FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > 1% Cap

1% Cap

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

What do you think of the 1% benefits cap and the poll of MPs which shows they want a 32% increase on their salaries?

In it together? This is public sector pay and all of them feel they should be paid more, but not the rest of the public sector.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman over a year ago

evesham

32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

its just the way mp's are showing us how far out of touch they are with the public and they realy could not give a flying about the man in the street

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Sack the lot of em, 1% is fair, if u work out how much money goes out in benefit n how much tax n bi average jo pays its a wonder the country aint in a worse mess

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??"

agreed. Most workers have been getting minimal pay rises for a few years now, so I don't see why benefit claimants should be any different.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"What do you think of the 1% benefits cap and the poll of MPs which shows they want a 32% increase on their salaries?

In it together? This is public sector pay and all of them feel they should be paid more, but not the rest of the public sector."

I think in all fairness they should all have a pay cut,they are already in a privileged position and should be grateful for what they get.... the Nurses, Paramedics, Police and Fire services deserve pay rises before politicians do in my opinion... I know nusers and paramedics have been on a pay freeze for 3 years now..... I would like to see why politicians think they deserve such a hike.

S xx

(sorry, I really think it is unfair that they think they have the right to demand when they should be thinking how lucky they are)

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

Isn't the difference though that a 1% increase on £100 per week is an increase of £1. The value of that 1% is more in simple cash terms on a salary of £25,000 (£480 a week) is £4.80 a week. When inflation is higher than 1% it has the effect of being felt as a cut.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 12/01/13 13:53:32]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Maybe they were thinking a 32% cut. It's a boys club at the end of the day. The UK is full of stealth taxes. Eg The London emission zone, driver cpc.

I work in an industry that's losing 5 companies a week due to over taxing

After all have a think. Have you seen more or less trucks from the EU in the UK? Do they pay the same as us for fuel? Mmmmmmm

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ucky_LadsCouple (MM) over a year ago

Kidderminster+ surrounding areas.

as most of our governing these days seems to be direct from brussella,why doo we need these MPs?,and what do they do exactly when they can be bothered to turn up for work in parliament apart from feed themselves to death on good subsidised food and fine wines?.

they bleat whenever asked about a law or directive that they can do nothing about this as it comes from brussells so they the MPs are in fact surplus to rrquirements?.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Country will never change, politicians shud have to do an apprenticeship and live on benefit and in social housing, before they start trying to fix the problems

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *dwalu2Couple over a year ago

Bristol

"32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??"

Sadly symptomatic of the idiocy that surrounds this issues.

No-one on benefits is getting a 'pay rise'. Their benefits will cease to match the rate of inflation, so rather than not becoming poorer, they will now become poorer.

You should really be asking what your government is doing to make wages in the private sector improve, rather than wanting other vulnerable people in society to become worse off.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *r mrs pCouple over a year ago

taunton

"32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??"

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ngel n tedCouple over a year ago

maidstone

If its a parliament elected for the people, by the people.....technically i'm their boss and i say no rise in pay...yer shit

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman over a year ago

evesham

"32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??

Sadly symptomatic of the idiocy that surrounds this issues.

No-one on benefits is getting a 'pay rise'. Their benefits will cease to match the rate of inflation, so rather than not becoming poorer, they will now become poorer.

You should really be asking what your government is doing to make wages in the private sector improve, rather than wanting other vulnerable people in society to become worse off."

i am not talking about people who cant work for medical/disability reasons when i say this but i fail to see how people ho CHOOSE not to work are vulnerable?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman over a year ago

evesham

"32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??

Sadly symptomatic of the idiocy that surrounds this issues.

No-one on benefits is getting a 'pay rise'. Their benefits will cease to match the rate of inflation, so rather than not becoming poorer, they will now become poorer.

You should really be asking what your government is doing to make wages in the private sector improve, rather than wanting other vulnerable people in society to become worse off."

my wages dont match the rate of inflation so by your reasoning i am also getting poorer right?

i dont WANT people to become poorer but it is a kick in the nuts when people who choose not to work moan about not getting increases in their 'free' money.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I didn't get a payrise for over 5 years in my previous employment. To get a payrise I had to find another job as I was struggling to pay my bills, yet those I know on benefits were smoking and buying take aways without worrying too much about it. If I had to get off my ass to earn more money why shouldn't others?! And yes it was difficult to find another job and took me the best part of a year to do it so I know it isn't easy, but it was something I had to do in order to have enough money to pay my way...why should someone who doesn't want to work effectively be better off than I am at my expense?

Maybe instead of increasing the amount benefits raise by the government could look at ways to reduce the cost of living for everyone...like fuel duty! I know they may come from different pots but there must be some way to help everyone rather than just those on benefits?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

"32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??

Sadly symptomatic of the idiocy that surrounds this issues.

No-one on benefits is getting a 'pay rise'. Their benefits will cease to match the rate of inflation, so rather than not becoming poorer, they will now become poorer.

You should really be asking what your government is doing to make wages in the private sector improve, rather than wanting other vulnerable people in society to become worse off.

i am not talking about people who cant work for medical/disability reasons when i say this but i fail to see how people ho CHOOSE not to work are vulnerable?"

Have those who have just lost their jobs at Jessops and Honda chosen to not work? The cap affects them too.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *dwalu2Couple over a year ago

Bristol

"32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??

Sadly symptomatic of the idiocy that surrounds this issues.

No-one on benefits is getting a 'pay rise'. Their benefits will cease to match the rate of inflation, so rather than not becoming poorer, they will now become poorer.

You should really be asking what your government is doing to make wages in the private sector improve, rather than wanting other vulnerable people in society to become worse off.

i am not talking about people who cant work for medical/disability reasons when i say this but i fail to see how people ho CHOOSE not to work are vulnerable?"

The number of people who CHOOSE not to work is less than a fraction of those who will suffer under this cap who, as well as being disabled or ill, cannot find work, or are also working. Working tax credits are being cut, don't forget.

Let's put it this way - if you find yourself agreeing whenever you hear anything mentioned about targeting shirkers not strivers, or anything else from a politician that sounds like that, you've let yourself become a fool.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman over a year ago

evesham

"32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??

Sadly symptomatic of the idiocy that surrounds this issues.

No-one on benefits is getting a 'pay rise'. Their benefits will cease to match the rate of inflation, so rather than not becoming poorer, they will now become poorer.

You should really be asking what your government is doing to make wages in the private sector improve, rather than wanting other vulnerable people in society to become worse off.

i am not talking about people who cant work for medical/disability reasons when i say this but i fail to see how people ho CHOOSE not to work are vulnerable?

Have those who have just lost their jobs at Jessops and Honda chosen to not work? The cap affects them too."

not yet it doesnt as presumaby they will have redundancy pay to fall back on, they cant claim benefits while they have that i believe. Also if they are actively looking for work then not thy dont fit into the category of people who chose to be unemplyed.

are you suggesting that no one on benefits choses to be there?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

i am not talking about people who cant work for medical/disability reasons when i say this but i fail to see how people ho CHOOSE not to work are vulnerable?"

Agreed, and since most benefits are meant to be a short term measure when times are tough then people shouldn't feel the pinch annually. However those on long term benefits like disability allowance should be in line with inflation.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"What do you think of the 1% benefits cap and the poll of MPs which shows they want a 32% increase on their salaries?

In it together? This is public sector pay and all of them feel they should be paid more, but not the rest of the public sector."

i wish i could have a 32% payrise

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

"I didn't get a payrise for over 5 years in my previous employment. To get a payrise I had to find another job as I was struggling to pay my bills, yet those I know on benefits were smoking and buying take aways without worrying too much about it. If I had to get off my ass to earn more money why shouldn't others?! And yes it was difficult to find another job and took me the best part of a year to do it so I know it isn't easy, but it was something I had to do in order to have enough money to pay my way...why should someone who doesn't want to work effectively be better off than I am at my expense?

The different pots argument is always a red herring. The Chancellor has one pot and portions this out. When I look at my organisation's budget at tough times I take a zero based approach. I realise that is not entirely possible for a nation but we are stuck in thinking in departmental terms.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman over a year ago

evesham

"32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??

Sadly symptomatic of the idiocy that surrounds this issues.

No-one on benefits is getting a 'pay rise'. Their benefits will cease to match the rate of inflation, so rather than not becoming poorer, they will now become poorer.

You should really be asking what your government is doing to make wages in the private sector improve, rather than wanting other vulnerable people in society to become worse off.

i am not talking about people who cant work for medical/disability reasons when i say this but i fail to see how people ho CHOOSE not to work are vulnerable?

i dont believe anything politians say, its all just playground 'he said/she said' games. Any political threads on here basiclly become slanging/name calling matches wich makes people look childish in my eyes.

perhaps you are right, perhaps i should ask what the government are doing to make private sector pay better but as they seem to be doing a bang up job of protecting compaies from going under and restoring the economy maybe o wont hold my breath?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

"32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??

Sadly symptomatic of the idiocy that surrounds this issues.

No-one on benefits is getting a 'pay rise'. Their benefits will cease to match the rate of inflation, so rather than not becoming poorer, they will now become poorer.

