Coronavirus Thread (Off Topic, Politics) (48 Viewers)

[TomRad85]

This thread is still a shit show then...

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

 

---

[clint van damme]

This thread is still a shit show then...

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

Not now playboy Tom is back....

 

[skybluetony176]

Standard mature response as usual.

Simple fact is that successive governments have been trying to do this for decades and your over simplified view of the world is actually very immature.

 

[TomRad85]

Not now playboy Tom is back....

You know it mate.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

 

[shmmeee]

Simple fact is that successive governments have been trying to do this for decades and your over simplified view of the world is actually very immature.

Yeah it’s this childlike goodie vs baddie world a lot of the right seem to live in. Totally devoid of facts, just fairy tales about foreigners and scroungers coming for their English way of life like they’re Hobbits fighting the Orcs.

TBF we have our share on the far left too. Some people just prefer conspiracies and kids stories to the messy complexity of the real world. And that’s fine as a coping mechanism, I just wish they wouldn’t vote based on it.

 

[Ian1779]

Most people on benefits need it. Clamping down on cheats is often used as an excuse to cut back on those who need it, without people complaining, rather than an active desire to root out the few.

The amount of money gained by the Treasury if they stop one tax-evading millionaire would account for countless ‘benefit cheats’

 

[skybluetony176]

People don't like piecework. Most of the seasonal harvesting work is that. Also comes down to geography in many cases in having to get large groups of people from urban to rural areas on a daily basis.

Board and lodgings is usually taken out of what you earn from piecework too. Simple fact is that most British people won’t move temporarily to another part of the country to take home less than minimum wage (legally) when they have the option to stay at home and take home at least the minimum wage. It’s a no brainier for British people and that’s a compliment not a criticism.

 

[wingy]

I don't know why we don't go full on down the euthenasia route .
What a drag on society that generation are .
Health,housing, monetary support, what a drain and lag on the rest of society.

 

[Ian1779]

I don't know why we don't go full on down the euthenasia route .
What a drag on society that generation are .
Health,housing, monetary support, what a drain and lag on the test of society.

Isn’t that pretty much the Government’s strategy right now... especially for those people in care homes. Disgraceful.

 

[Astute]

Why do you always great stuff into posts that isn't there?

????
What isn't there?

Do you mean those who brought in 150 workers because there isn't anyone in the UK that would do it? Look back in his post.

It is amazing what is missed by those normally agreed with on here.

 

[TomRad85]

????
What isn't there?

Do you mean those who brought in 150 workers because there isn't anyone in the UK that would do it? Look back in his post.

It is amazing what is missed by those normally agreed with on here.

This long winded argument/discussion you've being having with other posters, Astute, just demonstrates to me perfectly why people will be waiting a long time if they want a Labour government ever again. I've seen people tearing strips out of floating voters, out of less left wing Labour voters... people they need onside to win an election. For a lot of people it seems to be project Corbyn or nothing.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

 

[wingy]

Isn’t that pretty much the Government’s strategy right now... especially for those people in care homes. Disgraceful.

Yeah, was thinking about the motives around ending immigration
Many of the doctors and nurses could stay home

Bit like the PPE shortage,If we'd maintained and expanded track and trace we wouldn't be needing half of it.

 

[Astute]

Do we actually have enough slack in the British workforce to make it up though? We have had record lows in unemployment for a good while now and agri jobs have a lot of competition. People have choices and the right to choose whatever job they A) want to apply for and B) what they want to accept.

Don't speak too soon. Unemployment is going to shoot up in the next 6 months. Most of Europe is going to be hit hard. And those reliant on exporting to other EU countries will then be hit hard as there will be less money around to purchase what they normally do.

I am worried about the Spanish. They rely on people having holidays there. They will lose this summer and it won't recover quickly.

 

[Astute]

Yep, and most of the “long term unemployed scroungers” are 50-64 year old who can’t get hired due to ageism: https://www.peoplemanagement.co.uk/news/articles/over-50s-more-likely-to-face-long-term-unemployment

Yet again people making decisions based on fairy tales sold to them by the tabloids and not the real world.

