[Archived] The General Election 2015

[Gav]

Tbh? i don't have a clue about hedge funds,different world to one that i live in which is why i tend to comment on matters that i do have knowledge about.

Fair enough bacup, both parties have taken money from hedge fund donors, but the Tories have taken significantly more than Labour. No wonder they don't bring stamp duty in. It's estimated it could bring in 500m, massive but the Tories cut welfare instead...

[Sandiway Blue]

With regards to welfare nobody could argue about the fact that we spend way too much on welfare as a nation and we simply cannot afford it.I don't begrudge anybody who is a GENUINE claimant with regards to disabilities but the workshy? (and before anybody accuses me of pulling that one from the Daily stale, i don't read newspapers : D ) I live on a housing estate, 1/2 private house owners and half council tenants and i can assure you there are over 1/2 dozen households within a MINUTE'S walk that are very capable of working but won't.They still haven't been clamped down on so yes savings can be made.

[yoda]

Fair enough bacup, both parties have taken money from hedge fund donors, but the Tories have taken significantly more than Labour. No wonder they don't bring stamp duty in. It's estimated it could bring in 500m, massive but the Tories cut welfare instead...

And what if the hedge funds hedge their collective bets and move the fund out of UK jurisdiction

[Sandiway Blue]

Fair enough bacup, both parties have taken money from hedge fund donors, but the Tories have taken significantly more than Labour. No wonder they don't bring stamp duty in. It's estimated it could bring in 500m, massive but the Tories cut welfare instead...

But in fairness Labour take money from unions (don't even get me started on them hypocrites! ) which the Tories don't get.

[ultrablue]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25287068

Is this not a better definition of what is being discussed, the increase of the working poor?

Spot on Baz. This link got lost in the other posts. It is the rise in the number of working poor we need to concerned about. If you are working a full time job, you should be living above the poverty line. Private companies do not pay enough, so the government has to step in.

Question to Al. You said you you agree that the government should avoid effecting the working poor with their cuts and target only the workshy. Seeing as the government have promised 12 billion pounds in cuts, but cutting welfare that only effects the longterm unemployed would save a fraction of that total, where else do you think the government should make savings?

And a question to thenodrog. You made the comment that Jim thinks everyone else is stupid except him, yet you keep saying the most facile comments about the poor, heavily implying they are stupud.

Why don't they just get another job you've repeatedly asked. It could be for a hundred different reasons. Here are a few:

They could be trying to bring up a child in a responsible way.

They could be trying to learn skills or attending classes in the evening to improve their employment prospects.

They could have a sick relative they are taking care of.

They could be volunteering their time to help those even worse off than themselves.

These are not sob stories- these are real people's lives.

Or you could be right- they could just be stupid and just didn't realise they could earn more money if they worked more and stopped shopping in waitrose.

So the question is thenodrog - should someone who is working fulltime be living in poverty?

[jim mk2]

With regards to welfare nobody could argue about the fact that we spend way too much on welfare as a nation and we simply cannot afford it.I don't begrudge anybody who is a GENUINE claimant with regards to disabilities but the workshy? (and before anybody accuses me of pulling that one from the Daily stale, i don't read newspapers : D ) I live on a housing estate, 1/2 private house owners and half council tenants and i can assure you there are over 1/2 dozen households within a MINUTE'S walk that are very capable of working but won't.They still haven't been clamped down on so yes savings can be made.

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation published a study in December testing whether there were generations of the same family that had never worked. Despite dogged searching, researchers were unable to find such families. If they exist, they account for a minuscule fraction of workless people.

The study showed there was no evidence of "a culture of worklessness" – values, attitudes and behaviours discouraging employment and encouraging welfare dependence – in the families being passed down the generations. The long-term worklessness of parents in these families was a result of complex problems (particularly related to ill-health) associated with living in long-term and deep poverty.

HMRC figures also showed in 2012-13 benefits fraud cost the country about £1.2bn and tax evasion more than £4bn, suggesting it is those at the top end of society who are the biggest problem.

