Someone loves the Credit Crunch.................
15 October 2008, 12:42 AM
#61
The sentiment is good but is this really what we have to do nowadays, find ways of convincing people they really want to work?
Go back 50 years and a job was valued because without one life was genuinely tough, maybe the difference between a warm house or a cold one, or a full stomach or an empty one.
With the state wet-nursing every misfit is the current attitude of many much of a surprise?
Kevin
Go back 50 years and a job was valued because without one life was genuinely tough, maybe the difference between a warm house or a cold one, or a full stomach or an empty one.
With the state wet-nursing every misfit is the current attitude of many much of a surprise?
Kevin
It doesn't help, across the board, many values appear to have gone out of the window. This is apparent in lower classes, as much as any others from what I see. Morals/respect and general decency are less and less apparent, for whatever reason, and this honestly seems to be not necessarily class dependent. Maybe we all need to take a look at ourselves, and how we behave, so much as judging others.
15 October 2008, 08:10 AM
#64
My take on this.
Abolish Welfare.
Abolish NI.
Make income tax per annum (per person):
3% on earnings under £30K
4% on earnings up to £40K
5% on earnings up to £90K
8% on earnings up to £180K
12% on earnings up to £500K
20% on earnings up to £1000K
25% on earnings over £1000K
Now, here's the hook.
Anyone, in any band, attracting a tax take by Central Goverment can choose to make a donation to:
A. The Local Diocese / Council, (To care for those falling on hard times, etc) Every pound donated earns a Tax credit of 10% of the value donated.
B. Nationally, (To care for those falling on hard times, etc)
Every pound donated earns a Tax credit of 20% of the value donated.
C. Globally (To care for those falling on hard times etc)
Every pound donated earns a Tax credit of 30% of the value donated.
Any healthcare costs should be covered by insurance for those wishing / able to pay for it. Anyone unable to pay for healthcare should be able to make a representation to the Local / National / Global fund managers.
D.
Section 13
Chapter 06
Paragraph 66
"All drivers of Subaru Imprezas will be exempt from fuel tax and will be eligible for an annual [Nationally paid for] "Jolly" to the Nurburgring"
Abolish Welfare.
Abolish NI.
Make income tax per annum (per person):
3% on earnings under £30K
4% on earnings up to £40K
5% on earnings up to £90K
8% on earnings up to £180K
12% on earnings up to £500K
20% on earnings up to £1000K
25% on earnings over £1000K
Now, here's the hook.
Anyone, in any band, attracting a tax take by Central Goverment can choose to make a donation to:
A. The Local Diocese / Council, (To care for those falling on hard times, etc) Every pound donated earns a Tax credit of 10% of the value donated.
B. Nationally, (To care for those falling on hard times, etc)
Every pound donated earns a Tax credit of 20% of the value donated.
C. Globally (To care for those falling on hard times etc)
Every pound donated earns a Tax credit of 30% of the value donated.
Any healthcare costs should be covered by insurance for those wishing / able to pay for it. Anyone unable to pay for healthcare should be able to make a representation to the Local / National / Global fund managers.
D.
Section 13
Chapter 06
Paragraph 66
"All drivers of Subaru Imprezas will be exempt from fuel tax and will be eligible for an annual [Nationally paid for] "Jolly" to the Nurburgring"
15 October 2008, 10:18 AM
#65
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
15 October 2008, 10:19 AM
#66
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
15 October 2008, 11:36 AM
#68
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
15 October 2008, 11:55 AM
#69
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just out of interest, like, how much do people think the state should contribute to a family of 10 children? If at all.
I mean, of course its morally reprehensible to expect the state to support you and your family, but, it is just as morally wrong to say "tough".
I dont see how you can't pay the money, as a state? I mean these are kids -what other option is there?
I mean, of course its morally reprehensible to expect the state to support you and your family, but, it is just as morally wrong to say "tough".
I dont see how you can't pay the money, as a state? I mean these are kids -what other option is there?
15 October 2008, 01:22 PM
#70
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The sentiment is good but is this really what we have to do nowadays, find ways of convincing people they really want to work?
Go back 50 years and a job was valued because without one life was genuinely tough, maybe the difference between a warm house or a cold one, or a full stomach or an empty one.
With the state wet-nursing every misfit is the current attitude of many much of a surprise?