Oh yes. The boomers that have had the best of everything.

Rich when needed but poor when needed. This link is closer to the truth though.

 

[Astute]

This long winded argument/discussion you've being having with other posters, Astute, just demonstrates to me perfectly why people will be waiting a long time if they want a Labour government ever again. I've seen people tearing strips out of floating voters, out of less left wing Labour voters... people they need onside to win an election. For a lot of people it seems to be project Corbyn or nothing.

Exactly.

It is one way or no way. Just look at the latest.

Boomers are rich. They had all the money. Boo.

The most people that are on benefits are those of the age called boomers. But because they are poor they are suddenly not called boomers. And most lap it up.

Have tried to explain the difference between having left Labour but not getting a Labour government and taking the best parts of everything when we can and getting elected. But the excuses come out. It is a constant one sided rant. I fear we won't have a Labour government for a long time.

 

[clint van damme]

????
What isn't there?

Do you mean those who brought in 150 workers because there isn't anyone in the UK that would do it? Look back in his post.

It is amazing what is missed by those normally agreed with on here.

I merely pointed out we were flying in workers. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[clint van damme]

The amount of money gained by the Treasury if they stop one tax-evading millionaire would account for countless ‘benefit cheats’

Think the country loses something like 3 billion to evasion and 4 billion to avoidance or it may be the other way round.
That's a fair old whack.

 

[Astute]

I merely pointed out we were flying in workers. Nothing more, nothing less.

Wasn't you that I quoted.

A company is flying in workers. We? We had people who wanted these jobs.

 

[fernandopartridge]

No what the government should of done was select 150 or however many needed of the long term dole dossing scroungers we have here and make them earn some of their universal credit.

If they're doing a job for somebody they should get paid, never mind 'earning' their UC.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Think the country loses something like 3 billion to evasion and 4 billion to avoidance or it may be the other way round.
That's a fair old whack.

It's significantly higher than that

 

[tisza]

Board and lodgings is usually taken out of what you earn from piecework too. Simple fact is that most British people won’t move temporarily to another part of the country to take home less than minimum wage (legally) when they have the option to stay at home and take home at least the minimum wage. It’s a no brainier for British people and that’s a compliment not a criticism.

Yep it's all relative.
Supermarkets set the prices and growers set wages according to that - not the other way around - or else supermarkets do what they always do and source from around the world where possible/feasible.
Romanian minimum wage around a quarter of the UK's so many Romanians "happy" to take the seasonal money and go home.

 

[Ian1779]

Exactly.

It is one way or no way. Just look at the latest.

Boomers are rich. They had all the money. Boo.

The most people that are on benefits are those of the age called boomers. But because they are poor they are suddenly not called boomers. And most lap it up.

Have tried to explain the difference between having left Labour but not getting a Labour government and taking the best parts of everything when we can and getting elected. But the excuses come out. It is a constant one sided rant. I fear we won't have a Labour government for a long time.

We get it - in fact most people generally agree with your point.

But we’re not the ones that need to be convinced. Tell us how you intend to change a mindset of people that will actively vote NOT in their own interests?

 

[skybluetony176]

Oh yes. The boomers that have had the best of everything.

Rich when needed but poor when needed. This link is closer to the truth though.

The 50-64 age group barely equates to a third of baby boomer generations.

 

[skybluetony176]

Wasn't you that I quoted.

A company is flying in workers. We? We had people who wanted these jobs.

We had people who applied for a job. Have you always took every job you’ve applied for?
You also seem to ignore that 25000 have applied but the farming industry needs 70000 seasonal workers so we’re still in trouble without the Eastern European’s.

 

[clint van damme]

It's significantly higher than that

My figures were estimates from HMRC.
Just googled it and other sources go as high as 70 billion.
I'd say it's it's pretty much nailed on that you're correct,.It's significantly higher, I wonder by how much?

 

[tisza]

I don't know why we don't go full on down the euthenasia route .
What a drag on society that generation are .
Health,housing, monetary support, what a drain and lag on the rest of society.