[Sandiway Blue]

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation published a study in December testing whether there were generations of the same family that had never worked. Despite dogged searching, researchers were unable to find such families. If they exist, they account for a minuscule fraction of workless people.

The study showed there was no evidence of "a culture of worklessness" – values, attitudes and behaviours discouraging employment and encouraging welfare dependence – in the families being passed down the generations. The long-term worklessness of parents in these families was a result of complex problems (particularly related to ill-health) associated with living in long-term and deep poverty.

HMRC figures also showed in 2012-13 benefits fraud cost the country about £1.2bn and tax evasion more than £4bn, suggesting it is those at the top end of society who are the biggest problem.

I can name 3 families within 2 minutes walk from my house.All i can say is they didn't look very hard...

[Gav]

With regards to welfare nobody could argue about the fact that we spend way too much on welfare as a nation and we simply cannot afford it.I don't begrudge anybody who is a GENUINE claimant with regards to disabilities but the workshy? (and before anybody accuses me of pulling that one from the Daily stale, i don't read newspapers : D ) I live on a housing estate, 1/2 private house owners and half council tenants and i can assure you there are over 1/2 dozen households within a MINUTE'S walk that are very capable of working but won't.They still haven't been clamped down on so yes savings can be made.

I'm sure you're right and some of those people could work, but the numbers are small and figures insignificant if you look at the actual figures.

Stamp duty on Hedge funds for the mega rich pulls in 500m, Labour claimed 1.2bn!

So where do you go first if you're impartial?

As for Labour donations from the unions, it's reported that in the last parliament unions gave labour 55m, the Tories got 85m for rich supporters and 30m for business.

[den]

With regards to welfare nobody could argue about the fact that we spend way too much on welfare as a nation and we simply cannot afford it.I don't begrudge anybody who is a GENUINE claimant with regards to disabilities but the workshy? (and before anybody accuses me of pulling that one from the Daily stale, i don't read newspapers : D ) I live on a housing estate, 1/2 private house owners and half council tenants and i can assure you there are over 1/2 dozen households within a MINUTE'S walk that are very capable of working but won't.They still haven't been clamped down on so yes savings can be made.

Why do we spend way too much on Welfare? Over three quarters of the welfare budget goes on pensions, child benefit, disability benefits and housing tax credit, all paid for by tax payers, not the bloody government. I'm happy with that policy. It's a poor world if these have to be reduced, while at the same time millionaires need to be given tax reductions.

[Sandiway Blue]

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation published a study in December testing whether there were generations of the same family that had never worked. Despite dogged searching, researchers were unable to find such families. If they exist, they account for a minuscule fraction of workless people.

The study showed there was no evidence of "a culture of worklessness" – values, attitudes and behaviours discouraging employment and encouraging welfare dependence – in the families being passed down the generations. The long-term worklessness of parents in these families was a result of complex problems (particularly related to ill-health) associated with living in long-term and deep poverty.

HMRC figures also showed in 2012-13 benefits fraud cost the country about £1.2bn and tax evasion more than £4bn, suggesting it is those at the top end of society who are the biggest problem.

Rubbish! My mate is a chief exec of a community project in Haslingden called Community Link.It's primary objective is to break the cycle of welfare dependency by teaching life skills and basic family values.

[jim mk2]

I can name 3 families within 2 minutes walk from my house.All i can say is they didn't look very hard...

Again the JSF study showed that in 2012 18% of working-age households were workless and in only 2% of those had no one ever worked. More than half of adults in households where no one has ever worked were under 25, suggesting it is likely to be a manifestation of young adult unemployment. Figures are a bit out of date but the point is the "problem" is largely a figment of the (Bacup) public's imagination and is exaggerated by the media.

I can name 3 families within 2 minutes walk from my house.All i can say is they didn't look very hard...

You need to look past the end of your own nose and look at the bigger picture outside your own backyard.

[Sandiway Blue]

Again the JSF study showed that in 2012 18% of working-age households were workless and in only 2% of those had no one ever worked. More than half of adults in households where no one has ever worked were under 25, suggesting it is likely to be a manifestation of young adult unemployment. Figures are a bit out of date but the point is the "problem" is largely a figment of the (Bacup) public's imagination and is exaggerated by the media.