You should really be asking what your government is doing to make wages in the private sector improve, rather than wanting other vulnerable people in society to become worse off.

i am not talking about people who cant work for medical/disability reasons when i say this but i fail to see how people ho CHOOSE not to work are vulnerable?

Have those who have just lost their jobs at Jessops and Honda chosen to not work? The cap affects them too.

are you suggesting that no one on benefits choses to be there? "

Of course I am not suggesting that but most benefits are paid to those in work and looking for work. Benefits are being paid to subsidise private sector salaries. Is that right?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"32% is a joke!!

perhaps you are right, perhaps i should ask what the government are doing to make private sector pay better but as they seem to be doing a bang up job of protecting companies from going under and restoring the economy maybe o wont hold my breath?"

as much as we all hope for this it wont happen

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Not typed that right! Meant to put that I know they are different pots, but that's the same in companies and surely they can be moved around to help everyone. We used to call it 'wooden dollars' where I worked before...taking money from one dept to make another look/perform better...same principal! Just think rather than looking at giving more out the government should look at saving everyone money so no one 'group' of people feels the pinch any more or less than another and we're not all left fighting amongst ourselves whilst they sneak their rises in as our backs are turned!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *dwalu2Couple over a year ago

Bristol

"32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??

Sadly symptomatic of the idiocy that surrounds this issues.

No-one on benefits is getting a 'pay rise'. Their benefits will cease to match the rate of inflation, so rather than not becoming poorer, they will now become poorer.

You should really be asking what your government is doing to make wages in the private sector improve, rather than wanting other vulnerable people in society to become worse off.

i am not talking about people who cant work for medical/disability reasons when i say this but i fail to see how people ho CHOOSE not to work are vulnerable?

You might not think you believe anything politicians say, but based on what you've posted, you've swallowed the lies and rhetoric wholesale that politicians are using to disguise an ideological attack by the rich on the poor.

Too many people listen to the headlines, and don't think about what is actually happening beyond them.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman over a year ago

evesham

so i cant just have an opinion for myself, i've got to have believed lies?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *dwalu2Couple over a year ago

Bristol

"so i cant just have an opinion for myself, i've got to have believed lies?

Well, either you have an opinion that exactly matches those lies, in which case the less said about that the better, or you believe the lies you've been told.

It's one or the other really!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

"so i cant just have an opinion for myself, i've got to have believed lies?

Well, either you have an opinion that exactly matches those lies, in which case the less said about that the better, or you believe the lies you've been told.

It's one or the other really!"

That's not true either, though. Someone could have reached the same conclusions based on different assumptions and data.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I would like to know what, exactly, was the question on the survey sent by UGOV to the MP's? Was the question "What pay rise do you think you should get right now as an MP?", that is one thing.

However, if the question was "What salary do you think an MP should receive?", that's something completely different.

If it was the first question, then I would agree they are out of touch, greedy bastards who should be stood up against a wall and shot.

But... if it were the second, then I have to say I don't find it unreasonable.

I have had quite a lot of dealings with my old MP from when I lived in the neighbouring borough. For the amount of work he does, and - more importantly - the degree to which he has to be available to his constituents (practically 24/7 at times) I would say even a salary of £86k wouldn't persuade me to go for the job.

Rather than concentrate on the salary, I think we ought to be questioning the sheer number of MP's, and the distribution under the Constituency Boundaries.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *dwalu2Couple over a year ago

Bristol

"so i cant just have an opinion for myself, i've got to have believed lies?

Well, either you have an opinion that exactly matches those lies, in which case the less said about that the better, or you believe the lies you've been told.

It's one or the other really!

That's not true either, though. Someone could have reached the same conclusions based on different assumptions and data."

There is no data to support those conclusions, of course. The only way analysis of the data would support the conclusions is if you _iew (and indeed twist) them to support an ideological bias...in which case, the less said about that, the better.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??

Sadly symptomatic of the idiocy that surrounds this issues.

No-one on benefits is getting a 'pay rise'. Their benefits will cease to match the rate of inflation, so rather than not becoming poorer, they will now become poorer.

You should really be asking what your government is doing to make wages in the private sector improve, rather than wanting other vulnerable people in society to become worse off.

my wages dont match the rate of inflation so by your reasoning i am also getting poorer right?

i dont WANT people to become poorer but it is a kick in the nuts when people who choose not to work moan about not getting increases in their 'free' money."

If only it was so easy, to anyone I would say dont judge someone else until you have walked a mile in their shoes. To try going from a well paid private sector job earning a very good salary (yes with no pay rises and inflation the way it is) to losing your job through no fault of your own.

Then try living on £71 a week. Try to empathise how someone feels when they may end up bankrupt, lose their house etc.

I have paid taxes for 18 years or so, earned over £45k pa and I am now in a position I am trying to live on £71 a week. Don't judge us all by the minorities behaviour, I want to work, I am now re training, the irony? I will now lose my £71 a week when re training as Im not available for a job.

A little empathy and understanding for those less fortunate could boost peoples confidence and ability to get through a tough time.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

"I would like to know what, exactly, was the question on the survey sent by UGOV to the MP's? Was the question "What pay rise do you think you should get right now as an MP?", that is one thing.

However, if the question was "What salary do you think an MP should receive?", that's something completely different.

If it was the first question, then I would agree they are out of touch, greedy bastards who should be stood up against a wall and shot.

But... if it were the second, then I have to say I don't find it unreasonable.

Rather than concentrate on the salary, I think we ought to be questioning the sheer number of MP's, and the distribution under the Constituency Boundaries.

You are correct, the question was what they felt would be a reasonable salary. I wouldn't be an MP on £68k - you hand over your life and have very little chance to switch off. However, we can ask the same question about nurses.

As I understand it, most MPs feel that adding £20k to their salaries would be at about the right level. My reason for writing the post as I did is obvious.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

If inflation is pegged at 1% then I see no reason why benefits shouldn't also be pegged at 1%, but if inflation goes up and benefits don't the purchasing power of people on benefits goes down, ergo reducing their ability to escape the poverty trap. At the moment interests rates are historically low and will be for some time because the Treasury knows that if interest rates start to climb too fast too soon inflation will rise with it, and that's in nobody's interest.

The flip side of that though is that those people who are solvent are earning very little on their investments, so they need something attractive to keep their money in Britain Plc, so they get that in the form of tax breaks (but it isn't reported why they get them, only that they are getting them).

As for MPs salaries, personally I think they are too low. That sounds controversial I know, but if you look at any business turning a profit you will find that they employ the brightest and the best to ensure that happens. It's no different with MPs in so much if we pay peanuts we get monkeys. I don't know how much a US Senator earns but I'd wage it's considerably more than £65,000.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

i dont WANT people to become poorer but it is a kick in the nuts when people who choose not to work moan about not getting increases in their 'free' money.

Then try living on £71 a week. Try to empathise how someone feels when they may end up bankrupt, lose their house etc.

A little empathy and understanding for those less fortunate could boost peoples confidence and ability to get through a tough time."

Thanks for that contribution. The 1% cap means that your weekly "increase" would not buy you a coffee at a greasy spoon.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I have paid taxes for 18 years or so, earned over £45k pa and I am now in a position I am trying to live on £71 a week. Don't judge us all by the minorities behaviour, I want to work, I am now re training, the irony? I will now lose my £71 a week when re training as Im not available for a job."

Why should you be paid jobseeker's allowance when you're not job seeking? It's called Job Seeker's Allowance and is designed to help you get to inter_iews, buy decent clothing to make yourself presentable etc. If you aren't engaging in going to inter_iews you don't need money to get there do you. It's not money the govt give you to buy food, or go to the pub. It's for seeking a job.

Additionally, if you've previously held jobs that commanded a £45k salary (I presume you held that level of work for a number of years) then why would £71/week be so vital to you?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

i dont WANT people to become poorer but it is a kick in the nuts when people who choose not to work moan about not getting increases in their 'free' money.

Then try living on £71 a week. Try to empathise how someone feels when they may end up bankrupt, lose their house etc.

A little empathy and understanding for those less fortunate could boost peoples confidence and ability to get through a tough time.

Thanks for that contribution. The 1% cap means that your weekly "increase" would not buy you a coffee at a greasy spoon."

Just one question I will ask about the £71 a week though...do you have to pay your mortgage/rent and council tax out of that too as if not then in real terms you are getting more than £71 a week...more like £171. And yes I know this is still less than someone on minimum wage but £71 a week is not the full picture!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I would like to know what, exactly, was the question on the survey sent by UGOV to the MP's? Was the question "What pay rise do you think you should get right now as an MP?", that is one thing.

However, if the question was "What salary do you think an MP should receive?", that's something completely different.

If it was the first question, then I would agree they are out of touch, greedy bastards who should be stood up against a wall and shot.

But... if it were the second, then I have to say I don't find it unreasonable.

Rather than concentrate on the salary, I think we ought to be questioning the sheer number of MP's, and the distribution under the Constituency Boundaries.

