in benefits, then maybe capping those claimants who are clearly taking the piss, could provide more for those claimants who aren't.

And I'd have no issue with that.

I get irritated when stereotypes are used to describe all claimants and when the right wingers make the welfare state into a bigger issue than it is, but will turn a blind eye to huge bonuses paid to failures (not in the RBS case but plenty of others) and tax avoidance at the top end.

About time we tackled the root causes of poverty and folk who cannot get jobs and those that don't want to rather than keep pretending if we just keep bashing em they will get themselves sorted!

[Worthy4England]

People forget sometimes though that whilst Hester (or whoever) might have a big figure for his salary and bonus, he pays in to the system rather than takes out. Failure is a difficult position to judge. When everyone is making losses, is failure not making a profit or minimising the loss? I'm not sure what blind eye could be turned in to an all seeing eye - private company should be able to reward as it feels it needs to. No one is obliged to work for them if they disagree.

Tax avoidance - agree wholeheartedly - should be sorted out as best as able - but so should "doing foreigners", getting paid cash in hand etc. what's wrong is wrong, regardless of the amounts.

On root cause, happy to help people who can't get jobs - often not their fault if the educational system hasn't helped them. Those that don't want to - not happy to help - I'd rather make it difficult for them.

[Bruce Rioja]

I get irritated when stereotypes are used to describe all claimants

Oh my giddy aunt. If you're eyes are so "wide open" then why are you so blind?

You have a problem with the 'I'm alright, Jack' attitude? So do I, Sunshine. I have a problem with getting up at all hours and working to all hours to fund dosser's taxis to Asda. They are indeed 'alright, Jack'.

Nobody's said that all claimants are the same, that's just something that goes on behind your 'wide open' eyes.

If you're happy to have the piss taken out of you by those that have benefits amounting to more than they could earn then fair enough.

Some of us aren't.

[William the White]

People forget sometimes though that whilst Hester (or whoever) might have a big figure for his salary and bonus, he pays in to the system rather than takes out. Failure is a difficult position to judge. When everyone is making losses, is failure not making a profit or minimising the loss? I'm not sure what blind eye could be turned in to an all seeing eye - private company should be able to reward as it feels it needs to. No one is obliged to work for them if they disagree.

Tax avoidance - agree wholeheartedly - should be sorted out as best as able - but so should "doing foreigners", getting paid cash in hand etc. what's wrong is wrong, regardless of the amounts.

On root cause, happy to help people who can't get jobs - often not their fault if the educational system hasn't helped them. Those that don't want to - not happy to help - I'd rather make it difficult for them.

Just looking at the general level of comment it's notable that people find it easier to discover failure in claimants (when there are few jobs for them to claim) than in bankers who have failed to hit their targets in lending to small businesses (a good way to take steps in making things better)...

This is such a common phenomenon that for me indicates the profound truth of Marx and Engels in their work The German Ideology - published in 1845/6 - in which they advanced the notion of a 'false consciousness' whereby the ruling ideas of a society are the ideas of its ruling class...

Claimants, for the most part, are victims of a rotten economic system... bankers for the most part are victors in the same system...

[Worthy4England]

People forget sometimes though that whilst Hester (or whoever) might have a big figure for his salary and bonus, he pays in to the system rather than takes out. Failure is a difficult position to judge. When everyone is making losses, is failure not making a profit or minimising the loss? I'm not sure what blind eye could be turned in to an all seeing eye - private company should be able to reward as it feels it needs to. No one is obliged to work for them if they disagree.

Tax avoidance - agree wholeheartedly - should be sorted out as best as able - but so should "doing foreigners", getting paid cash in hand etc. what's wrong is wrong, regardless of the amounts.

On root cause, happy to help people who can't get jobs - often not their fault if the educational system hasn't helped them. Those that don't want to - not happy to help - I'd rather make it difficult for them.

Just looking at the general level of comment it's notable that people find it easier to discover failure in claimants (when there are few jobs for them to claim) than in bankers who have failed to hit their targets in lending to small businesses (a good way to take steps in making things better)...

This is such a common phenomenon that for me indicates the profound truth of Marx and Engels in their work The German Ideology - published in 1845/6 - in which they advanced the notion of a 'false consciousness' whereby the ruling ideas of a society are the ideas of its ruling class...

Claimants, for the most part, are victims of a rotten economic system... bankers for the most part are victors in the same system...

If we look at that a moment, Will, the first mention I can find of the F word was in the context of paying bonuses to big banking failures (I'm not sure anyone mentioned it in the context of claimants).

It would be just as irresponsible for financial institutions to loan out to small businesses with really ropey business plans, unable or unlikely to survive the economic downturn (yet another one) and cover the debt - therefore creating another tab that someone has to pick up. Bank lending to businesses has exceeded that required by Project Merlin by about 11% (or had in the last reported quarter), but yes it missed the target for small businesses by about 1.5%. Just using that as a political headline doesn't really wash, I'm sure you'd agree that irresponsible lending wouldn't make anyone better off.

The wider problem isn't whether the banks have hit an arbitrary target (which quite frankly is stuff and nonsense), it's whether they're supporting businesses (or all sizes and scale) in a manner that has some prospect of having the debt repaid without creating further debt for people.

An interesting digression, but back to the plot.

I still don't see any problem (yes there will be exceptions to the rule) with capping benefits at a level that doesn't exceed the average national wage - without at any point trying to judge whether the recipient(s) are successes or failures. Having people getting for nowt, as much as those people working for a living would hardly make them victims in my eyes.

[Lord Kangana]

I enjoy a daily bonus for simultaneously serving what is on the menu and it being hot. If it should be.

They hand me the keys to the city if I manage to turn a profit by achieving these significant milestones.

Or its called doing what I'm paid to. One of the two, slips my mind at this moment, eating too much gold always plays with my memory like that.

[Worthy4England]

I enjoy a daily bonus for simultaneously serving what is on the menu and it being hot. If it should be.

They hand me the keys to the city if I manage to turn a profit by achieving these significant milestones.

Or its called doing what I'm paid to. One of the two, slips my mind at this moment, eating too much gold always plays with my memory like that.

And if I enjoy it, I leave a tip. That's a bonus. And what's more it's not contractual which makes it an even better bonus as you're not expecting it.

What's your view on capping benefits at the national average wage?

[thebish]

I enjoy a daily bonus for simultaneously serving what is on the menu and it being hot. If it should be.

They hand me the keys to the city if I manage to turn a profit by achieving these significant milestones.

Or its called doing what I'm paid to. One of the two, slips my mind at this moment, eating too much gold always plays with my memory like that.

And if I enjoy it, I leave a tip. That's a bonus. And what's more it's not contractual which makes it an even better bonus as you're not expecting it.

no he's not - cos the waitress nicks it!

[Worthy4England]

I enjoy a daily bonus for simultaneously serving what is on the menu and it being hot. If it should be.

They hand me the keys to the city if I manage to turn a profit by achieving these significant milestones.

Or its called doing what I'm paid to. One of the two, slips my mind at this moment, eating too much gold always plays with my memory like that.

And if I enjoy it, I leave a tip. That's a bonus. And what's more it's not contractual which makes it an even better bonus as you're not expecting it.

no he's not - cos the waitress nicks it!

How their business divvies the bonus up, is up to them. But even bankers don't get daily bonuses.

[BWFC_Insane]

Surely the tip is for the 'service' rather than the food per se, and is used to supplement the minimum wage that shift working waiters and waitresses earn?