-
Posts
-
@melody wrote:
@quiet_man wrote:
@melody wrote:
So in the few short weeks that the two toff-boys have been in charge of the country they have or plan to:
scrapped new school builds
scrapped the building of a hospital and begun to ‘overhaul’ the nhs to cut costs
vowed to make schools into academies… aka privatise them meaning that OFSTED standards will no longer apply
Stopped funding for the rights project which helps ppl appeal against wromg benefits decisions
raised VAT
scrapped several benefits
frozen child benefits……
need I go on???
Oh and let us not forget the millions in foreign aid pledged to help other countries which would basically wipe out our own domestic debts…
SOOOOO still glad you voted?
So how would you fix the £4 trillion debt and spending 30% more than you get via taxation?
It’s always the same after a Labour government, higher unemployment and a wrecked economy, you’d think people would have sussed this by now.Ermmm i would start by hitting the rich harder and leaving the those already on the poverty line alone….
perhaps the overseas aid might wipe out a bit of it… charity starts at home…
I was a child of the 80s, I grew up with Maggie at the helm, I remember my Dad fighting for his rights on a picket line and Maggie cancelling my milk at school … I have seen mass industry in the north east closed… then labour came along, the NHS went from strength to strength, waiting times slashed, education for all, women back into work through child care subsidies,- women in work… vital for the economy of a country like ours with an aged and dependant population greater than the working ages… then Clegg and his other eton pal come along and pull the plug, which will leave many woman with no option but to stay at home to raise their kids because tax credits are going to be abolished, the very money that allows working women to get help with childcare costs…Perhaps clegg and doofus might start by cutting their own salaries to that of someone with an equally important role in society say perhaps a paramedic? That would save a few grand!
I want my children to be educated to a standard with a national curriculum and where English is the primary language…. academies are just an excuse for the local enterprises to come in and set their own curriculum if they are forking out for it… does that mean in highly ethnic areas the children will be taught under Islamic laws for example? Another step to stamping out the English culture…. don’t get me started….
I apologise for any typing errors… the screen is jumping and I cannot see what I have typed without scrolling back
And when the rich decide to leave because you’re taxing them too much? As they tend too because they have the money to do so.
Clegg and Cameron actually took a pay cut, something like 20%, more than Brown ever did.
Who opened the floodgates of immigration just to rub the rights noses in multiculturalism?
That was the labour party you voted for, You’d have done better to vote BNP, at least they’re honest about what they are up too.
By the way the NHS has not gone from strength to strength, it’s gone from higher paid middle management to even higher paid middle management. The best healthcare service in Europe is the French one, it out performs our NHS easily, strangely enough it’s more or less privately run unlike our own.If you voted Labour, you really do have my sympathy. :lol:
Ermmm i would start by hitting the rich harder and leaving the those already on the poverty line alone….
Why should the rich be hit harder? This really bugs me. Not all rich people are born with a silver spoon in their mouth. Some wealthier people have worked damned hard to get where they are. Don’t most of them pay enough taxes? Well yes they do.
Typical of this country….punish the poeple who are doing well by taking more money off them. Most of them pay enough through taxes etc on their earnings. Ok there are some who evade paying, but then there are pleny of lazy doleites around who can work and dont want to and fiddle the system at the lower end.Oh and in my town every single school has been pulled down and rebuilt except my son’s school. They were told 2 weeks ago they will not be getting a new school now. :twisted: They happened to be the last school to have there building work start, and now have missed out.
:-({|= :mrgreen:
8)My two penneth . . for what it’s worth . . having now experienced both sides of the coin !
Until a few months ago I was a full time employee and a full time mother. I had a pretty good salary and also received the so called ‘chidcare help’ from the government in the form of tax credits. Supposedly covering 90% of costs. Far from it! Not only is childcare really expensive, it’s hard to find and many childcare facilities are not available at the times of day required, which, when a single parent makes it even harder to juggle. School holidays are any parents worst nightmare if they are working. If you’re lucky enough to find a playscheme or childcare facility, the cost of providing a full day can range from £20 – £30 per day, and that’s just for 1 child !!!! Being able to take time off during school holidays is not always possible, it’s the most popular time and often it’s on a rota basis ( you had last year so it’s so n so’s turn this year ) or first come first served basis, sometimes it’s not allowed at all !
Not only that, but because I did work and had a good salary, my older children were not entitled to grants for their university studies.
I paid my taxes like anyone else, I paid my own way, and although it wasn’t a lavish life I did manage to save and enjoy a holiday or two, or not worry if my child needed new shoes etc.
However, in some ways now, I can see why many chose not to work.
As some of you know, I have given up working to return to university myself. I don’t start my course until September and in the meantime I am living on benefits ( claiming on my NI contributions as someone so nicely put it ). I have never lived on benefits before and don’t plan to again I can tell you. But, I get my rent paid, no council tax to pay, and a whole whopping £65 a week plus child benefit. Hardly the high life really! And not one I wish to live again!
I did initially look for work when I moved, and was successful in that search too. However, when I looked into childcare, tax credits and the like, bearing in mind the hassles of childcare ( as mentioned above ) the fact I would no longer recieve housing benefit and would be liable for council tax and childcare fees, financially I was going to be £10 a month better off !! Now ask yourself why so many don’t work !!!