As I understand it, most MPs feel that adding £20k to their salaries would be at about the right level. My reason for writing the post as I did is obvious."
Just been listening to the repeat of Any Questions on Radio 4. This question inevitably came up and the level of squirming between Malcolm Rifkind, Harriet Harperson and Simon Hughes - and the accompanying degree of avoiding answering the question - was palpable.... shame on them...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

As I understand it, most MPs feel that adding £20k to their salaries would be at about the right level. My reason for writing the post as I did is obvious.Just been listening to the repeat of Any Questions on Radio 4. This question inevitably came up and the level of squirming between Malcolm Rifkind, Harriet Harperson and Simon Hughes - and the accompanying degree of avoiding answering the question - was palpable.... shame on them...

They did not acquit themselves well on this.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

They did not acquit themselves well on this."
Expected nothing else from Ms Harperson, but Simon Huighes' deliberately answering a completely different question (whether an independent panel set MP's pay) was, erm, 'disheartening'... Would have liked to hear better from said Mr Hughes to be honest....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??

Sadly symptomatic of the idiocy that surrounds this issues.

No-one on benefits is getting a 'pay rise'. Their benefits will cease to match the rate of inflation, so rather than not becoming poorer, they will now become poorer.

You should really be asking what your government is doing to make wages in the private sector improve, rather than wanting other vulnerable people in society to become worse off.

i am not talking about people who cant work for medical/disability reasons when i say this but i fail to see how people ho CHOOSE not to work are vulnerable?

Have those who have just lost their jobs at Jessops and Honda chosen to not work? The cap affects them too.

are you suggesting that no one on benefits choses to be there? "

i think you will find they dont get redundancy if the company goes into adminarstration

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 12/01/13 14:57:35]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rightonsteveMan over a year ago

Brighton - even Hove!

MP's should have been doing their very best and utmost at a salary of £68k so why pay more? Will they work harder? 32% harder? I think not. The Eton Mess got their jobs on not what they know but who they know. Money should not be their prime motivation for becoming MPs.

As for benefits, people don't buy bread with percentages. 1% of not much is still not much and as inflation is higher than 1% then it's a small minded nasty CONservative pay cut for the most vulnerable in society. A real 'I'm all right, Jack' mentality. Big Society? We're all in this together? Ha!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *iewMan over a year ago
Forum Mod

Angus & Findhorn

if you want to attract the best political minds, £68k isn't going to attract people with the life & professional skills for that..

that is no more than an average middle management salary in a FTSE company.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman over a year ago

evesham

"32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??

Sadly symptomatic of the idiocy that surrounds this issues.

No-one on benefits is getting a 'pay rise'. Their benefits will cease to match the rate of inflation, so rather than not becoming poorer, they will now become poorer.

You should really be asking what your government is doing to make wages in the private sector improve, rather than wanting other vulnerable people in society to become worse off.

i am not talking about people who cant work for medical/disability reasons when i say this but i fail to see how people ho CHOOSE not to work are vulnerable?

Have those who have just lost their jobs at Jessops and Honda chosen to not work? The cap affects them too.

are you suggesting that no one on benefits choses to be there?

i think you will find they dont get redundancy if the company goes into adminarstration "

well then i i admit to learning something new today...at least i am not above that

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

i dont WANT people to become poorer but it is a kick in the nuts when people who choose not to work moan about not getting increases in their 'free' money.

Then try living on £71 a week. Try to empathise how someone feels when they may end up bankrupt, lose their house etc.

A little empathy and understanding for those less fortunate could boost peoples confidence and ability to get through a tough time.

Thanks for that contribution. The 1% cap means that your weekly "increase" would not buy you a coffee at a greasy spoon.

In brief YES, I am expected to pay the mortgage , at best I"might" in the future after another few months get mortgage interest relief only, meanwhile the mortgage arrears pile up, and there is a monthly charge added for this too. If there was no mortgage you can get housing benefit, but not with a mortgage. You do get council tax relief however this will also be lost during re training as if a course is under 6 months they expect you to pay council tak as well as lose your JSA. Its a minefield.

Yes, its not the "full" picture, but please dont judge until you know the full facts about someone/a situation. (talking generically here). Again the point I was making is I have paid a lot of tax over the years, during one bonus month I paid nearly £6000 tax that month, and have paid into a system to support me now through NO FAULT of my own, £71 plus whatever is not a living wage. Try it please and let me know how comfortable it is -aimed at those who judge without experiencing it.

Try running a car looking for work/flexibility, try paying your mortgage the best you can whilst dealing with demanding phone calls every day, try paying gas, electricity, food, water rates, tv licence out of £71 a week and good luck to you. I have paid my way in tax, why should I not be supported at this time and given a rise to link with inflation?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

i think the crux of the matter with MP's and yes i think we should pay them more, but to be honest theres just to many of them, over 650 to run a small country like ours, america which has bee quoted on here has just over 420, and that country is 20 times the size lol

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"MP's should have been doing their very best and utmost at a salary of £68k so why pay more? Will they work harder? 32% harder? I think not. The Eton Mess got their jobs on not what they know but who they know. Money should not be their prime motivation for becoming MPs.

You are becoming so predictable with your posts. Eton Mess blah blah blah ... so who did the previous Labour ministers tap up to get their jobs then? Were they working at full capacity for 12 years? Which is why we're in such a (non-Eton) Mess now?

Big Society requires members of it to activaly engage in making it better, and if someone isn't doing that then why should they be included in any benefits of such a society. Paying them a minimal amount for being out of work (for more than 6 months as JSA stops after that) means that they are being tolerated, and if they can't be bothered to get off their arses and change their circumstances without bleating on and on about how let down they feel by the govt, then fuck em.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

i dont WANT people to become poorer but it is a kick in the nuts when people who choose not to work moan about not getting increases in their 'free' money.

Then try living on £71 a week. Try to empathise how someone feels when they may end up bankrupt, lose their house etc.

A little empathy and understanding for those less fortunate could boost peoples confidence and ability to get through a tough time.

Thanks for that contribution. The 1% cap means that your weekly "increase" would not buy you a coffee at a greasy spoon.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

i hope you never fall on hard times

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"i think the crux of the matter with MP's and yes i think we should pay them more, but to be honest theres just to many of them, over 650 to run a small country like ours, america which has bee quoted on here has just over 420, and that country is 20 times the size lol"

You're quite right of course, but to reduce the number of MPs entails changing constituency borders, and whenever that subject is raised there are always accusations flying about of changing the borders to suit the party currently in power.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

i hope you never fall on hard times "

I have in the past, so I retrained as an electrician. I didn't sit on my arse moaning about how bad the govt is.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

and to add, if it wasn't for my very supportive partner and my parents I would have went under already, their support is keeping me going and I know I will rise again. Just hearing the "Daily Mail" type comments damning us all gets very wearisome and depressing, its on every forum and its the same uninformed _iews at times. Yes I agree everyone has their own opinion, just mine is towards empathy and support for fellow humans rather than single minded and often blinkered _iews some can have that put themselves at the centre of the universe. IMHO

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

i visted texas in the summer just goner, its roughly 4 times as big as the uk, i think they have 29 senators, it dont make any sense what so ever to me

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I have paid my way in tax, why should I not be supported at this time and given a rise to link with inflation?"

Paying tax isn't like banking it over the years you know. You pay tax to provide the services society needs at the time you need it. For benefits calculations, only the previous two years tax payments are taken into consideration. If the govt was to consider tax you paid 20 years ago when you earned a lot less and paid a lot less it wouldn't amount to much in the way of credit now would it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

i hope you never fall on hard times

I have in the past, so I retrained as an electrician. I didn't sit on my arse moaning about how bad the govt is. "

i think you missed the point completely, im not moaning or the other guy posting on here, its the attitude to some people regarding the unemployed

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"and to add, if it wasn't for my very supportive partner and my parents I would have went under already, their support is keeping me going and I know I will rise again. Just hearing the "Daily Mail" type comments damning us all gets very wearisome and depressing, its on every forum and its the same uninformed _iews at times. Yes I agree everyone has their own opinion, just mine is towards empathy and support for fellow humans rather than single minded and often blinkered _iews some can have that put themselves at the centre of the universe. IMHO"

How many fellow humans felt empathetic enough to pop round and help you out recently, excluding partner & family?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"i think you missed the point completely, im not moaning or the other guy posting on here, its the attitude to some people regarding the unemployed "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"i hope you never fall on hard times

I have in the past, so I retrained as an electrician. I didn't sit on my arse moaning about how bad the govt is.

i think you missed the point completely, im not moaning or the other guy posting on here, its the attitude to some people regarding the unemployed "

Erm, nope, I got the point of your one line post completely.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *iamondsmiles.Woman over a year ago

little house on the praire

Mine is a simple answer,put the pm in with a single parent living on some awful high block. Not for a week, anyone can live on nothing for a week.

n three months, you have to pay for haircuts, clothes/new school uniform. When people have make money out of thin airLet him watch as the young kids have to stay the hous to play as its not safe for them to play out

In fact just give him state benifit for 3months, no hiden ects.

He would spend it all in ond go on his chauffer to work

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *iamondsmiles.Woman over a year ago

little house on the praire

[Removed by poster at 12/01/13 15:13:24]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

How many fellow humans felt empathetic enough to pop round and help you out recently, excluding partner & family?"

