gmc;1421537 wrote: Yes there's something seriously wrong with the country and the system but it's not people like your friend the bus driver and his wife that are the problem yet that is exactly the kind of people the tories are attacking and labelling as benefit scroungers. The other one who is eating out is probably committing fraud have you reported her to the authorities - that number they keep advertising that you should call. Are you sure she is on benefits have you asked her or are you just making that assumption?
I'm being nice calling you a fascist. You support a party that used to be the british nazi party and even had plans to stand as an MP for them. If you don't know what went on before in the banking or why our industry and agriculture is all but destroyed where were you? Asleep or what. It's a toss up which of the political parties is most to blame.
I am standing first...
Yes, I am aware of what went on with the banking In this country but:
I have the utmost sympathy for the genuine but let's be honest here, when we had bail out, It affected a huge amount of people that simply lived beyond their means. They spank the credit to the max and when It goes tits up, they're down the bankruptcy court getting dissolved only to start the whole process 8 years later.
Yes, I was lucky. I had a Father who provided well but I was raised that only one person Is responsible for any mess I make In my adult life and that's me.
Fifteen years ago our joint Income was £1,800 a week. I had a three bedroomed house and even a cleaner because I worked 10 hours a day. We lost most of It when through no fault of my own I had to have major emergency surgery which was complicated by Pulmonary Embolisms. As I recovered, my husband was found to be In the advance stage of cancer resulting In radical open surgery which took him 3 years to recover from fully. When he survived that he was diagnosed with a terminal Illness.Thankfully because of the way I was raised, I didn't have loans, credit card Interest etc etc. We moved to a smaller house and despite living In a tiny village, I took any work I could find. I was lucky that I had a skill and got work on race courses but I had to travel miles to do so. We recovered and everything I have now Is what I've worked for.... so do I feel sympathetic to someone who lives totally beyond their means.... NO.
Yes, what the bankers did was criminal and they should be jailed for fraud. Yes, they destroyed people's lives but If anyone thinks I should feel guilty for getting off my arsse to pay my way In life, then they'll be a long time waiting.
Bastyards
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
-
AnneBoleyn
- Posts: 6632
- Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm
Bastyards
Government benefits exist to keep the lid on insurgency. I'm sure the Romans didn't want to feed their massive numbers of poor or give them free gladiator shows to keep their minds off their lot, but they did. To keep the lid on insurgency. I often think that is why my country's Democratic Party came to exist in its present form.
Bastyards
AnneBoleyn;1421545 wrote: Government benefits exist to keep the lid on insurgency..
That's a good way to put it. When too many people are starving and out of work....heads will roll. (See: The French Revolution)
That's a good way to put it. When too many people are starving and out of work....heads will roll. (See: The French Revolution)
Bastyards
oscar;1421542 wrote: husband was found to be In the advance stage of cancer took him 3 years to recover from fully. When he survived that he was diagnosed with a terminal Illness.We recovered and everything I have now Is what I've worked for.... so do I feel sympathetic to someone who lives totally beyond their means.... NO.
Yes, what the bankers did was criminal and they should be jailed for fraud. Yes, they destroyed people's lives but If anyone thinks I should feel guilty for getting off my arsse to pay my way In life, then they'll be a long time waiting.
I sympathize with you. oscar, I really do. But I get a different slant to your troubles. To me, a system that makes someone go bankrupt because they got sick is not taking care of its people.
(I recently had to go through a bankruptcy for the exact same reason....medical bills. And that's AFTER my extremely good state insurance paid out! American medical system = broken.)
Yes, what the bankers did was criminal and they should be jailed for fraud. Yes, they destroyed people's lives but If anyone thinks I should feel guilty for getting off my arsse to pay my way In life, then they'll be a long time waiting.
I sympathize with you. oscar, I really do. But I get a different slant to your troubles. To me, a system that makes someone go bankrupt because they got sick is not taking care of its people.
(I recently had to go through a bankruptcy for the exact same reason....medical bills. And that's AFTER my extremely good state insurance paid out! American medical system = broken.)
-
AnneBoleyn
- Posts: 6632
- Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm
Bastyards
In the USA, where MDs used to enjoy God Status, it seems there is still a law on the books that says all MDs must be millionaires. That, plus privatization, for profit HMOs are reasons why the system is "broken". I don't see it as being broken btw, you're just in the wrong line of work.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
Saint_;1421549 wrote: I sympathize with you. oscar, I really do. But I get a different slant to your troubles. To me, a system that makes someone go bankrupt because they got sick is not taking care of its people.
(I recently had to go through a bankruptcy for the exact same reason....medical bills. And that's AFTER my extremely good state insurance paid out! American medical system = broken.) I don't need sympathy and I didn't go bankrupt.
My post was some sort of explanation why I have no sympathy for someone who won't travel for a job or anyone made bankrupt because they have lived totally beyond their means on credit.
As to our banking situation, part of bail out was due to banks lending money to people living beyond their means.
(I recently had to go through a bankruptcy for the exact same reason....medical bills. And that's AFTER my extremely good state insurance paid out! American medical system = broken.) I don't need sympathy and I didn't go bankrupt.
My post was some sort of explanation why I have no sympathy for someone who won't travel for a job or anyone made bankrupt because they have lived totally beyond their means on credit.
As to our banking situation, part of bail out was due to banks lending money to people living beyond their means.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Bastyards
Posted by gmc.....That was a generic comment not intended for snowfire in particular who I don't think is a daily mail reader.
Thats alright mate but it did make me think of my Nan
My Nan used to tear newspaper into squares and thread them onto string cos toilet paper was too expensive. I'm sure her preference would have been the Daily Mail
Thats alright mate but it did make me think of my Nan
My Nan used to tear newspaper into squares and thread them onto string cos toilet paper was too expensive. I'm sure her preference would have been the Daily Mail
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire."
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
Bastyards
oscar;1421542 wrote: I am standing first...
Yes, I am aware of what went on with the banking In this country but:
I have the utmost sympathy for the genuine but let's be honest here, when we had bail out, It affected a huge amount of people that simply lived beyond their means. They spank the credit to the max and when It goes tits up, they're down the bankruptcy court getting dissolved only to start the whole process 8 years later.
Yes, I was lucky. I had a Father who provided well but I was raised that only one person Is responsible for any mess I make In my adult life and that's me.
Fifteen years ago our joint Income was £1,800 a week. I had a three bedroomed house and even a cleaner because I worked 10 hours a day. We lost most of It when through no fault of my own I had to have major emergency surgery which was complicated by Pulmonary Embolisms. As I recovered, my husband was found to be In the advance stage of cancer resulting In radical open surgery which took him 3 years to recover from fully. When he survived that he was diagnosed with a terminal Illness.Thankfully because of the way I was raised, I didn't have loans, credit card Interest etc etc. We moved to a smaller house and despite living In a tiny village, I took any work I could find. I was lucky that I had a skill and got work on race courses but I had to travel miles to do so. We recovered and everything I have now Is what I've worked for.... so do I feel sympathetic to someone who lives totally beyond their means.... NO.
Yes, what the bankers did was criminal and they should be jailed for fraud. Yes, they destroyed people's lives but If anyone thinks I should feel guilty for getting off my arsse to pay my way In life, then they'll be a long time waiting.
