Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login

Tackling the Welfare budget

last reply
88 replies
2.9k views
0 watchers
0 likes
Quote by Max777
Personally, I would rather have well educated people in government not socialists devoid of original thought. If you saw Question Time last night - there were two female MP's on. One was educated, articulate, polite and put across a compelling argument - the other was like a pre programmed tape machine - devoid of original thought and unable to put a compelling case other than to attack her opposite number. It was actually quite embarrassing for her.

You didn't rate the Shadow Attorney General then? Claire Perry was much easier on the eye too! wink
Exactly - It was the "eyes looking up" and then launching into a pre prepared monologue. Claire Perry seemed sharper, more intelligent and really on the ball.
Quote by Too Hot
Personally, I would rather have well educated people in government not socialists devoid of original thought. If you saw Question Time last night - there were two female MP's on. One was educated, articulate, polite and put across a compelling argument - the other was like a pre programmed tape machine - devoid of original thought and unable to put a compelling case other than to attack her opposite number. It was actually quite embarrassing for her.

You didn't rate the Shadow Attorney General then? Claire Perry was much easier on the eye too! wink
Exactly - It was the "eyes looking up" and then launching into a pre prepared monologue. Claire Perry seemed sharper, more intelligent and really on the ball.
The pre prepared lines seem to consist of 'the government is out of touch' 'and ''the austerity measures are not working' Labour obviously believe that if they trot these lines out often enough, the electorate will believe them ( a tactic favoured by a certain poster to this forum) without ever having to divulge their policies, should they exist.
Quote by Max777
Labour obviously believe that if they trot these lines out often enough, the electorate will believe them ( a tactic favoured by a certain poster to this forum)

No.....
I wonder who that could be...... :confused:
So by stopping child benefit this Government thinks it is a wonderful idea for their austerity measures? What really?
This is how this ' new measure ' works. If one member of a family receives MORE than a year as a salary, the benefit has to be taxed up until a parent gets and then it stops all together. But........if one parent earns and the second parent also earns then they carry on getting the benefit. So a joint family income of £ can still get the benefit. loon:loon: Absolutely bonkers and the people who make up these new rules must have very thick custard for brains.
Now I know that TH would think that is not a lot of money rolleyes but does he then think that 100 grand is also not a lot of money? What a persons thinking is to think that is not a lot of money nowadays, and then did not know that child benefit existed well..........speaks volumes I think.
Isn't that because people are no longer taxed as a couple, star?
Remind me, which party changed the rules?
Quote by starlightcouple
So by stopping child benefit this Government thinks it is a wonderful idea for their austerity measures? What really?
This is how this ' new measure ' works. If one member of a family receives MORE than a year as a salary, the benefit has to be taxed up until a parent gets and then it stops all together. But........if one parent earns and the second parent also earns then they carry on getting the benefit. So a joint family income of £ can still get the benefit. loon:loon: Absolutely bonkers and the people who make up these new rules must have very thick custard for brains.
Now I know that TH would think that is not a lot of money rolleyes but does he then think that 100 grand is also not a lot of money? What a persons thinking is to think that is not a lot of money nowadays, and then did not know that child benefit existed well..........speaks volumes I think.

You are describing the measures already in place. What we have been talking about for the last four pages is what Ian Duncan Smith spoke about on the Today programme earlier this week - it was just an idea, not the existing policy you have described.
As mentionev above, it was the previous Labour government got rid of married couples joint taxation. Ooops, how inconvenient.
Selectively quoting me is a poor show Star - I said that £65,000 in not a lot for an MP because many of the highly qualified MP's could get three or four times that in the private sector.
Quote by GnV
Isn't that because people are no longer taxed as a couple, star?

My point GnV ( which I think you know wink ), was to make others aware that a household can earn a huge sum of money and still get the benefit. Well a huge sum of money to some of course.
Quote by GnV
Remind me, which party changed the rules?

Is there a difference in these parties then? Oh yes one is in the blue corner and one in the red corner. They all look like Muppets from the tv show of old. They all tell lies and tell us what we think we want to hear. To be honest GnV it could have been either one of them.
Quote by Too Hot
You are describing the measures already in place. What we have been talking about for the last four pages is what Ian Duncan Smith spoke about on the Today programme earlier this week - it was just an idea, not the existing policy you have described.