The government is changing benefits, the age of a child to which a single parent needs to return to work, making it harder to ‘swing the lead’ on incapacity benefit, capping housing benefit, reducing tax credits, freezing child benefit. Sounds like everyone’s worst nightmare . . however you have to read further into it:
Tax credits are being reduced, yes. Currently household incomes of 30K plus can recieve tax credits, they are lowering this income level, hardly hitting the poor really!
Housing benefit is being capped, yes. They are targetting people who live in large or luxury homes when they could easily live in a smaller one or two bedroomed property. Why should councils pay peoples rent so they can live in a big house and only really use the one or two rooms. It’s only serving to put pressure on their budgets and help real people in real need.
Forcing parents back to work when their child now starts full time school ( previously 16, then later reduced to 12 ) is all well and good, providing they put extra emphasis on providing available and quality childcare with reasonable costs and subsidies available.
Of course I have only focussed here on issues about children, but that’s because that is mainly where I am effected.
Income tax . . tax the rich to help the poor ? I agree with Kenty on this one! CEO’s etc on grossly exaggerated salaries are a joke ! But, many many people have made a good life for themselves, worked hard for their position and what they have and the salary they earn justified, why should they be penalised ? They pay a relatively high income tax as it is. My previous employment entitled me to a car, I don’t drive, so was offered a travel allowance instead. I refused this as it would have taken me into the next income tax bracket and I would have paid more in tax than the allowance was worth !
VAT will rise, taxes will rise, the cost of living rises, there will always be people who chose not to work because they are better off, and there are those who will suffer financially through no fault of their own . . it’s life, it can’t all be even. No matter which government, which policy . .
We all have the power to try and influence the power and policy . . and we will all have differing opinions as to who what why where and when . . and no matter what the outcome there will always be much to debate !!!!
I don’t complain though . . I just get on with it and make the best of it I can, that’s all we can do ! :?
=D>
This is not a reply to any particular post as i have my own political opinions and will keep them .
I would just like to make a point about benefits and the difficulty in coming off them and finding work, due to the anomally of the beneftits system.
If a person is claiming Job seekers allowance and takes work of 16 hours it is considered by they JSA to be full time work and their benefits stop. However, it is not possible to claim Working Tax Credit unless a person is working for 32 hours because the WTC regard 32 hours as full time.
In the current economical climate most firms seem to prefer to take on 16 hour workers. i have been told that this is because the “paperwork” involved for the employer is so much less . It may also be that , if an employer has 2 16 hour workers rather than one 32 hour worker there is more flexibility for cover for hols and illness etc.
Whatever the government are doing with benefits it would make a big difference to a persons abiltity to come off benefits and start work if the above anomally was addressed.
Hou
@eve wrote:
This is not a reply to any particular post as i have my own political opinions and will keep them .
I would just like to make a point about benefits and the difficulty in coming off them and finding work, due to the anomally of the beneftits system.
If a person is claiming Job seekers allowance and takes work of 16 hours it is considered by they JSA to be full time work and their benefits stop. However, it is not possible to claim Working Tax Credit unless a person is working for 32 hours because the WTC regard 32 hours as full time.
In the current economical climate most firms seem to prefer to take on 16 hour workers. i have been told that this is because the “paperwork” involved for the employer is so much less . It may also be that , if an employer has 2 16 hour workers rather than one 32 hour worker there is more flexibility for cover for hols and illness etc.
Whatever the government are doing with benefits it would make a big difference to a persons abiltity to come off benefits and start work if the above anomally was addressed.
Hou
Tax credits were originally only available to parents ( of children in full time education until the age of 19 ) who work 16 hours or more. This is still the case, and a higher award is generally given the less hours they work.
In recent years pension credit and tax credits have become available to people outside of the above bracket, with different rules regarding the number of hours worked. I have no idea what was in place for people who only worked 16 hours ( or less than 32 ) prior to the introduction of tax credits for all, but no doubt it is reflected by the 32 hour ruling for claimants. So probably an ongoing issue. I supose the thinking is that if you have no parental responsibilities to restrict you then you are able to work the 32+ hours !
That said, I agree eve, for many years now employers have taken to giving out part time jobs rather than full time, not just for the flexibility, but the lack of need to pay employers NI and other costs and benefits ! So not always easy to find ‘full time’ employment.
Tis a crazy world we live in !!!
@susieq wrote:
That said, I agree eve, for many years now employers have taken to giving out part time jobs rather than full time, not just for the flexibility, but the lack of need to pay employers NI and other costs and benefits ! So not always easy to find ‘full time’ employment.
When the time comes for me to take on staff, which will be pretty soon, this is the basis on which I will be employing, for all of the above reasons! It’s an approach that suits the small business very well.
But…just because the jobs on offer are part-time there is no reason why you should not be in full-time employment. If you can find two part-time jobs whose hours compliment each other you could be working a 32+ hour week which would make you effectively full-time albeit not with one employer.
One of my customers does this, she has two completely different jobs using different skillsets and she says she wouldn’t take either job full-time if they asked her, she like the variety that it offers.
Horses for courses :wink:
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!