Whose suggesting you should feel guilty? Just imagine similar circumstances where you didn't have a skill and weren't able to get a job.
so do I feel sympathetic to someone who lives totally beyond their means.... NO.
Why do you assume that everybody was living beyond their means? Most people are within three months of not being able to pay their mortgage, a lender can repossess after two months although most of them hold off. I'm sure you appreciate that £1800 a week is more than most people earn in a month. Add the cost of kids and everything else and it's easy to understand why people might not have much of a cushion if they lose their jobs. They're not spendthrift or living way beyond their means most people just have enough to get by. Perhaps your mortgage was paid off and you didn't find yourself in negative equity and you could sell up and move to a smaller house for a lot of people that just isn't an option. You end up homeless on the waiting list. If you are renting you are out the door even quicker than two months with a private landlord. How easy it is to get another job depends very much on where you live. That is a fact that the constant litany of people need to get off their backsides and find works. is not going to change that and even you happen to live in one of those areas it makes people very angry. I know couples whose joint income is less than £1800 a month and both in full time employment, yes they claim income support but are they scroungers. How about all the remploy employees who have just lost their jobs so they can be integrated in to "normal" employment were they pathetic no hoper's. No they were just disabled benefit scroungers playing the system and should get a proper job according to the daily mail and it's ilk.
As to our banking situation, part of bail out was due to banks lending money to people living beyond their means.
A very small part of it, a large chunk of it was outright fraud perpetrated by the banks selling on what they know were bad mortgages as part of a supposedly secure investment bought by other banks to re-insure their risk. (it's called securities fraud) It was also them fiddling the libor rate. What brought down the northern rock was over two thirds of the mortgages it sold being over 100% loan to value. Now your starter for ten which idiot chancellor brought that in to help people get on the housing market in areas where houses were overpriced. Which idiot chancellor sold our nations gold reserves when gold was at an all time low and finally which chancellor's first budget included a raid on everybody's pension fund taking out 5 billion a year achieved by reducing tax credits to 10% from 20%.
Blaming people for living beyond their means and banging on about benefit scroungers is a great way to divert attention away from what the bastards have been up to.
Yes, I am aware of what went on with the banking In this country but:
I have the utmost sympathy for the genuine but let's be honest here, when we had bail out, It affected a huge amount of people that simply lived beyond their means. They spank the credit to the max and when It goes tits up, they're down the bankruptcy court getting dissolved only to start the whole process 8 years later.
Yes, I was lucky. I had a Father who provided well but I was raised that only one person Is responsible for any mess I make In my adult life and that's me.
Fifteen years ago our joint Income was £1,800 a week. I had a three bedroomed house and even a cleaner because I worked 10 hours a day. We lost most of It when through no fault of my own I had to have major emergency surgery which was complicated by Pulmonary Embolisms. As I recovered, my husband was found to be In the advance stage of cancer resulting In radical open surgery which took him 3 years to recover from fully. When he survived that he was diagnosed with a terminal Illness.Thankfully because of the way I was raised, I didn't have loans, credit card Interest etc etc. We moved to a smaller house and despite living In a tiny village, I took any work I could find. I was lucky that I had a skill and got work on race courses but I had to travel miles to do so. We recovered and everything I have now Is what I've worked for.... so do I feel sympathetic to someone who lives totally beyond their means.... NO.
Yes, what the bankers did was criminal and they should be jailed for fraud. Yes, they destroyed people's lives but If anyone thinks I should feel guilty for getting off my arsse to pay my way In life, then they'll be a long time waiting.
Whose suggesting you should feel guilty? Just imagine similar circumstances where you didn't have a skill and weren't able to get a job.
so do I feel sympathetic to someone who lives totally beyond their means.... NO.
Why do you assume that everybody was living beyond their means? Most people are within three months of not being able to pay their mortgage, a lender can repossess after two months although most of them hold off. I'm sure you appreciate that £1800 a week is more than most people earn in a month. Add the cost of kids and everything else and it's easy to understand why people might not have much of a cushion if they lose their jobs. They're not spendthrift or living way beyond their means most people just have enough to get by. Perhaps your mortgage was paid off and you didn't find yourself in negative equity and you could sell up and move to a smaller house for a lot of people that just isn't an option. You end up homeless on the waiting list. If you are renting you are out the door even quicker than two months with a private landlord. How easy it is to get another job depends very much on where you live. That is a fact that the constant litany of people need to get off their backsides and find works. is not going to change that and even you happen to live in one of those areas it makes people very angry. I know couples whose joint income is less than £1800 a month and both in full time employment, yes they claim income support but are they scroungers. How about all the remploy employees who have just lost their jobs so they can be integrated in to "normal" employment were they pathetic no hoper's. No they were just disabled benefit scroungers playing the system and should get a proper job according to the daily mail and it's ilk.
As to our banking situation, part of bail out was due to banks lending money to people living beyond their means.
A very small part of it, a large chunk of it was outright fraud perpetrated by the banks selling on what they know were bad mortgages as part of a supposedly secure investment bought by other banks to re-insure their risk. (it's called securities fraud) It was also them fiddling the libor rate. What brought down the northern rock was over two thirds of the mortgages it sold being over 100% loan to value. Now your starter for ten which idiot chancellor brought that in to help people get on the housing market in areas where houses were overpriced. Which idiot chancellor sold our nations gold reserves when gold was at an all time low and finally which chancellor's first budget included a raid on everybody's pension fund taking out 5 billion a year achieved by reducing tax credits to 10% from 20%.
Blaming people for living beyond their means and banging on about benefit scroungers is a great way to divert attention away from what the bastards have been up to.
Bastyards
oscar;1421509 wrote: Yeah ? And I have a girlfriend who Is deeply wounded for having to ask a food charity for help.
Her husband Is a coach driver for National Express and works all hours god gives him. He even drove long distance In that snow and ice we had when no-one else would. She also works a few hours a week despite having a baby and a toddler. She also has his two older children that she took after their mother abandoned them.
They had no Christmas presents this year and now she has to ask a food charity for help...
Meanwhile my vile neighbour who has never worked a day In her life has a fridge full of beer and orders take-outs 4 times a week along with eating at the local Cavery on a Sunday because she's too bone idle to cook for her 4 kids. They have a car, plasma screen tv etc etc and she'll think nothing of wasting £200 on another body piercing or tattoo.
gmc;1421510 wrote: That is not snowfire, or you come to that, so my apologies if offence was given. I just read it to see what crap is being spun.
This was seen in the Sun on Sunday so no offence at all.
Frankie Boyle said.........I am copying typing this.
"I am not going to slag off mum-of-11 Heather Frost for buying a horse with benefits.
In fairness, she's got to feed all those kids somehow.
Poor lady must have stretch marks to rival the pattern on a faded tiger skin rug.
The kids were all natural- the last two being winched but using a bucket and a winder like you'd find on an old time well.
This is actually Heathers attempt to get off benefits and back to work- she needs transport and the job she's looking for is over 12 fences and six furlongs away.
Of course, there is a lesson to learn from this....
That benefit policy should be totally determined by a tiny minority of extreme cases
So funny and very very relevant...............to me anyway.