An idea? No it was to judge peoples reactions to this, hence it has got all of us debating it. It will go ahead as they dare not target their rich buds, so will target every single benefit they can. They have targeted others and now it is the child allowances turn.
Quote by Too Hot
As mentionev above, it was the previous Labour government got rid of married couples joint taxation. Ooops, how inconvenient.

The point? When you apply for benefits, those benefits are determined on the household income unless it is not a means tested benefit. If they do it for most other benefits, should it then not also be done for this benefit? If it is going to be a means tested benefit now then is a household budget of nearly a 100 thousand pounds not considered a figure that does not entitle a household to child allowance?
Quote by Too Hot
Selectively quoting me is a poor show Star - I said that £65,000 in not a lot for an MP because many of the highly qualified MP's could get three or four times that in the private sector.

is three times the national average for a wage. Are you seriously telling me that a person who earns this money is worth it with about 20 weeks a year off, a few consultations with their constituents. Sitting in the House shouting ' here here 'as loud as possible whilst waving white pieces of paper? What £65 grand a year?
I am aware there is a bit more involved than that, but you kinda get my drift? Well Not your good self Too Hot, as you have already stated your thoughts on the sum of
A lot of those ' highly qualified ' MP's already have very lucrative jobs away from Westminster. Like a Doctor in my old Surgery who worked as both a GP and an MP, both jobs running side by side. Or the other MP's who run consultation workshops for 4 grand a pop. So I doubt very much that your average MP only earns the paltry amount of 65 thousand pounds a year. Of course if you become a minister that rates are much much higher.......well to some of course.
For a year it should be a full time job. A job that takes up all of your time being the important job it is supposed to be. Yet how can an MP do a GP's job concurrently ? An MP's job is obviously nowhere near a full time occupation, and for that kind of money it bloody well should be. The child benefits are now the next benefit in line for cuts .
Quote by star
To be honest GnV it could have been either one of them.

But it wasn't, was it star.... It was a socialist government rolleyes
Quote by star
Or the other MP's who run consultation workshops for 4 grand a pop.

Or an ex socialist Prime Minister with an amassed property portfolio in the Millions and now reportedly worth as much as an MP earns a year for spouting his evil thoughts on the American speaker trail for about 10 minutes on his feet.
Quote by star
To be honest GnV it could have been either one of them.

Quote by GnV
But it wasn't, was it star.... It was a socialist government rolleyes

What you mean 'NEW Labour '? Socialist? I somehow do not look at them that way now, as the word Socialist when referring to a political party, is not how I would describe new Labour. They are a Tory party but kept their name.
Quote by star
Or the other MP's who run consultation workshops for 4 grand a pop.

Quote by GnV
Or an ex socialist Prime Minister with an amassed property portfolio in the Millions and now reportedly worth as much as an MP earns a year for spouting his evil thoughts on the American speaker trail for about 10 minutes on his feet.

The old school Socialists GnV would never associate Bliar with being a true Socialist. To think he was or is is laughable. A Tory through and through with Capitalist veins through his blood.
Star - you need to look out of the bubble a bit more and set your goals a bit higher than they appear to be at the moment. You just sound envious, full of bitterness and consumed with negativity.
We live in a free country where we all have had the ability (and still do) to change our lives instead of moaning about the unfairness of it. Unfortunately, life is not fair in this big bad world and increasingly we will all have to apply ourselves that much harder to get by - or we can moan about how unfair life is, whilst slipping further and deeper underwater.
PS - I would be surprised at any family earning £100,000 a year claiming child benefit/credit - whatever it is called - on top. A bit of petty cash is all it would amount to - I certainly would not be bothered wasting my personal time to make a claim every week/month however it is dished out. You could spend more in wasted time/fuel than you would get back in credit/benefit.
and New labour now, star?
I'm not certain that calling John Prescott a Tory would go down well in the Hull Labour Club that he frequented (maybe still does) - not if you treasure your kneecaps that is! Seamen and dockers aren't known for their subtlety I'm reliably informed. A fish hook through your gullet or a punch in the face is more their style :lol2:
And what of 'The Beast of Bolsover'? A Tory????
Tony Benn (not his limp wristed son) ?
If anything, TB was more communist than Tory..... Khrushchev comes to mind here.
Quote by GnV
and New labour now, star?
I'm not certain that calling John Prescott a Tory would go down well in the Hull Labour Club that he frequented (maybe still does) - not if you treasure your kneecaps that is! Seamen and dockers aren't known for their subtlety I'm reliably informed. A fish hook through your gullet or a punch in the face is more their style :lol2:
And what of 'The Beast of Bolsover'? A Tory????
Tony Benn (not his limp wristed son) ?
If anything, TB was more communist than Tory..... Khrushchev comes to mind here.