It does raise economic issues for the future though (not the euthanasia bit).
Companies investing billions in extending life spans = normally at the "unproducive" stages of our lives.
Getting to the situation where around half of our life spans will not be spent working (paying into the system) 18-22 years "getting ready" to join the workforce and maybe 15-20 plus years retired. Despite our best efforts we are going to be a financial issue for our kids and grandkids.

 

[tisza]

My figures were estimates from HMRC.
Just googled it and other sources go as high as 70 billion.
I'd say it's it's pretty much nailed on that you're correct,.It's significantly higher, I wonder by how much?

you've got a figure for the outright tax evasion, then there's a figure for the "legal" evasion (like Google, Amazon etc moving their daily income offshore to tax friendly environments)

 

[clint van damme]

you've got a figure for the outright tax evasion, then there's a figure for the "legal" evasion (like Google, Amazon etc moving their daily income offshore to tax friendly environments)

That's what my initial figures were for, evasion and avoidance but as FP pointed out, they're too low.

The fist google hit says 70 billion and refers solely to evasion. It comes from Patrick Cannon Barrister website.
Have no idea how credible it is or how they arrived at that figure I haven't looked beyond the headlines

A huge difference from the official HMRC figure I initially posted though.

 

[Flying Fokker]

It does raise economic issues for the future though (not the euthanasia bit).
Companies investing billions in extending life spans = normally at the "unproducive" stages of our lives.
Getting to the situation where around half of our life spans will not be spent working (paying into the system) 18-22 years "getting ready" to join the workforce and maybe 15-20 plus years retired. Despite our best efforts we are going to be a financial issue for our kids and grandkids.

1/3 of life spans maybe?

Question, why has so much been spent on improving medicine, reducing some pollution and encouraging some healthy lifestyles?

What generation will be a financial burden on the kids? The baby boomers generally pay for care if they have the means. The state picks up the tab otherwise.

Don’t get me wrong. I think the young of today are going to have a real struggle without worrying about supporting elders.

 

[clint van damme]

1/3 of life spans maybe?

Question, why has so much been spent on improving medicine, reducing some pollution and encouraging some healthy lifestyles?

What generation will be a financial burden on the kids? The baby boomers generally pay for care if they have the means. The state picks up the tab otherwise.

Don’t get me wrong. I think the young of today are going to have a real struggle without worrying about supporting elders.

Isn't that what he meant, we'll be a collective burden on the younger generations rather on on individual families specifically? That's how I read it.

Whichever way social care for the elderly is going to be a huge issue.

 

[skybluetony176]

Wasn't you that I quoted.

A company is flying in workers. We? We had people who wanted these jobs.

We need 70000 workers though. By your own admission only 25000 Brits applied. We need to fly them in regardless.

 

[Grendel]

We get it - in fact most people generally agree with your point.

But we’re not the ones that need to be convinced. Tell us how you intend to change a mindset of people that will actively vote NOT in their own interests?

Probably don’t patronise them that they should know better and you know what’s good for them

 

[TomRad85]

Probably don’t patronise them that they should know better and you know what’s good for them

Had the same thought, it's not a tactic that's been working well.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

 

[tisza]

1/3 of life spans maybe?

Question, why has so much been spent on improving medicine, reducing some pollution and encouraging some healthy lifestyles?

What generation will be a financial burden on the kids? The baby boomers generally pay for care if they have the means. The state picks up the tab otherwise.

Don’t get me wrong. I think the young of today are going to have a real struggle without worrying about supporting elders.

1/3? Does that mean we're going to live into our 100s? That's a way a way surely.
state picking up the tab will come from higher taxes for those in work.
As to investment in medicine, healthy lifestyles - some comes from trying to reduce the burden on health services, the rest from individual desire to live longer. Govts (as entities) may like first part, not so much the 2nd

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

I talked about the Coventrian living in a £500k house - are you drunk?

No you weren't

Would you want 16 year old working class school leavers to aspire to live in half million property?