Her husband Is a coach driver for National Express and works all hours god gives him. He even drove long distance In that snow and ice we had when no-one else would. She also works a few hours a week despite having a baby and a toddler. She also has his two older children that she took after their mother abandoned them.
They had no Christmas presents this year and now she has to ask a food charity for help...
Meanwhile my vile neighbour who has never worked a day In her life has a fridge full of beer and orders take-outs 4 times a week along with eating at the local Cavery on a Sunday because she's too bone idle to cook for her 4 kids. They have a car, plasma screen tv etc etc and she'll think nothing of wasting £200 on another body piercing or tattoo.
gmc;1421510 wrote: That is not snowfire, or you come to that, so my apologies if offence was given. I just read it to see what crap is being spun.
This was seen in the Sun on Sunday so no offence at all.
Frankie Boyle said.........I am copying typing this.
"I am not going to slag off mum-of-11 Heather Frost for buying a horse with benefits.
In fairness, she's got to feed all those kids somehow.
Poor lady must have stretch marks to rival the pattern on a faded tiger skin rug.
The kids were all natural- the last two being winched but using a bucket and a winder like you'd find on an old time well.
This is actually Heathers attempt to get off benefits and back to work- she needs transport and the job she's looking for is over 12 fences and six furlongs away.
Of course, there is a lesson to learn from this....
That benefit policy should be totally determined by a tiny minority of extreme cases
So funny and very very relevant...............to me anyway.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
gmc;1421577 wrote: Whose suggesting you should feel guilty? Just imagine similar circumstances where you didn't have a skill and weren't able to get a job.
Why do you assume that everybody was living beyond their means? Most people are within three months of not being able to pay their mortgage, a lender can repossess after two months although most of them hold off. I'm sure you appreciate that £1800 a week is more than most people earn in a month. Add the cost of kids and everything else and it's easy to understand why people might not have much of a cushion if they lose their jobs. They're not spendthrift or living way beyond their means most people just have enough to get by. Perhaps your mortgage was paid off and you didn't find yourself in negative equity and you could sell up and move to a smaller house for a lot of people that just isn't an option. You end up homeless on the waiting list. If you are renting you are out the door even quicker than two months with a private landlord. How easy it is to get another job depends very much on where you live. That is a fact that the constant litany of people need to get off their backsides and find works. is not going to change that and even you happen to live in one of those areas it makes people very angry. I know couples whose joint income is less than £1800 a month and both in full time employment, yes they claim income support but are they scroungers. How about all the remploy employees who have just lost their jobs so they can be integrated in to "normal" employment were they pathetic no hoper's. No they were just disabled benefit scroungers playing the system and should get a proper job according to the daily mail and it's ilk.
A very small part of it, a large chunk of it was outright fraud perpetrated by the banks selling on what they know were bad mortgages as part of a supposedly secure investment bought by other banks to re-insure their risk. (it's called securities fraud) It was also them fiddling the libor rate. What brought down the northern rock was over two thirds of the mortgages it sold being over 100% loan to value. Now your starter for ten which idiot chancellor brought that in to help people get on the housing market in areas where houses were overpriced. Which idiot chancellor sold our nations gold reserves when gold was at an all time low and finally which chancellor's first budget included a raid on everybody's pension fund taking out 5 billion a year achieved by reducing tax credits to 10% from 20%.
Blaming people for living beyond their means and banging on about benefit scroungers is a great way to divert attention away from what the bastards have been up to.
Sorry but No. The banking scandal and the ensuing bail out In the main was down to unregulated banks and In some cases out and out fraud, but.... no-one put a gun to people's heads and forced them to borrow beyond their means and rack up credit.
We all make choices In life .
Why do you assume that everybody was living beyond their means? Most people are within three months of not being able to pay their mortgage, a lender can repossess after two months although most of them hold off. I'm sure you appreciate that £1800 a week is more than most people earn in a month. Add the cost of kids and everything else and it's easy to understand why people might not have much of a cushion if they lose their jobs. They're not spendthrift or living way beyond their means most people just have enough to get by. Perhaps your mortgage was paid off and you didn't find yourself in negative equity and you could sell up and move to a smaller house for a lot of people that just isn't an option. You end up homeless on the waiting list. If you are renting you are out the door even quicker than two months with a private landlord. How easy it is to get another job depends very much on where you live. That is a fact that the constant litany of people need to get off their backsides and find works. is not going to change that and even you happen to live in one of those areas it makes people very angry. I know couples whose joint income is less than £1800 a month and both in full time employment, yes they claim income support but are they scroungers. How about all the remploy employees who have just lost their jobs so they can be integrated in to "normal" employment were they pathetic no hoper's. No they were just disabled benefit scroungers playing the system and should get a proper job according to the daily mail and it's ilk.
A very small part of it, a large chunk of it was outright fraud perpetrated by the banks selling on what they know were bad mortgages as part of a supposedly secure investment bought by other banks to re-insure their risk. (it's called securities fraud) It was also them fiddling the libor rate. What brought down the northern rock was over two thirds of the mortgages it sold being over 100% loan to value. Now your starter for ten which idiot chancellor brought that in to help people get on the housing market in areas where houses were overpriced. Which idiot chancellor sold our nations gold reserves when gold was at an all time low and finally which chancellor's first budget included a raid on everybody's pension fund taking out 5 billion a year achieved by reducing tax credits to 10% from 20%.
Blaming people for living beyond their means and banging on about benefit scroungers is a great way to divert attention away from what the bastards have been up to.
Sorry but No. The banking scandal and the ensuing bail out In the main was down to unregulated banks and In some cases out and out fraud, but.... no-one put a gun to people's heads and forced them to borrow beyond their means and rack up credit.
We all make choices In life .
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
Bruv;1421578 wrote: This was seen in the Sun on Sunday so no offence at all.
Frankie Boyle said.........I am copying typing this.
"I am not going to slag off mum-of-11 Heather Frost for buying a horse with benefits.
In fairness, she's got to feed all those kids somehow.
Poor lady must have stretch marks to rival the pattern on a faded tiger skin rug.
The kids were all natural- the last two being winched but using a bucket and a winder like you'd find on an old time well.
This is actually Heathers attempt to get off benefits and back to work- she needs transport and the job she's looking for is over 12 fences and six furlongs away.
Of course, there is a lesson to learn from this....
That benefit policy should be totally determined by a tiny minority of extreme cases
So funny and very very relevant...............to me anyway.
Or as my Mother would say.... " Fanny like a horse's collar." " Didn't give birth, more slipped out of a Wizards sleeve...
Frankie Boyle said.........I am copying typing this.
"I am not going to slag off mum-of-11 Heather Frost for buying a horse with benefits.
In fairness, she's got to feed all those kids somehow.
Poor lady must have stretch marks to rival the pattern on a faded tiger skin rug.
The kids were all natural- the last two being winched but using a bucket and a winder like you'd find on an old time well.
This is actually Heathers attempt to get off benefits and back to work- she needs transport and the job she's looking for is over 12 fences and six furlongs away.
Of course, there is a lesson to learn from this....
That benefit policy should be totally determined by a tiny minority of extreme cases
So funny and very very relevant...............to me anyway.
Or as my Mother would say.... " Fanny like a horse's collar." " Didn't give birth, more slipped out of a Wizards sleeve...