Kevin
Go back 50 years and a job was valued because without one life was genuinely tough, maybe the difference between a warm house or a cold one, or a full stomach or an empty one.
With the state wet-nursing every misfit is the current attitude of many much of a surprise?
Kevin
We have less police, more people and less jobs. Whatever your stance on benefits and how people out of work should be treated, the simple fact is that if these people have no money, and cannot get jobs, you cannot leave them to starve. Apart from being an amoral thing to do, the rise in crime would be incalcuable.
Cases like this do make make pleasant reading, but i would imagine it is the minority, not the majority that abuse the system. The papers wouldn't sell many copies if they were full of boring stories of people obeying the law, or being nice to each other!
As for Matin2005s argument about the electorate, I don't know why anyone is arguing against him?
It's patently obvious that neither side has the core support to win an election, so the large floating vote (whatever it's social makeup) has effectively created this issue if you want to blame them for voting NL in. Any other view is illogical and baseless.Geezer
15 October 2008, 01:26 PM
#71
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe, but many years the situation was quite different than it is now. We had full (well, whatever measure they use to say "full") employment and we had a thriving manufacturing undustry and litte IT penetration. Unfortunately now, virtually all of our manufacturing industry has gone, and IT has allowed companies to employ much less people for far greater return. This and other factors mean there are less well paid jobs around for a greater population.
We have less police, more people and less jobs. Whatever your stance on benefits and how people out of work should be treated, the simple fact is that if these people have no money, and cannot get jobs, you cannot leave them to starve. Apart from being an amoral thing to do, the rise in crime would be incalcuable.
Cases like this do make make pleasant reading, but i would imagine it is the minority, not the majority that abuse the system. The papers wouldn't sell many copies if they were full of boring stories of people obeying the law, or being nice to each other!
As for Matin2005s argument about the electorate, I don't know why anyone is arguing against him? It's patently obvious that neither side has the core support to win an election, so the large floating vote (whatever it's social makeup) has effectively created this issue if you want to blame them for voting NL in. Any other view is illogical and baseless.
Geezer
We have less police, more people and less jobs. Whatever your stance on benefits and how people out of work should be treated, the simple fact is that if these people have no money, and cannot get jobs, you cannot leave them to starve. Apart from being an amoral thing to do, the rise in crime would be incalcuable.
Cases like this do make make pleasant reading, but i would imagine it is the minority, not the majority that abuse the system. The papers wouldn't sell many copies if they were full of boring stories of people obeying the law, or being nice to each other!
As for Matin2005s argument about the electorate, I don't know why anyone is arguing against him?
It's patently obvious that neither side has the core support to win an election, so the large floating vote (whatever it's social makeup) has effectively created this issue if you want to blame them for voting NL in. Any other view is illogical and baseless.Geezer
15 October 2008, 02:07 PM
#72
Just out of interest, like, how much do people think the state should contribute to a family of 10 children? If at all.
I mean, of course its morally reprehensible to expect the state to support you and your family, but, it is just as morally wrong to say "tough".
I dont see how you can't pay the money, as a state? I mean these are kids -what other option is there?
I mean, of course its morally reprehensible to expect the state to support you and your family, but, it is just as morally wrong to say "tough".
I dont see how you can't pay the money, as a state? I mean these are kids -what other option is there?
Walking miles a day for water - that's povity. Sleeping at the side of the road living of scaps - that's povity. Sleeping in sewers becuase the streets aro too cold - that's povity.
15 October 2008, 03:11 PM
#73
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Poverty is relative to your reality.
Sitting in a house with no heating because you cannot afford to pay the bills the middle of winter is "poverty" in this country.
Not having the money to be able to buy your kids fresh food is "poverty" in this country
Dying from starvation because you cant afford to eat is "poverty" in another.
In other words, someone very poor in this country, may appear as wealthy as a king in another.
Of course, the UK is the fifth richest nation on the planet, there really is no excuse at all to have people in any sort of poverty at all.
Sitting in a house with no heating because you cannot afford to pay the bills the middle of winter is "poverty" in this country.
Not having the money to be able to buy your kids fresh food is "poverty" in this country
Dying from starvation because you cant afford to eat is "poverty" in another.
In other words, someone very poor in this country, may appear as wealthy as a king in another.
Of course, the UK is the fifth richest nation on the planet, there really is no excuse at all to have people in any sort of poverty at all.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
serpico
ScoobyNet General
20
01 April 2019 07:47 AM