I am lucky enough to have some good friends who i have helped in the past that have helped me recently. eg a mate that fixed my heating FOC, another who took us away for a few days FOC, others that pop by to chat and offer friendship and often offer fiscal support (not taken it). Even great friends from here asking how things are etc is also a support. There are decent people out there.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rightonsteveMan over a year ago

Brighton - even Hove!

I think someone has a chip on their shoulder!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think someone has a chip on their shoulder!

Only poor people have those. Usually cos that's all they can afford.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??"

Believe it or not not everyone who is on benefits choose to be i would rather be in work than not and millions are being demonised deliberabetly by the coakition divide and rule.

I agree in principle to a cap but when the elite few get massive tax cut then it smacks of double standards and now the mps want more if they do not like the job they should resign and fuck off.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"i hope you never fall on hard times

I have in the past, so I retrained as an electrician. I didn't sit on my arse moaning about how bad the govt is.

i think you missed the point completely, im not moaning or the other guy posting on here, its the attitude to some people regarding the unemployed

Erm, nope, I got the point of your one line post completely."

well that was an educated come back, one liners sometimes get there message over

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman over a year ago

evesham

"so i cant just have an opinion for myself, i've got to have believed lies?

Well, either you have an opinion that exactly matches those lies, in which case the less said about that the better, or you believe the lies you've been told.

It's one or the other really!"

wel....seeing as you seem to know me better than i know myself....do you know where i put my car tax renewal???

i have no political affiliation, i read no newspapers and listen to newsbeat on the way home from work (possiby the most patronising radio non-news ever!)

i am not speaking from some ivory tower, i work and am in fact facing the possibiity of becomming unemployed in a couple of months due to job relocation.

i dont profess to be an expert or have the ultimate opinion that everyone must adopt (unike some on here) and have the ability to learn and re-evaluate my opinions (again, unlike some on here). this is the reason i participate in these threads, i like to learn.

I am in a slightly priveledged ituation where by i have only ever been unemployed for 2 weeks and so have never had to claim JSA and have no doubt that it is tough to be claiming this but i personally find that the people moaning the most about not getting as much as they feel they are entitled to are those who do as little as possible to find work and better themselves. why should i show empathy towards them?

Perhaps that is an envronmental thing limited to my particular geographic position.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think someone has a chip on their shoulder!

Only poor people have those. Usually cos that's all they can afford.

yet another poor come back

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rightonsteveMan over a year ago

Brighton - even Hove!

"empathetic".....what does this mean? I know what 'empathic' means and 'pathetic'....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

"Mine is a simple answer,put the pm in with a single parent living on some awful high block. Not for a week, anyone can live on nothing for a week.

In fact just give him state benifit for 3months, no hiden ects.

He would spend it all in ond go on his chauffer to work"

It's a good idea for all of us. Having money has its own problems I am sure.

I did some work on participative government/decision making about 10 years ago - Citizen's Juries. You get people together and give them the budget and ask them to make the decisions for an area. It's not so easy when you have to do it. Premature babies or hip replacements always got very interesting.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *weet DevilMan over a year ago

dukinfield

have no worries mps will only be gettin 1 % like everyone else its already agreed

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rightonsteveMan over a year ago

Brighton - even Hove!

I just know who I will be voting for next election. As will students with loans, as will public sector employees, as will the unemployed....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

""empathetic".....what does this mean? I know what 'empathic' means and 'pathetic'....

perhaps look up "pedantic" also ??????

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

""empathetic".....what does this mean? I know what 'empathic' means and 'pathetic'....

perhaps look up "pedantic" also ??????"

and the missing

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

This mess were in now was caused a lot longer ago than the previous Labour goverment

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman over a year ago

evesham

"This mess were in now was caused a lot longer ago than the previous Labour goverment"

has any government ever made it better? surely they woud stay in power forever if they did?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *o-jCouple over a year ago

Outskirts of Notts

Not that I want to or will have a go at anyone , BUT I know of at least one single mum and a couple of teenagers without jobs but they all have iphones , I cant afford one , not jealous just wondered how come .

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

god i could rant about this so much ,,ive been diagnosed with ostio arthritis of the spine and anso have it in both legs , feft hip and left hand ,,,im currently on so many meds that my doc signed me off work and says im in no fit state ,,currently going through pain management at hospital and also under a neuro surgeon for when my legs completely shut down without any warning and also had 3 heart attacks ,,,and im "fit for work" according to atos healthcare ..i have lost all my disability payments and now on £71 per week to feed me n 2 kids and pay all my bills ...the job i had before i had to leave to give you an idea of my busiest time after tax in nov dec and january i could clear £3000 plus per month ...so dont get me started about the wxxxers in government ..i would love to be back in work and have loads of cash but im not ,,and half of these lazy assholes who cant be bothered to work really pixx me off

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Not that I want to or will have a go at anyone , BUT I know of at least one single mum and a couple of teenagers without jobs but they all have iphones , I cant afford one , not jealous just wondered how come .

perhaps someone else brought them for them, did you ask

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

i dont WANT people to become poorer but it is a kick in the nuts when people who choose not to work moan about not getting increases in their 'free' money.

Then try living on £71 a week. Try to empathise how someone feels when they may end up bankrupt, lose their house etc.

A little empathy and understanding for those less fortunate could boost peoples confidence and ability to get through a tough time.

Thanks for that contribution. The 1% cap means that your weekly "increase" would not buy you a coffee at a greasy spoon.

Firstly, I wasn't judging I was merely pointing out that £71 a week is not the full picture as some seem to forget that as well as the job seekers allowance there is more in the background which isn't physically paid to the claimant. I was under the impression that mortgage support was available 'straight away' (subject to the usual paperwork shite!) as I have a friend who was in a similar situation and if she'd have had to wait months for any form of help every single person she came into contact with would have known about it so maybe her situation was different?

I haven't been out of work and would struggle if I was to suddenly be out of work but like anyone else I would have to cut my cloth accordingly whilst I found some kind of work...if I needed to though I would work in McDonalds to pay my way though as even though it's a crappy job, it's a job! I do respect that you are doing some training to pursue alternative employment so that would make it difficult (although their hours can be very flexible), but that is something I'm guessing you have chosen to do? Also, I would imagine you are getting some kind of financial support towards it? If not then I would enquire about it as I know there have been incentives for training in order to get people off JSA in the long term.

Don't want to get into a debate about personal circumstances as they are exactly that...personal...but I still don't believe giving increased benefits is better for anyone when the government could instead put that money towards reducing the cost of living for everyone

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

gifts perhaps? second hand? super fantastic contract? found it? Nicked it?

ps I dont have one either

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

"This mess were in now was caused a lot longer ago than the previous Labour goverment

has any government ever made it better? surely they woud stay in power forever if they did?"

It doesn't matter who you vote for you always get the government is a truism. The longer a government stays in power the less effective it becomes. I also think we get what we deserve because we are apathetic about democracy in this country.

I'm looking forward to the new series of Yes Prime Minister this week. The old ones are still relevant.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"god i could rant about this so much ,,ive been diagnosed with ostio arthritis of the spine and anso have it in both legs , feft hip and left hand ,,,im currently on so many meds that my doc signed me off work and says im in no fit state ,,currently going through pain management at hospital and also under a neuro surgeon for when my legs completely shut down without any warning and also had 3 heart attacks ,,,and im "fit for work" according to atos healthcare ..i have lost all my disability payments and now on £71 per week to feed me n 2 kids and pay all my bills ...the job i had before i had to leave to give you an idea of my busiest time after tax in nov dec and january i could clear £3000 plus per month ...so dont get me started about the wxxxers in government ..i would love to be back in work and have loads of cash but im not ,,and half of these lazy assholes who cant be bothered to work really pixx me off

i dont think its about the not working, its about surving, and your a prime example of how the benefitts system dont work

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

i dont WANT people to become poorer but it is a kick in the nuts when people who choose not to work moan about not getting increases in their 'free' money.

Then try living on £71 a week. Try to empathise how someone feels when they may end up bankrupt, lose their house etc.

A little empathy and understanding for those less fortunate could boost peoples confidence and ability to get through a tough time.

Thanks for that contribution. The 1% cap means that your weekly "increase" would not buy you a coffee at a greasy spoon.

i agree with you, but did you know, the tax payer are paying these companies in a in direct way to employ them

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *o-jCouple over a year ago

Outskirts of Notts

perhaps someone else brought them for them, did you ask

Might have been the same person who bought them the designer sportswear .....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

my dad is very good with finance and politics and over the years this has all said to have been coming for a long time ,,and when maggie thatcher was in power the national debt was summet like 4 billion and now its more then 10 times that and news on the grape vine is that not only big companys like the one electrical company who recently shut down it looks like the banks them selves will be following this route too.

so anyone with large investments in the bank then be aware you may have to pull your money out completely or loose every thing

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

perhaps someone else brought them for them, did you ask

Might have been the same person who bought them the designer sportswear ....."

could be there mother or father, i know ive bought my kids the same stuff, and again there lies the problem, people just jump to conclusions

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

this is no joke either so for the little man or even successful business man its going to hit hard ,,,then watch war start

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman over a year ago

evesham

perhaps someone else brought them for them, did you ask

Might have been the same person who bought them the designer sportswear .....

could be there mother or father, i know ive bought my kids the same stuff, and again there lies the problem, people just jump to conclusions

and you're not.....jumping to the conclusion that they have super generous riends and famiy buying them £500 phones and designer clothes?

if i was in a position where i was claiming benefits i think i'd prefer them to help me out in more practical ways

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I get your thoughts, i did say everyone has and can have an opinion. No problem. Just giving my slant on it by the same rules

To clarify, you do not get mortgage interest support until after 6 months. I do not get any assistance for the course as its a privately funded (non further education type) course at a private school (paid for by myself)On this course I am physically in the building 830 to about 530 mon to fri, EVERY night I do a further 2 hours or so "homework" as well as travel to and from the school. At the weekend I do around another 10 hours homework. Wonder when I could fit another "job" in? In my last job i worked up to 75 hours a week normally (unpaid overtime) so im used to hard work.