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Bastyards
oscar;1421551 wrote: I don't need sympathy and I didn't go bankrupt.
My post was some sort of explanation why I have no sympathy for someone who won't travel for a job or anyone made bankrupt because they have lived totally beyond their means on credit. As to our banking situation, part of bail out was due to banks lending money to people living beyond their means.
Alrighty then.....
My post was some sort of explanation why I have no sympathy for someone who won't travel for a job or anyone made bankrupt because they have lived totally beyond their means on credit. As to our banking situation, part of bail out was due to banks lending money to people living beyond their means.
Alrighty then.....
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
Saint_;1421589 wrote: Alrighty then.....
Sorry If I came across as rude Saint.
Sorry If I came across as rude Saint.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Bastyards
oscar;1421592 wrote: Sorry If I came across as rude Saint.
Not to worry, I totally misread your post. (Filtering it through my recent experiences colored it I suppose...) It's all good.
Not to worry, I totally misread your post. (Filtering it through my recent experiences colored it I suppose...) It's all good.
Bastyards
oscar;1421583 wrote: Sorry but No. The banking scandal and the ensuing bail out In the main was down to unregulated banks and In some cases out and out fraud, but.... no-one put a gun to people's heads and forced them to borrow beyond their means and rack up credit.
We all make choices In life .
So I'll reiterate my pint. Getting people to concentrate on benefit scroungers and disability living allowance fraudsters and the odd extreme case is a great way to distract people from what is really the problem and what our government and corporations are up to. It certainly seems to work in your case.n If the daily mail would just go after all the fraudsters that make vast sums in this country and take all the profits abroad they might actually do some good. It does work to some extent - look at the effect it had on Starbucks, they do fear public condemnation.
We all make choices In life .
So I'll reiterate my pint. Getting people to concentrate on benefit scroungers and disability living allowance fraudsters and the odd extreme case is a great way to distract people from what is really the problem and what our government and corporations are up to. It certainly seems to work in your case.n If the daily mail would just go after all the fraudsters that make vast sums in this country and take all the profits abroad they might actually do some good. It does work to some extent - look at the effect it had on Starbucks, they do fear public condemnation.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
gmc;1421613 wrote: So I'll reiterate my pint. Getting people to concentrate on benefit scroungers and disability living allowance fraudsters and the odd extreme case is a great way to distract people from what is really the problem and what our government and corporations are up to. It certainly seems to work in your case.n If the daily mail would just go after all the fraudsters that make vast sums in this country and take all the profits abroad they might actually do some good. It does work to some extent - look at the effect it had on Starbucks, they do fear public condemnation.
However much you lay the blame on the deregulation of banking and what followed, you can not take away the fact that no-one put a gun to people's heads to borrow beyond their means.
However much you lay the blame on the deregulation of banking and what followed, you can not take away the fact that no-one put a gun to people's heads to borrow beyond their means.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Bastyards
oscar;1421619 wrote: However much you lay the blame on the deregulation of banking and what followed, you can not take away the fact that no-one put a gun to people's heads to borrow beyond their means.
True it is a fact but it's hardly the cause of the economic mess we are in. what the daily mail is doing is repeating something over and over and eventually people become convinced that is the cause and forget everything else. If you really think over-borrowing is the main cause of all the economic hardship people are facing in this recession I'm afraid you have dropped considerably in my estimation. I know you don't think that you are just not that stupid.
True it is a fact but it's hardly the cause of the economic mess we are in. what the daily mail is doing is repeating something over and over and eventually people become convinced that is the cause and forget everything else. If you really think over-borrowing is the main cause of all the economic hardship people are facing in this recession I'm afraid you have dropped considerably in my estimation. I know you don't think that you are just not that stupid.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
gmc;1421636 wrote: True it is a fact but it's hardly the cause of the economic mess we are in. what the daily mail is doing is repeating something over and over and eventually people become convinced that is the cause and forget everything else. If you really think over-borrowing is the main cause of all the economic hardship people are facing in this recession I'm afraid you have dropped considerably in my estimation. I know you don't think that you are just not that stupid.
The economic mess we are In Is not all about the problems associated with unregulated banks, some of It yes. Another major factor was the unlimited borrowing by the previous government.
Regardless, there Is a sense of entitlement In this country that has also come from previous governments.
Outstanding personal debt stood at £1.457 trillion at the end of February
2012.
 This is up from £1.452 trillion at the end of February 2011.
ï‚· Individuals owed nearly as much as the entire country produced during
the whole of 2011.
That's personal debt not mortgages.
http://www.creditaction.org.uk/assets/P ... ummary.pdf
We have had people come In and ask for a council house, no, demanded a council house because their mortgage Is taking up their disposable Income not because they're children have been living on the streets.
We have had women demand a council house because they've had an affair and the husband has kicked them out.
I'm not saying that the banks have not contributed to the mess but when you look at the figures for personal debt, there are a hell of a lot of people living beyond their means and expect the tax payer to keep them when It goes tits up. There comes a time when some people have to stop blaming everyone and everything around them and take some responsibility for the choices they made In life.
If I had my way, I'd bring In even tougher reforms and give more money to the genuine, but then I'm a Fascist.
The economic mess we are In Is not all about the problems associated with unregulated banks, some of It yes. Another major factor was the unlimited borrowing by the previous government.
Regardless, there Is a sense of entitlement In this country that has also come from previous governments.
Outstanding personal debt stood at £1.457 trillion at the end of February
2012.
 This is up from £1.452 trillion at the end of February 2011.
ï‚· Individuals owed nearly as much as the entire country produced during
the whole of 2011.
That's personal debt not mortgages.
http://www.creditaction.org.uk/assets/P ... ummary.pdf
We have had people come In and ask for a council house, no, demanded a council house because their mortgage Is taking up their disposable Income not because they're children have been living on the streets.
We have had women demand a council house because they've had an affair and the husband has kicked them out.
I'm not saying that the banks have not contributed to the mess but when you look at the figures for personal debt, there are a hell of a lot of people living beyond their means and expect the tax payer to keep them when It goes tits up. There comes a time when some people have to stop blaming everyone and everything around them and take some responsibility for the choices they made In life.
If I had my way, I'd bring In even tougher reforms and give more money to the genuine, but then I'm a Fascist.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Bastyards
oscar;1421638 wrote: The economic mess we are In Is not all about the problems associated with unregulated banks, some of It yes. Another major factor was the unlimited borrowing by the previous government.
What about the criteria for borrowing set by the financial institutions ?
The Banks set the rules for credit, in association with the Government.
The Banking crisis is basically the lowering of lending standards, by greedy bankers selling money, they don't own, to people that can barely afford to borrow.
If I had my way, I'd bring In even tougher reforms and give more money to the genuine, but then I'm a Fascist.
No.......you are an Idealist, shame we don't live in an Ideal world.
What about the criteria for borrowing set by the financial institutions ?
The Banks set the rules for credit, in association with the Government.
The Banking crisis is basically the lowering of lending standards, by greedy bankers selling money, they don't own, to people that can barely afford to borrow.
If I had my way, I'd bring In even tougher reforms and give more money to the genuine, but then I'm a Fascist.