You need to look past the end of your own nose and look at the bigger picture outside your own backyard.

Or maybe just quote from an unbiased newspaper like the Guardian?

Personally i'll take a look inside and outside my backyard and see what is REALLY going on and i will state exactly what i see rather than quote left-wing propaganda.

[Gav]

Again the JSF study showed that in 2012 18% of working-age households were workless and in only 2% of those had no one ever worked. More than half of adults in households where no one has ever worked were under 25, suggesting it is likely to be a manifestation of young adult unemployment. Figures are a bit out of date but the point is the "problem" is largely a figment of the (Bacup) public's imagination and is exaggerated by the media.

.

In a nutshell, tell a lie enough times and people will believe it, the facts speak for themselves.

[thenodrog]

And a question to thenodrog. You made the comment that Jim thinks everyone else is stupid except him, yet you keep saying the most facile comments about the poor, heavily implying they are stupud.

sorry stupud!

[ultrablue]

Well done, you spotted a typo. Now let's hear an answer to the question.

Should someone who is working full time be living in poverty?

[adopted scouser]

The study showed there was no evidence of "a culture of worklessness" values, attitudes and behaviours discouraging employment and encouraging welfare dependence in the families being passed down the generations. The long-term worklessness of parents in these families was a result of complex problems (particularly related to ill-health) associated with living in long-term and deep poverty.

Comedy gold.

[thenodrog]

Well done, you spotted a typo. Now let's hear an answer to the question.

Should someone who is working full time be living in poverty?

It was the context that was funny.

[thenodrog]

HMRC figures also showed in 2012-13 benefits fraud cost the country about £1.2bn and tax evasion more than £4bn, suggesting it is those at the top end of society who are the biggest problem.

You'll certainly welcome George Osbornes proposed July Budget then.

From the Guardian....."Osborne will say in the budget that the Conservatives intend to adopt a fair and balanced approach to deficit reduction, and that the package will include ringfencing spending on the NHS while cutting £13bn from other Whitehall departments. The budget will also include a fresh crackdown on tax avoidance designed to raise £5bn."

Now I might have missed it but I'm rather surprised you haven't praised this move to high heaven because you have been banging on about bringing people to book tax avoidance and tax evasion for bloody years.

I'm sure you're right and some of those people could work, but the numbers are small and figures insignificant if you look at the actual figures.

Stamp duty on Hedge funds for the mega rich pulls in 500m, Labour claimed 1.2bn!

So where do you go first if you're impartial?

As for Labour donations from the unions, it's reported that in the last parliament unions gave labour 55m, the Tories got 85m for rich supporters and 30m for business.

Remind me Gav.... What does one do with rotten apples in barrels?

Regarding your last sentence it's fair to say that most of those Tory donations would have been given voluntarily, whereas the donations from the Unions had been levied from their members, many of which who would not agree with making donations to Labour or indeed any political party.

[thenodrog]

Why do we spend way too much on Welfare? Over three quarters of the welfare budget goes on pensions, child benefit, disability benefits and housing tax credit, all paid for by tax payers, not the bloody government. I'm happy with that policy. It's a poor world if these have to be reduced, while at the same time millionaires need to be given tax reductions.

I've no problems with Disability benefit as long as it is only given to the disabled! BUT Housing tax credit and child benefit beyond two children? Sorry I simply can't grasp this growing expectation in our society that someone else must pay for A. N Other person through life. If I got a tapeworm I'd take panacur or similar to destroy it, I certainly wouldn't tolerate it and allow it to multiply and weaken me further.

In a nutshell, tell a lie enough times and people will believe it, the facts speak for themselves.

Quite right Gav he's always guilty of that but I thought you and Jim were mates?

Well done, you spotted a typo. Now let's hear an answer to the question.

Should someone who is working full time be living in poverty?

'YES' if their outgoings are more than their incomings.

Bloody silly question that generalises so widely.