And please don't condemn McDonalds as a "crappy job" that smacks of superiority over those that do work there. They too often work long unsocial hours and im sure they wouldnt like to be considered as having a "crappy job". Mutual respect goes a long way everyone.

Im off now to buy fags and booze

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

i can see this country eventually getting like something off a mad max film and there been one big war and then everyone fending for them selves and colonies of folk trying to protect wot they have ....violence , war , looting and the rest of it but thats my _iew cos this government is going to push and push till people snap and then there is going to be one hell of a fight back to take control of the country

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

perhaps someone else brought them for them, did you ask

Might have been the same person who bought them the designer sportswear .....

could be there mother or father, i know ive bought my kids the same stuff, and again there lies the problem, people just jump to conclusions

and you're not.....jumping to the conclusion that they have super generous riends and famiy buying them £500 phones and designer clothes?

if i was in a position where i was claiming benefits i think i'd prefer them to help me out in more practical ways"

im not jumping to anything, i said it MIGHT be, not it WAS, im speaking from my own prospective here, cos i know i've done it for my kids, and that £500 phone must be gold encased lol, lots of phone companies now give them away with a contract

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ucsparkMan over a year ago

dudley

"What do you think of the 1% benefits cap and the poll of MPs which shows they want a 32% increase on their salaries?

In it together? This is public sector pay and all of them feel they should be paid more, but not the rest of the public sector."

Who remember the fire fighters strike when they ask for same as MP's and media turned on them. Pay them all what they are worth and with the money they give us back it should cover the GND and leave some spare

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I get your thoughts, i did say everyone has and can have an opinion. No problem. Just giving my slant on it by the same rules

Im off now to buy fags and booze

I did work there for 3 years when I was at Uni, which is how I know if is a flexible but crappy job as a crew member...although the management training scheme is pretty good if someone wanted to progress in the company.

I do find it hard to be believe there is no form or support for someone in any kind of further/higher education though. Admittedly it isn't something I have looked into for some time as I'm still paying off my debts from my uni days but I would have thought there would be some kind of students loans still available if nothing else to support through the education...that's what I got in place of grants as I started the year after grants stopped (although I did get my tuition fees paid as my dad isn't my legal guardian, technically he's just my mums husband).

With regards to the mortgage support, fine I do not know the facts and am surprised it doesn't kick in sooner...that should be changed as it's no different to giving someone housing benefit and is unfair to those who could potentially lose their home which someone in a council home does have a lower risk of

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman over a year ago

evesham

perhaps someone else brought them for them, did you ask

Might have been the same person who bought them the designer sportswear .....

could be there mother or father, i know ive bought my kids the same stuff, and again there lies the problem, people just jump to conclusions

and you're not.....jumping to the conclusion that they have super generous riends and famiy buying them £500 phones and designer clothes?

if i was in a position where i was claiming benefits i think i'd prefer them to help me out in more practical ways

so you would pay £45 a month for someone elses contract, hoping that they dont go over any text/minute/data usage or run up bills caling premium rate numbers.....you are very generous.

p.s. look up costs for sim free iphones, they are not that far from £500

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I just know who I will be voting for next election. As will students with loans, as will public sector employees, as will the unemployed...."

They will vote for the party that promises them the most. As is usual. If any party had stood up in 2010 and said, "look, reality time, we're up shit creek without a paddle and we're going to have to cut, cut, cut until you bleed," they'd have been lucky to get a few thousand votes.

2015 will be no different to any election in the past. Over the next two years the Tories will start to 'buy' back the votes they've lost these past two years with tax cuts and extra spending. Labour will try and offset the Tories election pledges with pledges of their own that amount to more buy backs than the Tories are offiering, and the LibDems will be saying, "please vote for us, we're really sorry about the last time etc."

UKIP will stand in seats they think they can win and ask the electorate to back Britain all the way and the Greens will hug a few more trees and hope someone, anyone, notices it.

Let's not be naive about it eh.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

Public funding for training is capped to literacy and numeracy and upto level 3 qualifications. It doesn't really help with re-training.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

""empathetic".....what does this mean? I know what 'empathic' means and 'pathetic'....

Empathetic: An empathetic person is someone who can share another person's feelings.

Dictionary: a useful book for looking up words and what they mean.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

perhaps someone else brought them for them, did you ask

Might have been the same person who bought them the designer sportswear .....

could be there mother or father, i know ive bought my kids the same stuff, and again there lies the problem, people just jump to conclusions

and you're not.....jumping to the conclusion that they have super generous riends and famiy buying them £500 phones and designer clothes?

if i was in a position where i was claiming benefits i think i'd prefer them to help me out in more practical ways

so you would pay £45 a month for someone elses contract, hoping that they dont go over any text/minute/data usage or run up bills caling premium rate numbers.....you are very generous.

p.s. look up costs for sim free iphones, they are not that far from £500"

try looking on the virgin media website, max £25 a month, with a free phone, and yes i,ve paid for a family member in the past, along with there uni's fee's etc

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Wonder how our MP's would feel, knowing that the Nation's Swingers are debating heatedly their opinion on their pay....?

I feel some Nadine Dorres-related comments coming on.....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Wonder how our MP's would feel, knowing that the Nation's Swingers are debating heatedly their opinion on their pay....?

I feel some Nadine Dorres-related comments coming on.....

haha, perhaps some are honorable members on here

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Wonder how our MP's would feel, knowing that the Nation's Swingers are debating heatedly their opinion on their pay....?

I feel some Nadine Dorres-related comments coming on.....

haha, perhaps some are honorable members on here

ment to say have honorable members

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Wonder how our MP's would feel, knowing that the Nation's Swingers are debating heatedly their opinion on their pay....?

I feel some Nadine Dorres-related comments coming on.....

haha, perhaps some are honorable members on here

Wouldn't be that 'honourable' then....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Wonder how our MP's would feel, knowing that the Nation's Swingers are debating heatedly their opinion on their pay....?

I feel some Nadine Dorres-related comments coming on.....

haha, perhaps some are honorable members on here

Wouldn't be that 'honourable' then....

i refer to my previous answer

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

as said before its NOT higher or further education so not supported its a private course I have paid for to re train in a completely different profession. Id like to say it was my choice but losing my job forced me into making that decision. Maybe hard to believe but I do unfortunately know being in the position.

in the end it will be worth it but it is hard at the minute and the way people on here and other places (talking generically not specifically) talk down towards those often less fortunate to themselves does get you down, and I am a very positive person as anyone who has met us would verify!!! well I hope

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

perhaps someone else brought them for them, did you ask

Might have been the same person who bought them the designer sportswear .....

could be there mother or father, i know ive bought my kids the same stuff, and again there lies the problem, people just jump to conclusions

and you're not.....jumping to the conclusion that they have super generous riends and famiy buying them £500 phones and designer clothes?

if i was in a position where i was claiming benefits i think i'd prefer them to help me out in more practical ways

so you would pay £45 a month for someone elses contract, hoping that they dont go over any text/minute/data usage or run up bills caling premium rate numbers.....you are very generous.

p.s. look up costs for sim free iphones, they are not that far from £500

try looking on the virgin media website, max £25 a month, with a free phone, and yes i,ve paid for a family member in the past, along with there uni's fee's etc "

My friend pays for 3 family members phones as he is the breadwinner (brothers and mum) and they are not too well off. It happens.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *isscheekychopsWoman over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

I am lucky that the place that I am seconded from have given me a payrise and bonus 2 years running.. Its just a shame my substanial role is no longer there...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 12/01/13 17:27:09]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman over a year ago

evesham

I've been looking into retraining as my job is uncertain. I saw something online about deferred career development loans. Admittedly I didn't look into it much as I didn't have much time so dint know the eligibility etc. Have you looked into them?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

thanks for the thought but not eligible im afraid

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman over a year ago

evesham

[Removed by poster at 12/01/13 19:20:11]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

"What do you think of the 1% benefits cap and the poll of MPs which shows they want a 32% increase on their salaries?

..............."

Do you really want your legislators to be paid roughly the same as a mediocre double-glazing salesman?

Westminster is populated by people you wouldn't stand next to in the pub or allow in your house.