No.......you are an Idealist, shame we don't live in an Ideal world.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
Bruv;1421644 wrote: What about the criteria for borrowing set by the financial institutions ?
The Banks set the rules for credit, in association with the Government.
The Banking crisis is basically the lowering of lending standards, by greedy bankers selling money, they don't own, to people that can barely afford to borrow.
No.......you are an Idealist, shame we don't live in an Ideal world. I totally agree with you.
But I reiterate... nobody held a gun to anyone's heads to borrow. There comes a time when people have to accept some responsibility.
The Banks set the rules for credit, in association with the Government.
The Banking crisis is basically the lowering of lending standards, by greedy bankers selling money, they don't own, to people that can barely afford to borrow.
No.......you are an Idealist, shame we don't live in an Ideal world. I totally agree with you.
But I reiterate... nobody held a gun to anyone's heads to borrow. There comes a time when people have to accept some responsibility.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Bastyards
oscar;1421648 wrote: I totally agree with you.
But I reiterate... nobody held a gun to anyone's heads to borrow. There comes a time when people have to accept some responsibility.
Oh good maybe Gordon brown and tony blair will give up all the money rhat are making after having screwed the country up and the bankers will stand trial for fraud. Take the libor rigging - that is fraud sio why no arrests?
posted by bruv
No.......you are an Idealist, shame we don't live in an Ideal world.
#
She's a fascist and a daily mail reader. She may be an idealist but so was adolf hitler amd mussolini.
But I reiterate... nobody held a gun to anyone's heads to borrow. There comes a time when people have to accept some responsibility.
Oh good maybe Gordon brown and tony blair will give up all the money rhat are making after having screwed the country up and the bankers will stand trial for fraud. Take the libor rigging - that is fraud sio why no arrests?
posted by bruv
No.......you are an Idealist, shame we don't live in an Ideal world.
#
She's a fascist and a daily mail reader. She may be an idealist but so was adolf hitler amd mussolini.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
gmc;1421700 wrote:
#
She's a fascist and a daily mail reader. She may be an idealist but so was adolf hitler amd mussolini. :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl
I actually gave this thread some thought last night because I wondered If I am being too hard on people but then I Imagined going to my Father to tell him I was thousands of pounds In debt.
Why ?
Well, Dad, see It wasn't my fault, The credit companies kept raising my credit limit. Then the Store cards did the same. I remortgaged the house because the bank kept suggesting what I could do with the money. Then I was offered a loan to upgrade the car and, well Dad, I can't pay It back now..... Dear God, he'd have laughed me out of the building.
Did you actually pay any attention to my link showing personal debt figures for the country for 2012 or did you skim right past It with your fingers In your ears singing la la la la la la la la ? Or are you trying to divery attention away by throwing In the Brown/Blair card?
#
She's a fascist and a daily mail reader. She may be an idealist but so was adolf hitler amd mussolini. :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl
I actually gave this thread some thought last night because I wondered If I am being too hard on people but then I Imagined going to my Father to tell him I was thousands of pounds In debt.
Why ?
Well, Dad, see It wasn't my fault, The credit companies kept raising my credit limit. Then the Store cards did the same. I remortgaged the house because the bank kept suggesting what I could do with the money. Then I was offered a loan to upgrade the car and, well Dad, I can't pay It back now..... Dear God, he'd have laughed me out of the building.
Did you actually pay any attention to my link showing personal debt figures for the country for 2012 or did you skim right past It with your fingers In your ears singing la la la la la la la la ? Or are you trying to divery attention away by throwing In the Brown/Blair card?
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Bastyards
oscar;1421704 wrote: :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl
I actually gave this thread some thought last night because I wondered If I am being too hard on people but then I Imagined going to my Father to tell him I was thousands of pounds In debt.
Why ?
Well, Dad, see It wasn't my fault, The credit companies kept raising my credit limit. Then the Store cards did the same. I remortgaged the house because the bank kept suggesting what I could do with the money. Then I was offered a loan to upgrade the car and, well Dad, I can't pay It back now..... Dear God, he'd have laughed me out of the building.
Did you actually pay any attention to my link showing personal debt figures for the country for 2012 or did you skim right past It with your fingers In your ears singing la la la la la la la la ? Or are you trying to divery attention away by throwing In the Brown/Blair card?
Yes I read it - wasn't telling me anyth8ng I didn't know and yes it is a factor but hardly the main reason we are in a financial mess which you seem to be incapable of understanding you fascist git. :p
I actually gave this thread some thought last night because I wondered If I am being too hard on people but then I Imagined going to my Father to tell him I was thousands of pounds In debt.
Why ?
Well, Dad, see It wasn't my fault, The credit companies kept raising my credit limit. Then the Store cards did the same. I remortgaged the house because the bank kept suggesting what I could do with the money. Then I was offered a loan to upgrade the car and, well Dad, I can't pay It back now..... Dear God, he'd have laughed me out of the building.
Did you actually pay any attention to my link showing personal debt figures for the country for 2012 or did you skim right past It with your fingers In your ears singing la la la la la la la la ? Or are you trying to divery attention away by throwing In the Brown/Blair card?
Yes I read it - wasn't telling me anyth8ng I didn't know and yes it is a factor but hardly the main reason we are in a financial mess which you seem to be incapable of understanding you fascist git. :p
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
gmc;1421711 wrote: Yes I read it - wasn't telling me anyth8ng I didn't know and yes it is a factor but hardly the main reason we are in a financial mess which you seem to be incapable of understanding you fascist git. :p And you seem to be Incapable of understanding that no-one put guns to people's heads and forced them to fill In loan forms and sign on the dotted line you deluded Socialist dipstick. :yh_laugh:yh_laugh:yh_laugh
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Bastyards
What's a "git?"
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
Saint_;1421717 wrote: What's a "git?"
Urban Dictionary: git
Urban Dictionary: dipstick
Urban Dictionary: git
Urban Dictionary: dipstick
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
-
Patsy Warnick
- Posts: 4567
- Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 12:53 am
Bastyards
Your sustem is ran a little different than the US
They're expecting the unemployed to commit to a low paying part-time position and commute hours to this low paying part-time job to keep/save some benefits they're receiving.?
couldn't your system work by zip codes & location for the opening position
certainly the commute will cause many to be late for the job
I don't see this to be a answer or workable for all involved.
there has to be a better answer to the unemployed with benefits.
Patsy
They're expecting the unemployed to commit to a low paying part-time position and commute hours to this low paying part-time job to keep/save some benefits they're receiving.?
couldn't your system work by zip codes & location for the opening position
certainly the commute will cause many to be late for the job
I don't see this to be a answer or workable for all involved.
there has to be a better answer to the unemployed with benefits.
Patsy
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
Patsy Warnick;1421724 wrote: Your sustem is ran a little different than the US
They're expecting the unemployed to commit to a low paying part-time position and commute hours to this low paying part-time job to keep/save some benefits they're receiving.?
couldn't your system work by zip codes & location for the opening position
certainly the commute will cause many to be late for the job
I don't see this to be a answer or workable for all involved.
there has to be a better answer to the unemployed with benefits.
Patsy Sorry Patsy but you've got that totally wrong.