[ultrablue]

That is not an answer thenodrog - The poverty rate is calculated on income - it has nothing to do with irresponsible spending.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-27981975

According to this 6.7 million people in the UK are living in poverty, despite having a job.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11465536/Three-million-people-work-but-are-still-poor.-What-are-the-Conservatives-going-to-do-for-them.html

Even the Telegraph was pushing the Tories to consider the working poor in the election campaign.

[Sandiway Blue]

You'll certainly welcome George Osbornes proposed July Budget then.

From the Guardian....."Osborne will say in the budget that the Conservatives intend to adopt a fair and balanced approach to deficit reduction, and that the package will include ringfencing spending on the NHS while cutting £13bn from other Whitehall departments. The budget will also include a fresh crackdown on tax avoidance designed to raise £5bn."

Now I might have missed it but I'm rather surprised you haven't praised this move to high heaven because you have been banging on about bringing people to book tax avoidance and tax evasion for bloody years.

Remind me Gav.... What does one do with rotten apples in barrels?

Regarding your last sentence it's fair to say that most of those Tory donations would have been given voluntarily, whereas the donations from the Unions had been levied from their members, many of which who would not agree with making donations to Labour or indeed any political party.

which is why despite working for County council i flatly refused to join the union.If the unions weren't STILL paying for Scargill's mansion and donating money willy nilly to Labour then maybe their members would have more money in their pockets!

[Gav]

which is why despite working for County council i flatly refused to join the union.If the unions weren't STILL paying for Scargill's mansion and donating money willy nilly to Labour then maybe their members would have more money in their pockets!

So you're unwilling to join a union because they donate to Labour, don't blame you, do you adopt the same principle to Tory donors?

[Gav]

That is not an answer thenodrog - The poverty rate is calculated on income - it has nothing to do with irresponsible spending.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-27981975

According to this 6.7 million people in the UK are living in poverty, despite having a job.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11465536/Three-million-people-work-but-are-still-poor.-What-are-the-Conservatives-going-to-do-for-them.html

Even the Telegraph was pushing the Tories to consider the working poor in the election campaign.

You can't teach an old dog new tricks ultrablue

Cameron was hauled over the coals regarding food banks by Paxman, had no answers and basically refused to answer any questions about it, doubt you'll get his supporters to acknowledge they even exist.

[Sandiway Blue]

So you're unwilling to join a union because they donate to Labour, don't blame you, do you adopt the same principle to Tory donorA

These all had a hand in writing the now infamous letter praising the Conservatives stance on corporation tax.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11507586/General-Election-2015-Labour-threatens-Britains-recovery-say-100-business-chiefs.html

The executives who have signed the Telegraph letter belong to retail companies including Primark, Iceland, Ladbrokes, Costa Coffee, Ted Baker, Mothercare and LK Bennett.

Consumer brands represented include Kingsmill, Cobra beer, Robinsons, Tango and London Pride.

Well-known signatories include Bob Dudley, the CEO of BP Plc, Tidjane Thiam, the CEO of Prudential Plc, and George Weston, the CEO of Associated British Foods, which own Primark, Silver Spoon, Kingsmill and Ovaltine.

So i assume now Gav that you won't use any of these brands? Difference is there are alternatives to these brands however if you are in a union you have no choice but to donate to the Labour party.

Take a look at Unison's (the union representing LCC) fees for joining their union,hardly a fair sliding scale.Why aren't they hammering the top earners? Isn't that the Labour mantra?

http://www.unison.org.uk/for-members/joining-unison/how-much-does-it-cost/

[Al]

Thought you may take the bait Al (though it's increasingly likely that Ill pay all my life, and there will be no state pension for me.)

Anyhow, once we've targetted the workshy where are the rest of the welfare cuts coming from? Families or the disabled?

Well I didn't take the bait. The idea is so stupid. Of course you will get a state pension when you retire, provided you live long enough. You'll have paid the premiums and your pension is owed to you. If we stop payments to the workshy there will be no need for further cuts however it is irresponsible to pay benefits for more than two children.