When the wages are peanuts, the applicants will be monkeys. This isn't good for democracy or the country.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

The Government in its entirity are complete shiesters they take take take. 32% I wouldn't give them the steam off my pish theiving scum sucking mutants who are as usefull as tits on a boar hog.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

"What do you think of the 1% benefits cap and the poll of MPs which shows they want a 32% increase on their salaries?

...............

Do you really want your legislators to be paid roughly the same as a mediocre double-glazing salesman?

Westminster is populated by people you wouldn't stand next to in the pub or allow in your house.

When the wages are peanuts, the applicants will be monkeys. This isn't good for democracy or the country."

They are paid a mid management wage currently. They feel they deserve more. I raised the question only in context of the 1% cap.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

"What do you think of the 1% benefits cap and the poll of MPs which shows they want a 32% increase on their salaries?

...............

Do you really want your legislators to be paid roughly the same as a mediocre double-glazing salesman?

Westminster is populated by people you wouldn't stand next to in the pub or allow in your house.

When the wages are peanuts, the applicants will be monkeys. This isn't good for democracy or the country.

They are paid a mid management wage currently. They feel they deserve more. I raised the question only in context of the 1% cap.

There's no sense in conflating the two issues.

The 1% 'rise' is effectively a reduction in income. Couple that with the attack on Housing Benefit and the witch hunt on the genuinely ill, it's hardly surprising people are up in arms about this.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

Do you really want your legislators to be paid roughly the same as a mediocre double-glazing salesman?

Westminster is populated by people you wouldn't stand next to in the pub or allow in your house.

When the wages are peanuts, the applicants will be monkeys. This isn't good for democracy or the country.

They are paid a mid management wage currently. They feel they deserve more. I raised the question only in context of the 1% cap.

There's no sense in conflating the two issues.

The 1% 'rise' is effectively a reduction in income. Couple that with the attack on Housing Benefit and the witch hunt on the genuinely ill, it's hardly surprising people are up in arms about this."

Oh come on, you know why I have conflated the two things.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

................

Oh come on, you know why I have conflated the two things."

Yes, but I'm not the sort of person who'd seek to hold it against you.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

................

Oh come on, you know why I have conflated the two things.

Yes, but I'm not the sort of person who'd seek to hold it against you."

I don't mind if people do. I can have a reasoned debate about the 1% cap and a separate one about the right level of salary for MPs but I am interested that both points are current in a particular economic and political climate.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

................

Oh come on, you know why I have conflated the two things.

Yes, but I'm not the sort of person who'd seek to hold it against you.

'Cept they're not.

I dunno any MP who is actually campaigning for a 32% pay rise - or any pay rise for that matter. I'm sure it suits certain media outlets to propagate such nonsense but it doesn't make it true.

The 1% benefits uplift, effectively a cut in income, is coalition policy and was passed at Westminster earleir this week.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

................

Oh come on, you know why I have conflated the two things.

Yes, but I'm not the sort of person who'd seek to hold it against you.

'Cept they're not.

I dunno any MP who is actually campaigning for a 32% pay rise - or any pay rise for that matter. I'm sure it suits certain media outlets to propagate such nonsense but it doesn't make it true.

The 1% benefits uplift, effectively a cut in income, is coalition policy and was passed at Westminster earleir this week."

I know. The fact that any of them are giving their opinion that they should have a £20k uplift at this time helps to fuel the media stories on this.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

..................

'Cept they're not.

I dunno any MP who is actually campaigning for a 32% pay rise - or any pay rise for that matter. I'm sure it suits certain media outlets to propagate such nonsense but it doesn't make it true.

The 1% benefits uplift, effectively a cut in income, is coalition policy and was passed at Westminster earleir this week.

I know. The fact that any of them are giving their opinion that they should have a £20k uplift at this time helps to fuel the media stories on this.

You'll get the odd (VERY odd) MP who'll break cover on this front but it really isn't a major topic of conversation in the (heavily subsidised) tearooms.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ovingit2012Man over a year ago

Dudley

Put it bluntly this whole government is corrupt!! Politions have no idea of the real world. Most people are on benifits because this government put them there!! 72 pounds a fortnight!! How can any one live on that!! Then as a joke on them they get forced onto the work-fare to at tesco or were ever earn there benifits. Then theres the disabled who are forced to work too!! 6 months left to live?? Yea you can work too! Makes me sick.. people pay there tax... n.i. for years then shafted and treated as work shy. Look at these politions..... micheal gove... £39 pound for a breakfast on expenses... the chancellor with his house and paddock he sold with 500k profit the taxpayer paid the intrest on that house... oh and the mp who claimed £1500 on curtains!!!! Courtesy of the taxpayer... disgusting... there laughing at our expence!! Im lucky i have a job but im seriously screwed if i ever lost it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Way i see it is all the folk that slag off the unemployed etc all i woll say to you is simply overnight you could end up.out of work and how soon your _iews on amount to survive would be. Glass houses and all that

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Politicians aren't selfless public servants / volunteers.

usually (if not always!) they're cynical self interested, lazy hypocrites wanting to milk the public purse for as much as they can - perhaps slog out a few terms of public office doing the bare minimal then retiring into a cushy career of professional public speaker.. touring the university circuits and publishing their auto-biographies / BBC panelist question time pundits / presenting shows on bbc 2 about middle England.

Would be nice to see things restructured within the democratic tradition in some way - governments taking on a much more accurately representational character and less of faceless bureaucratical one.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ovingit2012Man over a year ago

Dudley

"Politicians aren't selfless public servants / volunteers.

Would be nice to see things restructured within the democratic tradition in some way - governments taking on a much more accurately representational character and less of faceless bureaucratical one."

great reply

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Way i see it is all the folk that slag off the unemployed etc all i woll say to you is simply overnight you could end up.out of work and how soon your _iews on amount to survive would be. Glass houses and all that"

Yes I agree, none of us are immune from a P45 and falling on hard times. I work in an industry which has seen a great deal of 'streamlining' and have seen incredibly hard working folk lose their jobs through no fault of their own.

The challenge of limited funds, benefit caps, access to (re)training, job seeking etc, is quite possibly an unwelcome reality to many of us even though we may not be experiencing it right now regardless of how well the 'order books' may appear

As for the MPs, not all of them are pushing for a great hike in their salary, some of them do actually remain in touch with reality.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"What do you think of the 1% benefits cap and the poll of MPs which shows they want a 32% increase on their salaries?

In it together? This is public sector pay and all of them feel they should be paid more, but not the rest of the public sector."

To me the 2 issues are totally independent. Firstly Mp's are paid less than many a corporate position of a similar standing but in the current financial position then I think its not appropriate.

Benefit caps? Well I see no reason to put them up at all in many cases. The emphasis should be in helping people get employment and paying them more isn't going to do that. I find it strange that all these people supposedly struggler in many cases are still smoking and drinking which frankly are not must have items on survival.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I am on benefits myself, and i do get embarrassed by this sometimes even though most of you know that i can-not go to work as i have a severely disabled child. I get everything i can from the government to make her life as comfortable as i can. I did work right up to having my daughter and i just want to say it's a very lonely life being on benefits.

The 1% cap i totally agree with as i know certain people who are pushing out children so they don't have to work and its them that should be penalised not the people that really need it.

The councils and the Government don't do enough checking on these people even those who claim the disability allowance, No one has ever called on me all i do is fill out the forms and send them back. Luckily i have nothing to hide unlike others !!!!

(Crackling)

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Bah! Politicians.... Whoever you vote for you will always have them "in power". Whatever their promises they won't and usually can't deliver. Parliamentary Privilege (privilege means private law, pertaining to politicians) is just that. It's a way of getting around verbal contracts made to the electorate. Doesn't matter what your political leaning is, you will always be disappointed. Partly due to the bureaucracy that is the civil service and also due to the pressure of commercial institutions. Waste of money, all of it. Bless Saint Guy Fawkes, not the sharpest tool in the box maybe but on the right side...

Now, when I rule the new Republic of Great Britain I will employ more people to build a big wall. Up against that wall will be placed a long line of gravy train politicos and their accomplices. Then the caps they'll need to worry about will be the ones that citizens will be popping in their collective asses... long live the revolution!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ucky_LadsCouple (MM) over a year ago

Kidderminster+ surrounding areas.

"What do you think of the 1% benefits cap and the poll of MPs which shows they want a 32% increase on their salaries?

In it together? This is public sector pay and all of them feel they should be paid more, but not the rest of the public sector.

To me the 2 issues are totally independent. Firstly Mp's are paid less than many a corporate position of a similar standing but in the current financial position then I think its not appropriate.

whilst we are struggling to find work to feed & cloth our selves and the family jobs in uk are still being advertised to european job seekers by a taxpayer funded brussels scheme.

the project which aims to help people find jobs other eu countries has advertised 357,570 jobs across 22 different countries on its website and astonishingly 169,600 (45%)of these jobs are in britain.

an eu spokesman claimed there is no evidence that migrant workers take jobs away from the host country but we know different and these people and our government are burying their heads in the sand.

if you are jobless and on benefits the future does look bloody bleak i am afraid to say!.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

".............

whilst we are struggling to find work to feed & cloth our selves and the family jobs in uk are still being advertised to european job seekers by a taxpayer funded brussels scheme.

an eu spokesman claimed there is no evidence that migrant workers take jobs away from the host country but we know different and these people and our government are burying their heads in the sand.

if you are jobless and on benefits the future does look bloody bleak i am afraid to say!.