They are not expecting anyone to commit to a low paying part-time position. We have minimum wage here and that does not mean minimum In the literal sense, ie low paid, but the minimum that the law will allow employers to pay. The minimum wage Is governed and no employer can legally pay below It.
HM Revenue & Customs: The national minimum wage
Taken from the article:
" A typical contract might require 40 hours’ work a week and a pledge to report ‘at any time’.
The Government Is not asking anyone to take part time work and travel for 3 hours a day... they are talking about full time positions of around 40 hours a week.
They're expecting the unemployed to commit to a low paying part-time position and commute hours to this low paying part-time job to keep/save some benefits they're receiving.?
couldn't your system work by zip codes & location for the opening position
certainly the commute will cause many to be late for the job
I don't see this to be a answer or workable for all involved.
there has to be a better answer to the unemployed with benefits.
Patsy Sorry Patsy but you've got that totally wrong.
They are not expecting anyone to commit to a low paying part-time position. We have minimum wage here and that does not mean minimum In the literal sense, ie low paid, but the minimum that the law will allow employers to pay. The minimum wage Is governed and no employer can legally pay below It.
HM Revenue & Customs: The national minimum wage
Taken from the article:
" A typical contract might require 40 hours’ work a week and a pledge to report ‘at any time’.
The Government Is not asking anyone to take part time work and travel for 3 hours a day... they are talking about full time positions of around 40 hours a week.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
-
Patsy Warnick
- Posts: 4567
- Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 12:53 am
Bastyards
Oscar
do you feel this system will work?
I understand finding employment within a certain radius of residents - but to demand to commute or else? There should be other avenues to enforce employment besides threats.
I see too many flaws in the system before enforcing in April.
I 'd be interested on updates after the system is up & running.
Patsy
do you feel this system will work?
I understand finding employment within a certain radius of residents - but to demand to commute or else? There should be other avenues to enforce employment besides threats.
I see too many flaws in the system before enforcing in April.
I 'd be interested on updates after the system is up & running.
Patsy
Bastyards
Patsy Warnick;1421731 wrote: Oscar
do you feel this system will work?
I understand finding employment within a certain radius of residents - but to demand to commute or else? There should be other avenues to enforce employment besides threats.
I see too many flaws in the system before enforcing in April.
I 'd be interesting on updates after the system is up & running.
Patsy
It is/was Politician talk.
They throw out some currently popular ideas to see what happens, nothing will, other than the memory of the way they would like it to be......come election day.
do you feel this system will work?
I understand finding employment within a certain radius of residents - but to demand to commute or else? There should be other avenues to enforce employment besides threats.
I see too many flaws in the system before enforcing in April.
I 'd be interesting on updates after the system is up & running.
Patsy
It is/was Politician talk.
They throw out some currently popular ideas to see what happens, nothing will, other than the memory of the way they would like it to be......come election day.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
Patsy Warnick;1421731 wrote: Oscar
do you feel this system will work?
I understand finding employment within a certain radius of residents - but to demand to commute or else? There should be other avenues to enforce employment besides threats.
I see too many flaws in the system before enforcing in April.
I 'd be interested on updates after the system is up & running.
Patsy
It has to work and I believe It's workable.
At the end of the day, the government has to get long term unemployed back Into work or continue paying out welfare long term to some of the country.
They have tried other options to help people In the past such as job grants and free bus travel. If they don't work because unemployed Insist on jobs tailor made to suit on their doorstep, what else can they do but get tough?
What flaws do you see Patsy?
do you feel this system will work?
I understand finding employment within a certain radius of residents - but to demand to commute or else? There should be other avenues to enforce employment besides threats.
I see too many flaws in the system before enforcing in April.
I 'd be interested on updates after the system is up & running.
Patsy
It has to work and I believe It's workable.
At the end of the day, the government has to get long term unemployed back Into work or continue paying out welfare long term to some of the country.
They have tried other options to help people In the past such as job grants and free bus travel. If they don't work because unemployed Insist on jobs tailor made to suit on their doorstep, what else can they do but get tough?
What flaws do you see Patsy?
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
-
Patsy Warnick
- Posts: 4567
- Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 12:53 am
Bastyards
Tailor-made jobs?
there's 1st flaw
job placement - a grocery store man is now expected to weld - weld clear across town.
will this man be trained on the job? - fake it to keep his benefits - poor workmanship let go from position - back to unemployment & re-up with more benefits. continous cycle.
just example.
What would happen if all the unemployed rally & refused.?
Would the Gov't work on another plan - or let it snowball into a riot - criminal action.?
Patsy
there's 1st flaw
job placement - a grocery store man is now expected to weld - weld clear across town.
will this man be trained on the job? - fake it to keep his benefits - poor workmanship let go from position - back to unemployment & re-up with more benefits. continous cycle.
just example.
What would happen if all the unemployed rally & refused.?
Would the Gov't work on another plan - or let it snowball into a riot - criminal action.?
Patsy
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
Patsy Warnick;1421743 wrote: Tailor-made jobs?
there's 1st flaw
job placement - a grocery store man is now expected to weld - weld clear across town.
will this man be trained on the job? - fake it to keep his benefits - poor workmanship let go from position - back to unemployment & re-up with more benefits. continous cycle.
just example.
What would happen if all the unemployed rally & refused.?
Would the Gov't work on another plan - or let it snowball into a riot - criminal action.?
Patsy
Put it another way... Let's say some-one lives In a small village or town with virtually no jobs available. Yet meanwhile an hour and a half's train ride away In the nearest city, there are job vacancies.
Is It cost effective to the countries budget to keep paying the long term unemployed welfare because they happen to live where there's little work and just hope they'll get a job one day or Is It more cost effective to get them Into work by asking them to travel?
The hard line of deducting their welfare If they refuse to travel for work will not affect the genuine people who truly want to work. It will only effect the one's claiming Job Seekers Allowance which Is a payment In the UK for unemployed to seek work. If they are not actively seeking work by refusing to go to jobs because they have to travel, then In effect, they are not fulfilling their side of the deal.
Jobseeker's Allowance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
How can the unemployed refuse? They can't. To claim Job Seekers Allowance while you're out of work, means you have to sign on at the Job Centre every week. If they don't sign on, no money at all Is paid to them.
There won't be riots....
there's 1st flaw
job placement - a grocery store man is now expected to weld - weld clear across town.
will this man be trained on the job? - fake it to keep his benefits - poor workmanship let go from position - back to unemployment & re-up with more benefits. continous cycle.
just example.
What would happen if all the unemployed rally & refused.?
Would the Gov't work on another plan - or let it snowball into a riot - criminal action.?
Patsy
Put it another way... Let's say some-one lives In a small village or town with virtually no jobs available. Yet meanwhile an hour and a half's train ride away In the nearest city, there are job vacancies.
Is It cost effective to the countries budget to keep paying the long term unemployed welfare because they happen to live where there's little work and just hope they'll get a job one day or Is It more cost effective to get them Into work by asking them to travel?
The hard line of deducting their welfare If they refuse to travel for work will not affect the genuine people who truly want to work. It will only effect the one's claiming Job Seekers Allowance which Is a payment In the UK for unemployed to seek work. If they are not actively seeking work by refusing to go to jobs because they have to travel, then In effect, they are not fulfilling their side of the deal.
