Please explain this? Spending more than we're earning and have a huge national debt? Then they try to reduce spending as a result of this and people do nothing but moan.
The welfare budget does need to be cut
But what are you going to cut? Pensions make up nearly half of welfare spending, if anything that needs to go up not down? Jobseekers is only about 3% of the total spend and incapacity similar.
Housing benefit is the next biggest chunk after pensions and that's only about 10% of the total, and not all to people who are out of work. Not sure how much you can cut housing benefit without either bringing in rent controls (there's no way the conservatives will do that, would cost them and their mates too much) or getting more people into higher paid jobs so they can afford a place to live without housing benefit. If anything this will get worse if they allow right to buy to be extending to housing association properties.
Benefit fraud? If most estimates are correct this is pretty much insignificant and a higher level of enforcement would cost more than the savings that would be made.
For me the two biggest things they need to do are sort out social housing, far cheaper than paying for people to rent privately. Combine that with a proper living wage, not the renamed minimum wage they are bringing in, so that those in work are earning enough to be able to support themselves.
Even by your own percentages there you seem to have covered 66% of it, what about the rest ?
Only if you are going to eat them !
My mate shoots them for me and does eat them.
What would be a better way to raise funds? Raid the welfare budget for £12 billion or finally deal with tax evasion that would bring in over double that amount and more?
The fact that not many of the Conservative 'friends' are claiming Income Support tells you all you need to know about this government.
I don't blame the Tories for the lack of funds in the kitty Hucks, but do think we're hardly all in this together when the preferred option is to claw the money back by targetting the poor rather than get the corporations to stop dodging their tax bills.
Plenty of money left? What? National debt of approx 70% of GDP and we're running a 5% deficit?
It would be great not to have to cut back on disability, benefits, public services, general govt expenditure, and everyone just live happily ever after. Unfortunately we live in the real world and money isn't unlimited. We have to live within our means. People don't like accepting that which is why they vote labour
Come on guys. What do you think will happen if they seriously start to clamp down on these tax breaks that the huge corporations undoubtedly get? They will all fuck their HQ off to Switzerland or Monaco and we get nothing. I agree they need to sort it out but it can't make us uncompetitive. Sad but it's the reality.
Personally feel that the "rich" are already having the shit taxed out of them, so the answer isn't to increase taxes at the upper level. I don't know why people seem to think that those people who work there arsed off with stressful jobs and have a higher MRP should get penalised for that? It's also not to start taxing the hell out of a financial services sector that have contributed about 15% of tax receipts for the last 30 odd years. Fine they messed up and got us in the shit, but that's the price you pay for having relaxed legislation and a lot of freedom in that industry, which is how they make us so much money.
In a perfect world we wouldn't increase taxes or decrease spending. But its not a perfect world and labour have got us in such a mess in order to by votes off doleys that someone's got to man up and start sorting it out. Even if it costs them the next election.
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
Come on guys. What do you think will happen if they seriously start to clamp down on these tax breaks that the huge corporations undoubtedly get? They will all fuck their HQ off to Switzerland or Monaco and we get nothing. I agree they need to sort it out but it can't make us uncompetitive. Sad but it's the reality.
Personally feel that the "rich" are already having the shit taxed out of them, so the answer isn't to increase taxes at the upper level. I don't know why people seem to think that those people who work there arsed off with stressful jobs and have a higher MRP should get penalised for that? It's also not to start taxing the hell out of a financial services sector that have contributed about 15% of tax receipts for the last 30 odd years. Fine they messed up and got us in the shit, but that's the price you pay for having relaxed legislation and a lot of freedom in that industry, which is how they make us so much money.
In a perfect world we wouldn't increase taxes or decrease spending. But its not a perfect world and labour have got us in such a mess in order to by votes off doleys that someone's got to man up and start sorting it out. Even if it costs them the next election.
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
Come on guys. What do you think will happen if they seriously start to clamp down on these tax breaks that the huge corporations undoubtedly get? They will all fuck their HQ off to Switzerland or Monaco and we get nothing. I agree they need to sort it out but it can't make us uncompetitive. Sad but it's the reality.
To be honest Hucks, if they aren't paying it they may as well fuck off to Switzerland or Monaco, 'cause we still won't get it anyway would we? They need to pay their fair share on profits or be closed down. After all, whats the best deal for them anyway...pay a few tens of millions in tax, or lose hundreds of millions in sales? Starbucks have made a "donation" after fear of not getting any customers through the door.
If people squeal because they're paying a higher tax bill, perhaps they need to swap places with those who don't earn enough to pay tax? I'm sure a few months struggling with increasing energy, food, fuel, utility prices - and a potential reduction in tax credits ..... fuck me, they'd be thankful they are able to pay 50%
I have no problem at all if people earn hundreds of thousands, even millions, doing whatever they can turn their hand to. I don't care if you're a banker who's ill with stress earning half a mill, or a banker who plays the system and sits on your arse all day and still earns half a mill .... you live to your means like the rest of us, and you should pay what you're supposed to.
Just a note on who got us into this mess, putting aside the bank's wheeling and dealing - other than us using the facilities, who profited from all that spending? Who got the contracts to build the schools and hospitals? Which firm's tills did the public sector wages end up in? Labour may have been writing the cheques, but entrepreneurs and big business flourished cashing them.
Wow. Why so personal? Why am I "thick"? So what if I'm working class? Are you incapable of having a proper debate without getting all catty?Nice to see that we have a thick working class tory amongst us.