You don't wanna believe everything you read in The Sun.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *utty_JiggleCouple over a year ago

Black Country

I think the 32% increase is a joke.

the PM keeps going on about "cutting costs".. well i think his MP's need to look a little closer to home.

maybe the 32% pay rise, is so that the MP's with children will still be able to get the money they would of got for child benefit.

in the Private sector, you are not really handed Pay rises every year, these are things you have to work for, and earn. and i think this should be the same for MP's.. if they did something worthy of the 32% increase, then fair enough. but should be just expecting it.

*passes soap box onto next forumite.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

Curiously enough*, it's the Tories who think they were most underpaid.

"On average, Tories said their salary should be £96,740, while Lib Dems thought the right amount was £78,361 and Labour £77,322. Other parties put the figure at £75,091." BBC website.

*OK, I was kidding.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *abioMan over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

I think a part of what has been missed in all the hoopla over the "32%" figure is that it is part of a public consultation over what MP's should be paid...

so where they may want 32%......and i would absolutely love to see they justify that if it were to happen, which it wont!, the next part of the consultation is the public....

so when the consultation starts... make your voices heard and contribute....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *abioMan over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

and now onto the 1% "working benefits" cap.... this is going to shock people... I am not against it...

why.........

I was working out what wage increses I have had in the last 5 years working in the public sector for the railways and the civil service..... 1%,pay freeze,pay freeze,pay freeze,1%

I am betting I am not alone

where as benefits go up normally with inflation... so over the same 5 year period people on benefits have had increases of 3%,3%,4%,5%,3%

over the last 5 years in real term values those on benefits have gone up 20%, those in the private sector have gone up 12% and the rest of us... I wished!!!

after all if we in the public sector or only getting 1%,and have had 1% or pay freezes for the last 3-4 years, why should those who are not working in compartively better off then those who are?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I think the Pm and the Coalition are doing a fantastic job. I made a very good return in property and development.

Thanks to the recession. I purchased more property's last year than any other year!

And lots of tenants around to house.

Good business is were you find it. my staff all got 15% bonus on their yearly income. at xmas!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

".................

after all if we in the public sector or only getting 1%,and have had 1% or pay freezes for the last 3-4 years, why should those who are not working in compartively better off then those who are?"

The problem with looking at such matters in simple %age terms is that 1% of a working persons salary is a great deal more than 1% of JSA, yet both are shopping in the same supermarket and buying the same leccy.

%ages just amplify gaps.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *abioMan over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

%ages just amplify gaps."

but again if inflation if running at between 3-5% on average and people on benefits have been getting that, but we as gov employees as have only been getting 1% or nothing... why people who work as a be penalised in real teams when others havent been....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

%ages just amplify gaps.

Working people deserve wage rises even in line with inflation even if government funded.

People on Benefits should be thankful for what they get.

Granted some people really need the support, but most should find work or create there own work its not that hard and stop complaining.

They are taking handouts and biting the hand that feeds them.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Do we not think that the waters have become really muddied over the whole benefit culture?

The simple reality is that if we are going to pay people not to work or to top up their money if they are lower paid then we have to assume two things

1) That the rest of the working population can pay sufficient taxes to support those outgoing benefits.

2) That the people being supported do not lose the basic will to work and get on in life.

Unfortunately we can't pay the bills at the moment and a significant number of people appear to have lost the desire to work.

Lets not beat around the bush here. We are a civilised society and no-one wants the truly needy to suffer but surely it is a basic requirement of a progressive society that able bodied people of working age should be looking after themselves first and foremost and not rely on State benefits to exist.

Where has this concept arisen of expectation that it is not necessary to work to survive in life? I don't doubt for one second that living on benefits is difficult and I don't doubt that sacrifices have to be made but some people are able to exist long term on benefits and this can't be right. The truly needy should not suffer and really they should have more but able bodied people should get less and should have motivation to get back to a productive existence.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Do we not think that the waters have become really muddied over the whole benefit culture?

The simple reality is that if we are going to pay people not to work or to top up their money if they are lower paid then we have to assume two things

1) That the rest of the working population can pay sufficient taxes to support those outgoing benefits.

2) That the people being supported do not lose the basic will to work and get on in life.

Unfortunately we can't pay the bills at the moment and a significant number of people appear to have lost the desire to work.

Thats what i was going to say but got all workrd up! very well said.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

" ..........

The simple reality is that if we are going to pay people not to work or to top up their money if they are lower paid then we have to assume two things

1) That the rest of the working population can pay sufficient taxes to support those outgoing benefits.

.................."

The working population isn't the only source of tax revenue but, even if we assume it is, the problem isn't whether or not they CAN pay, it's whether any government has the courage to MAKE them pay.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

" ..........

The simple reality is that if we are going to pay people not to work or to top up their money if they are lower paid then we have to assume two things

1) That the rest of the working population can pay sufficient taxes to support those outgoing benefits.

..................

The working population isn't the only source of tax revenue but, even if we assume it is, the problem isn't whether or not they CAN pay, it's whether any government has the courage to MAKE them pay."

Tax revenue comes from the creation of cash which comes from work. Whether the tax comes from a person or an entity it has to be generated in the first instance. No work, no wealth creation equals no tax revenue.

We all pay tax on the the things we buy, employees get tax deducted at source, the self employed pay tax via self assessment and Companies pay staff NI contributions and Corporation tax on profits.

There are laws requiring all of these taxes to be paid and if you are referring to multi nationals not paying corporation tax then that is a matter not just for our Government but for the International Courts to challenge European and Worldwide tax treaties.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *abioMan over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

".................

after all if we in the public sector or only getting 1%,and have had 1% or pay freezes for the last 3-4 years, why should those who are not working in compartively better off then those who are?

%ages just amplify gaps."

you want to use JSA as an example... but they get housing benefit and have that paid, they also get council tax or the majority of that paid....

I as a working person still have to find the mortgage/rent money, still have to pay the council tax....

so if i am taxing a real term cut.. plus everything else is going up around me, it almost gets to a situation where I am better off sitting at home than working... and that should never be the case...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

" ..........

The simple reality is that if we are going to pay people not to work or to top up their money if they are lower paid then we have to assume two things

1) That the rest of the working population can pay sufficient taxes to support those outgoing benefits.

..................

The working population isn't the only source of tax revenue but, even if we assume it is, the problem isn't whether or not they CAN pay, it's whether any government has the courage to MAKE them pay.

We all pay tax on the the things we buy, employees get tax deducted at source, the self employed pay tax via self assessment and Companies pay staff NI contributions and Corporation tax on profits.

Yeah, it's always someone else's job.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

".................

...........

you want to use JSA as an example... but they get housing benefit and have that paid, they also get council tax or the majority of that paid....

I as a working person still have to find the mortgage/rent money, still have to pay the council tax....

Working people get Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit too. It should be remembered that HB isn't money to spend down the pub - it has to be paid to the landlord.

I agree people should be better off in work than on benefit but you achieve that by improving wages, not diminishing benefits.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

".................

...........

you want to use JSA as an example... but they get housing benefit and have that paid, they also get council tax or the majority of that paid....

I as a working person still have to find the mortgage/rent money, still have to pay the council tax....

Working people get Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit too. It should be remembered that HB isn't money to spend down the pub - it has to be paid to the landlord.

I agree people should be better off in work than on benefit but you achieve that by improving wages, not diminishing benefits."

Onny, you live in a fantasy, Utopian world that can simply never exist other than in the minds of modern socialists. It is up to you to better yourself in life and improve your personal wealth and standing. Why would anyone else do that for you? It is your life and your responsibility to look after yourself.

This country is in a recession and it competes industrially with China and Asia - do you know the work conditions in those countries? We are punching way above our weight thanks mainly to our ties to Europe but no one is going to suddenly become all philanthropic and give all their staff a pay rise.

Employers create businesses to earn money for themselves - let's not forget this. If the business requires simple, manual work then they will pay low wages. If the business wants to grow and improve and needs more and/or better staff then the best get promoted and others get brought in for higher wages. These are simple market forces at work. This is why you now have Polish Managers and Supervisors in Hotels and the service industry - they took the low paid job and bettered themselves to earn more money.

It seems to me that many of your posts on this and related topics seem to be motivated by envy and a sense of inequality?? Unfortunately, life is really just not as fair as we would all wish it to be and my own _iew is that nobody owes us anything and everything we want, we should use our own efforts and resources to achieve.

Relying on this, or any government, to do us all a favour is simply a waste of time and a recipe for resentment. Just get on with your life and do the best you can for No 1.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

".................

.................

You're right about the inequality. I'll never stop striving to make this a more equal country.

"Relying on this, or any government, to do us all a favour is simply a waste of time and a recipe for resentment. Just get on with your life and do the best you can for No 1."

That's where we'll have to differ. I spent many years 'doing the best for No 1'. Now's the time to do my best for others less capable.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

[Removed by poster at 13/01/13 21:18:10]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icketysplits OP Woman over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

".................

...........