Jobseeker's Allowance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
How can the unemployed refuse? They can't. To claim Job Seekers Allowance while you're out of work, means you have to sign on at the Job Centre every week. If they don't sign on, no money at all Is paid to them.
There won't be riots....
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Bastyards
Now see...I would argue the opposite. How would you feel if you had lived all your life in a small town, knew everyone, and had lived in your home for decades then suddenly, because there's no work, you have to travel or even move to another city?
I'd hate it. Why are their no jobs in my city? Why are there only jobs in the larger cities?
Even if you moved, that policy would eventually result in everyone moving to the city, and turning the outlying cities to ghost towns, wouldn't it? Seems like the solution is for the government to promote business in the smaller cities, possibly giving tax breaks to companies that open in communities with high unemployment rates.
Proactive is better than reactive, which this policy is to my mind.
I'd hate it. Why are their no jobs in my city? Why are there only jobs in the larger cities?
Even if you moved, that policy would eventually result in everyone moving to the city, and turning the outlying cities to ghost towns, wouldn't it? Seems like the solution is for the government to promote business in the smaller cities, possibly giving tax breaks to companies that open in communities with high unemployment rates.
Proactive is better than reactive, which this policy is to my mind.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
Saint_;1421747 wrote: Now see...I would argue the opposite. How would you feel if you had lived all your life in a small town, knew everyone, and had lived in your home for decades then suddenly, because there's no work, you have to travel or even move to another city?
I'd hate it. Why are their no jobs in my city? Why are there only jobs in the larger cities?
Even if you moved, that policy would eventually result in everyone moving to the city, and turning the outlying cities to ghost towns, wouldn't it? Seems like the solution is for the government to promote business in the smaller cities, possibly giving tax breaks to companies that open in communities with high unemployment rates.
Proactive is better than reactive, which this policy is to my mind.
The government Is not asking people to move house. They are saying the long term unemployed should be looking for work further afield and be prepared to commute 3 hours a day which is what thousands of people already do In this country.
Come on Saint.. the Incentives failed.... what would you do then to get people Into jobs?
I'd hate it. Why are their no jobs in my city? Why are there only jobs in the larger cities?
Even if you moved, that policy would eventually result in everyone moving to the city, and turning the outlying cities to ghost towns, wouldn't it? Seems like the solution is for the government to promote business in the smaller cities, possibly giving tax breaks to companies that open in communities with high unemployment rates.
Proactive is better than reactive, which this policy is to my mind.
The government Is not asking people to move house. They are saying the long term unemployed should be looking for work further afield and be prepared to commute 3 hours a day which is what thousands of people already do In this country.
Come on Saint.. the Incentives failed.... what would you do then to get people Into jobs?
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
-
Patsy Warnick
- Posts: 4567
- Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 12:53 am
Bastyards
Oscar
it sounds like your unemployment system has a long term .? just asking?
is this new policy really meant for the man in a far out lonely village? no
it's for your community - your neighbors, the ones with the new car - TV's etc.
Patsy
it sounds like your unemployment system has a long term .? just asking?
is this new policy really meant for the man in a far out lonely village? no
it's for your community - your neighbors, the ones with the new car - TV's etc.
Patsy
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Bastyards
oscar;1421748 wrote: They are saying the long term unemployed should be looking for work further afield and be prepared to commute 3 hours a day which is what thousands of people already do In this country.
When we lived in Reading, 1991-93, my beloved commuted 2 hours one way to London. It seemed to be pretty common even then.
When we lived in Reading, 1991-93, my beloved commuted 2 hours one way to London. It seemed to be pretty common even then.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
Accountable;1421751 wrote: When we lived in Reading, 1991-93, my beloved commuted 2 hours one way to London. It seemed to be pretty common even then.
Exactly Acc !!!!! So like thousands here already, she travelled 4 hours a day.
When I was In Sales, I used to commute up to 5 hours a day.
Exactly Acc !!!!! So like thousands here already, she travelled 4 hours a day.
When I was In Sales, I used to commute up to 5 hours a day.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Bastyards
oscar;1421715 wrote: And you seem to be Incapable of understanding that no-one put guns to people's heads and forced them to fill In loan forms and sign on the dotted line you deluded Socialist dipstick. :yh_laugh:yh_laugh:yh_laugh
What's missing in British politics is the good old fashioned arguments about ideals there used to be whan all tories were bastards and workers were bolshie gits. Now they argue about which shade of grey to paint their monetarist hearse they run for the economy and pretend they didn't know about lord gropey.
posted by oscar
Exactly Acc !!!!! So like thousands here already, she travelled 4 hours a day.
When I was In Sales, I used to commute up to 5 hours a day.
You have to have a job that;s worthwhile commuting to. There quite simply are not these fantastic 40 hour a week jobs paying minimum wage you seem to think exist. If there were you would probably have one rather than the two or three I think you said you have. Uprooting your family and moving to get a better job is sometimes just not worth it unless it's a fer better job than you can get where you are. Once Scotland gets independence and we stop subsidising you things are going to get far worse.
What's missing in British politics is the good old fashioned arguments about ideals there used to be whan all tories were bastards and workers were bolshie gits. Now they argue about which shade of grey to paint their monetarist hearse they run for the economy and pretend they didn't know about lord gropey.
posted by oscar
Exactly Acc !!!!! So like thousands here already, she travelled 4 hours a day.
When I was In Sales, I used to commute up to 5 hours a day.
You have to have a job that;s worthwhile commuting to. There quite simply are not these fantastic 40 hour a week jobs paying minimum wage you seem to think exist. If there were you would probably have one rather than the two or three I think you said you have. Uprooting your family and moving to get a better job is sometimes just not worth it unless it's a fer better job than you can get where you are. Once Scotland gets independence and we stop subsidising you things are going to get far worse.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
gmc;1421779 wrote:
You have to have a job that;s worthwhile commuting to. There quite simply are not these fantastic 40 hour a week jobs paying minimum wage you seem to think exist. If there were you would probably have one rather than the two or three I think you said you have. Uprooting your family and moving to get a better job is sometimes just not worth it unless it's a fer better job than you can get where you are. Once Scotland gets independence and we stop subsidising you things are going to get far worse.
I know that. I don't expect anyone to commute for 3 hours for part-time work.... I am not a Nazi you know..... but In cases where people are refusing to look for full time work of around 40 hours because they don't want to get off their arrsse and travel, I've no sympathy.
I think once you lot get Independence, you'll come borrowing off the coffiers of Westminster very very quickly.
You have to have a job that;s worthwhile commuting to. There quite simply are not these fantastic 40 hour a week jobs paying minimum wage you seem to think exist. If there were you would probably have one rather than the two or three I think you said you have. Uprooting your family and moving to get a better job is sometimes just not worth it unless it's a fer better job than you can get where you are. Once Scotland gets independence and we stop subsidising you things are going to get far worse.
I know that. I don't expect anyone to commute for 3 hours for part-time work.... I am not a Nazi you know..... but In cases where people are refusing to look for full time work of around 40 hours because they don't want to get off their arrsse and travel, I've no sympathy.
I think once you lot get Independence, you'll come borrowing off the coffiers of Westminster very very quickly.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Bastyards
The Royal Bank Of Scotland lost .................wait for it £ 5 billion.