'They, the rich, work their arses off with stressful jobs. Don't make me laugh...compared to our serving soldiers, our hard pressed bobbies, our under pressure nurses and our hard working teachers they don't. As you point out it is the bankers who got us into the mess not just because of relaxed legislation but also because of selfish unbridled greed and a lack of morality. Are you seriously suggesting that they should shoulder no responsibility for wrecking the stability of many first world countries? Should they still be taking sky high bonuses whilst other people lose their jobs, have their pay cut or their benefits slashed? I wish I was so richly rewarded for failure and 'criminal' activity...clearly I'm in the wrong job. And the politicians that let them and continue to let them get away with their actions are equally to blame. Im sorry but the rich are not overtaxed...they are not taxed to the extent they have been for the last 100yrs apart from a few years at the end of the 1980s to 1994
Quite frankly I wish they would fuck off. The reality is though is that they won't... no matter how much fucking propaganda gets peddled to support this nonsense.
This is essentially advocating tax evasion by using threats that won't come to fruition.
People in the financial sector were rewarded for their failure. The working class people of this country stumped up the money for the financial bailout only to see the people that were complicit in it being given more money in bonuses in a year than the majority of people won't earn in 10 years.
It was the government's failure.
Yes, it was labours fault the American banks when bust and caused the global financial mess which sent us into recession. In fact it's labours fault the Greeks are still in a mess.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Bet they wish someone would delete their debtYou just deleted Greece?
Please explain this? Spending more than we're earning and have a huge national debt? Then they try to reduce spending as a result of this and people do nothing but moan.
I'd be all for them raising taxes to improve the standard of living for the worse off, as opposed to implementing policies that affect... the worst off.
It's the meanness and selfishness that offends most.
Don't worry MP's are getting a 10% pay rise. It's a good job they're so hard working, they deserve a tax break to go with their pay rise, subsidised cafe's and onsite childcare.
They do work so hard, especially when debating something as important as the impact of the welfare benefit reforms on the sick and disabled.....
Presumably out and about dining and quaffing champagne. Don't worry though, the found something far more important than the sick, disabled, disadvantaged and poverty stricken.....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
That encapsulates the whole sage in a very succinct nutshell. Thanks, Stupot.
MP's should be paid a lot more than they do.
MP's should be paid a lot more than they do.
Don't worry MP's are getting a 10% pay rise. It's a good job they're so hard working, they deserve a tax break to go with their pay rise, subsidised cafe's and onsite childcare.
They do work so hard, especially when debating something as important as the impact of the welfare benefit reforms on the sick and disabled.....
Presumably out and about dining and quaffing champagne. Don't worry though, the found something far more important than the sick, disabled, disadvantaged and poverty stricken.....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Good effort pal, but try again
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffee...memes-how-pictures-can-paint-a-thousand-lies/
It’s very fashionable these days to be despondent about the quality of our politicians. They’re all lazy liars who look only to their interests and neglect their duties to their constituents because they’d rather be grunting and snorting around a trough before sticking their snouts in it. And while the expenses scandal, resignations and court cases show that a lot of anti-politics sentiment has been provoked by the politicians themselves, it’s worth remembering that not every accusation levelled at Westminster is fair.
Over the past couple of years, a trend for internet memes about politicians has grown. Those graphics tend to juxtapose two images from Parliament, one showing lots of MPs apparently very interested in something, another with a handful of sleepy politicians loafing about on the Commons benches. Naturally, the first image bears a caption suggesting that MPs are debating something that benefits them personally, while the second claims they’re voting on something that affects very vulnerable people. Here’s one example.
Shocking, isn’t it? But mostly shocking that so many people have been taken in by what is a big fat lie. The bottom image claims to be from 11 July 2013. There was no debate on pay that day, which was a Thursday. There are often fewer MPs in the House on a Thursday. So this image is from the wrong day. I’ve combed the PA images archive and, surprise, surprise, it’s not from a debate about pay in 2013. It’s from Prime Minister’s Questions on 5 September 2012. Here’s that picture in slightly better quality.
Prime Minister’s Questions, 5 September 2012. Picture: PA
The top image is from a backbench debate in which a Labour MP called for a review into the impact of welfare reforms after a petition. It is poorly-attended because the debate had, by this point, been going on for a while. A screen grab from the start and close of the debate would have shown a more packed chamber. When debates go on for several hours, MPs often pop in and out as they have other business going on at the same time. They may be in a select committee, meeting constituents, taking part in a Westminster Hall debate, running an all-party parliamentary group meeting, briefing journalists, plotting a rebellion with colleagues or working in their office. They were all whipped by their respective parties to vote on this motion. But even though speaking in the debate gave MPs an opportunity to put their point of view across, it changed nothing because the type of debate meant the result of the vote was in no way binding on the government.
And FYI, the MP pay rise, which is justified to be fair, was decided by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority.....so you should direct your bitterness towards them
They do work very hard though don't they? Harder than dustbien, fire fighters, nurses, chambermaids, cleaners, etc. they deserve their tax breaks, pay rise, and subsidised childcare and cafe, and all of those expenses on top,
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
I'd say it's probably a pretty tough job yes.
If you could just direct me to the part where I said they work harder than the dustbin men (think thats what you meant), fire fighters, nurses etc, then I'll gladly apologies for it?
It's not about effort levels, it's about supply and demand of suitable labour, and marginal revenue product. Same as all jobs. While i have the utmost respect for cleaners, bin men, etc. there are a lot more people out there that could be trained to do that just as easy and would be willing to work for the wage.
It's beyond me how people can 1) Complain about austerity measures, 2) Complain about wages for public sector workers, and 3) be against privatisation....all at the same time. Don't they understand maths????
What do you mean RE personal wealth?I am one of them and my maths is pretty fantastic my friend.
What you miss
Personal wealth not invested
Proper tax system that enables some redistribution of wealth
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?