Relying on this, or any government, to do us all a favour is simply a waste of time and a recipe for resentment. Just get on with your life and do the best you can for No 1."

I don't see how you get to that position. I want equality but I don't have envy about the earnings or lifestyles of others.

Doing the best for No.1 does the best for no one.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

".................

after all if we in the public sector or only getting 1%,and have had 1% or pay freezes for the last 3-4 years, why should those who are not working in compartively better off then those who are?

%ages just amplify gaps.

you want to use JSA as an example... but they get housing benefit and have that paid, they also get council tax or the majority of that paid....

I as a working person still have to find the mortgage/rent money, still have to pay the council tax....

as I have pointed out before on this thread, I am expected to find the cash to pay my mortgage as I cannot get mortgage interest relief yet, out my £71 a week on JSA. No wonder the arrears are piling up. Not always as clear cut as it may seem.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"32% is a joke!!

yes benefits sgould have a cap on them. i work in the private sector and havent had a pay rise in 6 years, why should people who dont work get one??"

I have always worked even when kids were little never asked for anything ,but others use having kids as an excuse not to work so why should those withs elf respect earning minimum wage be worse off than those not working

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I have always worked, and i loved my last job and heartbroken to have to leave due to medical resons. I presently cant work and await several ops . hopefully i maybe able to resume if all goes well....Im also being hit by the new "bedroom tax" = £100 per mth and cant move due to the council not having any smaller properties...so basically im fucked regardless.....no rise and losing half what i get....

It will hit those least able to afford it....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

"..............

It will hit those least able to afford it....

That's the Tories for you.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Bedroom tax ? What the hell is that ???

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I have done my best for No 1 (me) all my working life! Built a good business and can afford the things I want! Building my business has created 13 well paid jobs for my staff.

So working for No 1 (me) has benefited others!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eavenNhellCouple over a year ago

carrbrook stalybridge

[Removed by poster at 14/01/13 07:33:52]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

People on the dole get their housing and council tax paid so their $71{I've just realised there isn't a pound key on my tablet} is pretty much there's to do as they please. I know plenty of working people who'd kill to have 71 quid left a week once their bills had been paid

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eavenNhellCouple over a year ago

carrbrook stalybridge

"People on the dole get their housing and council tax paid so their $71{I've just realised there isn't a pound key on my tablet} is pretty much there's to do as they please. I know plenty of working people who'd kill to have 71 quid left a week once their bills had been paid"
gas electric water food clothing all have to come out of the £71 which does not leave a lot left .

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"People on the dole get their housing and council tax paid so their $71{I've just realised there isn't a pound key on my tablet} is pretty much there's to do as they please. I know plenty of working people who'd kill to have 71 quid left a week once their bills had been paidgas electric water food clothing all have to come out of the £71 which does not leave a lot left ."

I was reading about someone on another forum who had to give up work as she couldn't afford to go. Once shed paid her bills all she had left was 50p for the rest of the month.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

".................

after all if we in the public sector or only getting 1%,and have had 1% or pay freezes for the last 3-4 years, why should those who are not working in compartively better off then those who are?

%ages just amplify gaps.

you want to use JSA as an example... but they get housing benefit and have that paid, they also get council tax or the majority of that paid....

I as a working person still have to find the mortgage/rent money, still have to pay the council tax....

Why is the taxpayer expected to fund the purchase of your property? There was a national outcry when MPs were exposed as doing just that!

JSA is supposed to fund you looking for a job, if you haven't budgeted over the years and built yourself a slush fund for when times are lean that's your own goddam fault.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Bedroom tax ? What the hell is that ??? "

It is part of the benefits overhaul whereby if a council tennant is living in a house too big for them they lose benefit for each spare room they have in their current property.

Council tennants will lose £14/week if they leave a room unoccupied for more than 13 weeks.

It's not the best thought out policy of the govt as it included armed forces personnal who are posted away from home, often for more than the 13 weeks stipulated by the new policy.

The govt have to address the problem of misued housing stock, and building more houses isn't the obvious answer. Making better use of existing housing would be much more preferable but these plans are making the coalition come across as hard and uncaring. People put children into schools where they live (often because of catchment area stipulations) and moving house to one more suited to a particular family pays no attention to school catchment areas, local services, places of employment etc.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ugby 123Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

O o O oo

Why is the taxpayer expected to fund the purchase of your property? There was a national outcry when MPs were exposed as doing just that!

JSA is supposed to fund you looking for a job, if you haven't budgeted over the years and built yourself a slush fund for when times are lean that's your own goddam fault."

You really don't live in the real world Wishy.

So if your wife and you both lost your jobs and you were left with JSA, you would be on here telling people they should have saved up to pay their morgage/bills/food for kids etc?

What if people are on minimum wage before losing their jobs, were all their wages were taken up by paying bills before they lost their job?

When people say they don't get help with their morgage....they prpbably mean they were encouraged to buy their house, lost their job and now can't get any help with paying it.

If they hadn't have bought their house they would now be getting help with paying rent. Why should people who rent their houses get help when things go pair shaped and the people who try and better themselves get none?

Wake up Wishy, you need some coffee to smell.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

One very quick answer Ruggers:

Who benefits when someone who owns their house sells it?

I don't see them rushing to give Joe Taxpayer some money back for when he helped out. Council tennancy is a different matter altogether.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ugby 123Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

O o O oo

PS Mp's where doing more than just getting morgage payments on a second home.....we are talking about the only roof over peoples heads.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ugby 123Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

O o O oo

"One very quick answer Ruggers:

Who benefits when someone who owns their house sells it?

I don't see them rushing to give Joe Taxpayer some money back for when he helped out. Council tennancy is a different matter altogether."

Who benefits when the landlord who has been getting paid rent from the goverment to help the people who are living in his house when he sells?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So if your wife and you both lost your jobs and you were left with JSA, you would be on here telling people they should have saved up to pay their morgage/bills/food for kids etc?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"One very quick answer Ruggers:

Who benefits when someone who owns their house sells it?

I don't see them rushing to give Joe Taxpayer some money back for when he helped out. Council tennancy is a different matter altogether.

Who benefits when the landlord who has been getting paid rent from the goverment to help the people who are living in his house when he sells?"

That's a pretty weak counter argument. Those landlords who do it as a mainstream business rarely sell up as they know how profitable it is. The benefit changes apply to council tennencies, not those renting from the private sector.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ugby 123Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

O o O oo

As I remember you have a wife who earned great money to support you....that what married couples do.

What if you were on your own, no other money to live on because you were on minimum wage before you lost your job....have the same bills as everyone else including a bill to keep a roof over your head....how would you feel then?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ugby 123Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

O o O oo

"One very quick answer Ruggers:

Who benefits when someone who owns their house sells it?

I don't see them rushing to give Joe Taxpayer some money back for when he helped out. Council tennancy is a different matter altogether.

Who benefits when the landlord who has been getting paid rent from the goverment to help the people who are living in his house when he sells?

And that isn't an answer to the question.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eavenNhellCouple over a year ago

carrbrook stalybridge

So if your wife and you both lost your jobs and you were left with JSA, you would be on here telling people they should have saved up to pay their morgage/bills/food for kids etc?

Two years ago I did lose my job and was on JSA - for 6 months until they stopped it. We were entitled to fuck all after that. I wasn't on here whingeing about it though, I put £5k on my credit card and retrained as an electrician."
lucky you had a credit card to put 5k on some people arent in that fortunate position ie most people on minimum wage

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"PS Mp's where doing more than just getting morgage payments on a second home.....we are talking about the only roof over peoples heads."

I did say in my initial post that I thought this bedroom tax was/is a badly thought out idea.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So if your wife and you both lost your jobs and you were left with JSA, you would be on here telling people they should have saved up to pay their morgage/bills/food for kids etc?

lucky you had a credit card to put 5k on some people arent in that fortunate position ie most people on minimum wage "

Oh FFS! So now we, the taxpayer, are at fault for someone not having a decent credit rating?

Only a brainless idiot would rack up more debt than they can service, thus making themselves unloanable to.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ugby 123Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

O o O oo

So if your wife and you both lost your jobs and you were left with JSA, you would be on here telling people they should have saved up to pay their morgage/bills/food for kids etc?

you could have saved your 5 grand, because you was on JSA you could have got a training course for free.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"One very quick answer Ruggers:

Who benefits when someone who owns their house sells it?

I don't see them rushing to give Joe Taxpayer some money back for when he helped out. Council tennancy is a different matter altogether.

Who benefits when the landlord who has been getting paid rent from the goverment to help the people who are living in his house when he sells?

And that isn't an answer to the question.

Mr Miliband recently suggested that Britain is in danger of becoming a Two-nation country: landlords and tennants. He had to say that so he could then promote his One Nation brand of Labour, but the reality is that there has ALWAYS been landlords and tennants. How did the govt come to own so much housing stock before the big sell off? It was because it believed in the ideaology of a cradle-to-the-grave nanny state. Mrs Thatcher changed that way of thinking and put it firmly in people's minds that they have the right to own their own homes. King of your own proverbial castle, so to speak. Not everyone can do that though, and there will still be landlords and tennants. If they happen to be council tennants they are at the whim of govt policy, it's the govt's houses after all, not the tennant's.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)