You get some good (well not so bad), and bad ones. I personally never really thought of Tony Blair as communist, but then I tend to think of the political spectrum as more of a circle than a line. Go far enough in the left, or West direction and you just start coming back round from the right or East.
It seems the welfare reforms are going ahead, households where somebody earns over £50,000 will be getting a reduced level of child benefit. Not quite sure how this hits the poor myself?
the welfare system favours far to many that are not in need as apposed to those that really need it
IMHO
Quote by Too Hot
PS - I would be surprised at any family earning £100,000 a year claiming child benefit/credit - whatever it is called - on top. A bit of petty cash is all it would amount to - I certainly would not be bothered wasting my personal time to make a claim every week/month however it is dished out. You could spend more in wasted time/fuel than you would get back in credit/benefit.

It's a one time claim that is then paid by direct debit weekly for up to 20 years.
The form is given to new mothers in Hospital or can be downloaded via the internet. It is then posted to a freepost address.
Fortunately it's a modern world.
The richest 1,000 people in Britain have seen their wealth increase by £155bn since the crisis began – more than enough to pay off the whole government deficit of £119bn at a stroke.
Quote by Ben_Minx
The richest 1,000 people in Britain have seen their wealth increase by £155bn since the crisis began – more than enough to pay off the whole government deficit of £119bn at a stroke.

thats one year sorted how do you propose to deal with the 1.5 debt rolleyes
Quote by Lizaleanrob
The richest 1,000 people in Britain have seen their wealth increase by £155bn since the crisis began – more than enough to pay off the whole government deficit of £119bn at a stroke.

thats one year sorted how do you propose to deal with the 1.5 debt rolleyes
there isn't actually £1 debt...majority of it is guarantees, bonds put out by the government on banks that may or may not default. Insurance if you like.
Quote by Rogue_trader
The richest 1,000 people in Britain have seen their wealth increase by £155bn since the crisis began -- more than enough to pay off the whole government deficit of £119bn at a stroke.

thats one year sorted how do you propose to deal with the 1.5 debt rolleyes
there isn't actually £1 debt...majority of it is guarantees, bonds put out by the government on banks that may or may not default. Insurance if you like.
so have you got an alternative figure for what our national debt actually is then :roll:
if its just "insurence" then these rich can keep their pocket money aye wink
Quote by Rogue_trader
The richest 1,000 people in Britain have seen their wealth increase by £155bn since the crisis began -- more than enough to pay off the whole government deficit of £119bn at a stroke.

thats one year sorted how do you propose to deal with the 1.5 debt rolleyes
there isn't actually £1 debt...majority of it is guarantees, bonds put out by the government on banks that may or may not default. Insurance if you like.
The Government debt at the end of Sept 12 was £1.3 , comprising £1.1 of Government Stock ( Gilts) £61 billion of Treasury bills and £100 billion National Savings.
This is real debt. Insurance it certainly is not.
Quote by Max777
The richest 1,000 people in Britain have seen their wealth increase by £155bn since the crisis began -- more than enough to pay off the whole government deficit of £119bn at a stroke.

thats one year sorted how do you propose to deal with the 1.5 debt rolleyes
there isn't actually £1 debt...majority of it is guarantees, bonds put out by the government on banks that may or may not default. Insurance if you like.
The Government debt at the end of Sept 12 was £1.3 , comprising £1.1 of Government Stock ( Gilts) £61 billion of Treasury bills and £100 billion National Savings.
This is real debt. Insurance it certainly is not.
i`ll take it we are correct then max :thumbup:
Can someone lend me a tenner? My child benefit doesn't go in the bank till Monday!
bolt
Will euros be ok Laine?
cos she's worth it
Sorry to say it like this but if the doors had been closed a long time ago there wouldn't be so much of a drain on resources ...
Quote by Steve
Sorry to say it like this but if the doors had been closed a long time ago there wouldn't be so much of a drain on resources ...