The publicly bailed out, and partly public owned, RBS made a trading loss in excess of a mind boggling five billion UK pounds.
They have managed to find 607 million pounds to reward their failing employees with bonus payments.
They have 'lost' since the 2008 publicly funded bail out £ 34 eye watering billions, including a £ 390 million fine for fiddling the Libor books.
Meanwhile Government threatens to cut benefits by tens of pounds to economically depressed citizens who fail to convince them of their search for work..................presumably so they can afford to pay next years bank bonuses.
The publicly bailed out, and partly public owned, RBS made a trading loss in excess of a mind boggling five billion UK pounds.
They have managed to find 607 million pounds to reward their failing employees with bonus payments.
They have 'lost' since the 2008 publicly funded bail out £ 34 eye watering billions, including a £ 390 million fine for fiddling the Libor books.
Meanwhile Government threatens to cut benefits by tens of pounds to economically depressed citizens who fail to convince them of their search for work..................presumably so they can afford to pay next years bank bonuses.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
Bruv;1421803 wrote:
Meanwhile Government threatens to cut benefits by tens of pounds to economically depressed citizens who fail to convince them of their search for work..................presumably so they can afford to pay next years bank bonuses.
Alright... so the job grants didn't work. The free bus travel didn't work. The free higher education didn't work. The work experience scheme didn't work...
How would you get long term unemployed Into jobs big boy ?
Meanwhile Government threatens to cut benefits by tens of pounds to economically depressed citizens who fail to convince them of their search for work..................presumably so they can afford to pay next years bank bonuses.
Alright... so the job grants didn't work. The free bus travel didn't work. The free higher education didn't work. The work experience scheme didn't work...
How would you get long term unemployed Into jobs big boy ?
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Bastyards
Lets take out all our money and put it into The Bank of Dave. I'm sick of subsidising the greedy gits
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire."
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
Bastyards
oscar;1421804 wrote:
How would you get long term unemployed Into jobs big boy ?
The very hard core, you will never ever ever get into work.
Whatever method is chosen it will hurt the innocent as well as the ar*es out there.
The only way to make wages more attractive in relation to benefits.
The way to make wages more attractive is to share the cake more fairly and let it be seen to be fairer.
Invest in manufacturing, invest in infrastructure, sort out cross border Tax fiddles.
How would you get long term unemployed Into jobs big boy ?
The very hard core, you will never ever ever get into work.
Whatever method is chosen it will hurt the innocent as well as the ar*es out there.
The only way to make wages more attractive in relation to benefits.
The way to make wages more attractive is to share the cake more fairly and let it be seen to be fairer.
Invest in manufacturing, invest in infrastructure, sort out cross border Tax fiddles.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Bastyards
Bruv;1421810 wrote: The very hard core, you will never ever ever get into work.
Whatever method is chosen it will hurt the innocent as well as the ar*es out there.
The only way to make wages more attractive in relation to benefits.
The way to make wages more attractive is to share the cake more fairly and let it be seen to be fairer.
Invest in manufacturing, invest in infrastructure, sort out cross border Tax fiddles.
I agree with you that wages must be far more attractive than welfare. But there's the reality. The reason welfare Is more beneficial is not due to disposable Income received In welfare but what It covers. ie rent, Council tax etc... the reality Is, you can not, not pay someone's rent and council tax because then you would have a homeless situation.
Whatever method is chosen it will hurt the innocent as well as the ar*es out there.
The only way to make wages more attractive in relation to benefits.
The way to make wages more attractive is to share the cake more fairly and let it be seen to be fairer.
Invest in manufacturing, invest in infrastructure, sort out cross border Tax fiddles.
I agree with you that wages must be far more attractive than welfare. But there's the reality. The reason welfare Is more beneficial is not due to disposable Income received In welfare but what It covers. ie rent, Council tax etc... the reality Is, you can not, not pay someone's rent and council tax because then you would have a homeless situation.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Bastyards
Bruv;1421803 wrote: The Royal Bank Of Scotland lost .................wait for it £ 5 billion.
The publicly bailed out, and partly public owned, RBS made a trading loss in excess of a mind boggling five billion UK pounds.
They have managed to find 607 million pounds to reward their failing employees with bonus payments.
They have 'lost' since the 2008 publicly funded bail out £ 34 eye watering billions, including a £ 390 million fine for fiddling the Libor books.
Meanwhile Government threatens to cut benefits by tens of pounds to economically depressed citizens who fail to convince them of their search for work..................presumably so they can afford to pay next years bank bonuses.
It gets worse, their intention is to privatise it again as soon as it is profitable no nonsense about making some money out of it first.
Here's one for you 0scar from your favourite comic.
Markit/CIPS: Shock fall in manufacturing activity brings prospect of triple-dip ever closer | Mail Online
The sector also saw its greatest fall in employment for 40 months, with large enterprises making the biggest cuts as they continued to shed backlogs of work. Some reported spare capacity.
David Noble, chief executive of the Chartered Institute of Purchasing & Supply, said the figures were a ‘reality check’ for the manufacturing sector.
He said: ‘Of concern is the dearth of encouraging signs for the future. The sector witnessed a fall in new orders at home and a continued lack of demand abroad and, perhaps most ominously, we saw the greatest fall in employment for 40 months.
Of course all those newly unemployed will be able to get on their bikes or use the free transport to commute two or three hours to their new job in this panglossian fantasy land the tories believe is real and so it seems do you.
moreover, the sector seems to continue to grapple with the ongoing problems of playing hostage to European fortunes, whilst unable to fully take advantage of emerging growth markets,’ he added.
and we're getting out of europe as well so that's all right then.
The publicly bailed out, and partly public owned, RBS made a trading loss in excess of a mind boggling five billion UK pounds.
They have managed to find 607 million pounds to reward their failing employees with bonus payments.
They have 'lost' since the 2008 publicly funded bail out £ 34 eye watering billions, including a £ 390 million fine for fiddling the Libor books.
Meanwhile Government threatens to cut benefits by tens of pounds to economically depressed citizens who fail to convince them of their search for work..................presumably so they can afford to pay next years bank bonuses.
It gets worse, their intention is to privatise it again as soon as it is profitable no nonsense about making some money out of it first.
Here's one for you 0scar from your favourite comic.
Markit/CIPS: Shock fall in manufacturing activity brings prospect of triple-dip ever closer | Mail Online
The sector also saw its greatest fall in employment for 40 months, with large enterprises making the biggest cuts as they continued to shed backlogs of work. Some reported spare capacity.
David Noble, chief executive of the Chartered Institute of Purchasing & Supply, said the figures were a ‘reality check’ for the manufacturing sector.
He said: ‘Of concern is the dearth of encouraging signs for the future. The sector witnessed a fall in new orders at home and a continued lack of demand abroad and, perhaps most ominously, we saw the greatest fall in employment for 40 months.
Of course all those newly unemployed will be able to get on their bikes or use the free transport to commute two or three hours to their new job in this panglossian fantasy land the tories believe is real and so it seems do you.
moreover, the sector seems to continue to grapple with the ongoing problems of playing hostage to European fortunes, whilst unable to fully take advantage of emerging growth markets,’ he added.
and we're getting out of europe as well so that's all right then.