and truly deserving hard working people like you wouldn't take second place to the hangers on....
Quote by GnV
Sorry to say it like this but if the doors had been closed a long time ago there wouldn't be so much of a drain on resources ...

and truly deserving hard working people like you wouldn't take second place to the hangers on....
There are far more deserving cases than I that are going without at present :-(
this and every selected government serves the interests of the rich and powerful. if voting could change that it would be illegal. ask the greeks, irish, spanish, portugese, hugarians, poles, latvians, lithuanians, italians or even our students who were pronised one thing by the liberals pre election and got something else after.
i'm sick and tired of people in the bottom 98% attacking each other (simple divide and rule) when in your face is theft, fraud, and corruption at the top.
it's taking too long for people to wake up to the headlies, presstitution and propaganda that enslaves us all.
bankers, hedge funds and bond holders have been lavished with 250 billion plus of liability to the taxpayer at interest for making bad bets/gambling losses and the poorest of society have to have austerity to pay for it and no one is charged ?
they will cut benefits (entitlements to the less well off) and increase entitlements/subsidies/benefits in kind/backroom deals to the rich.
they will close hospitals, schools, factories and shops and at the same time tell you that we are coming out of a double dip recession and unemployment is falling.
trust your senses. listen, look, smell and feel the hardship of your peers.
every m.p. of whatever colour of skirt wears the same colour knickers. they are all feathering their own nests and doing their masters bidding and that aint you or me.
Quote by gulsonroad30664
this and every selected government serves the interests of the rich and powerful. if voting could change that it would be illegal. ask the greeks, irish, spanish, portugese, hugarians, poles, latvians, lithuanians, italians or even our students who were pronised one thing by the liberals pre election and got something else after.
i'm sick and tired of people in the bottom 98% attacking each other (simple divide and rule) when in your face is theft, fraud, and corruption at the top.
it's taking too long for people to wake up to the headlies, presstitution and propaganda that enslaves us all.
bankers, hedge funds and bond holders have been lavished with 250 billion plus of liability to the taxpayer at interest for making bad bets/gambling losses and the poorest of society have to have austerity to pay for it and no one is charged ?
they will cut benefits (entitlements to the less well off) and increase entitlements/subsidies/benefits in kind/backroom deals to the rich.
they will close hospitals, schools, factories and shops and at the same time tell you that we are coming out of a double dip recession and unemployment is falling.
trust your senses. listen, look, smell and feel the hardship of your peers.
every m.p. of whatever colour of skirt wears the same colour knickers. they are all feathering their own nests and doing their masters bidding and that aint you or me.

I suggest you go blow up the Houses of Parliament ...
In a few years time we may well be burning effigies of you on bonfire night huh...
Quote by Steve
this and every selected government serves the interests of the rich and powerful. if voting could change that it would be illegal. ask the greeks, irish, spanish, portugese, hugarians, poles, latvians, lithuanians, italians or even our students who were pronised one thing by the liberals pre election and got something else after.
i'm sick and tired of people in the bottom 98% attacking each other (simple divide and rule) when in your face is theft, fraud, and corruption at the top.
it's taking too long for people to wake up to the headlies, presstitution and propaganda that enslaves us all.
bankers, hedge funds and bond holders have been lavished with 250 billion plus of liability to the taxpayer at interest for making bad bets/gambling losses and the poorest of society have to have austerity to pay for it and no one is charged ?
they will cut benefits (entitlements to the less well off) and increase entitlements/subsidies/benefits in kind/backroom deals to the rich.
they will close hospitals, schools, factories and shops and at the same time tell you that we are coming out of a double dip recession and unemployment is falling.
trust your senses. listen, look, smell and feel the hardship of your peers.
every m.p. of whatever colour of skirt wears the same colour knickers. they are all feathering their own nests and doing their masters bidding and that aint you or me.

I suggest you go blow up the Houses of Parliament ...
In a few years time we may well be burning effigies of you on bonfire night huh...
Or you could go into politics and change things for the better.