We need a revolution

[redken1]

Took my ali scrap in today for beer money. Rooney on 230 grand a week. Me thinks we need a revolution.

[SupeRDel]

Good for Rooney. It don't matter wot job you do - If someone offerered you 230 grand a week you would not say No.

I am more concerned about the amount of benifit scroungers that are living good lives while some of us slave... >:(

[Nelly]

Good for Rooney. It don't matter wot job you do - If someone offerered you 230 grand a week you would not say No.

I am more concerned about the amount of benifit scroungers that are living good lives while some of us slave... >:(

ditto that [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

[Last Train]

[smiley=thumbup.gif] (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUatnbaNfEo)

HTH

[pilninggas]

Good for Rooney. It don't matter wot job you do - If someone offerered you 230 grand a week you would not say No.

I am more concerned about the amount of benifit scroungers that are living good lives while some of us slave... >:(

Too right, as a Bristol Rovers supporter i hate Man Ure - but they are a successful business (arguably the most successful FC in the world) and they want the best people; they therefore pay the best money for that. Rooney for all his faults, is very successful at United and they want to retain him for many reasons.

Redken, you'd have more money for beer, if you weren't paying for all the dole scroungers, oxygen wasters, resource parasites etc who live on the estate i live on and have absolutely no intention of working - why should they, you and i will pay! The benefits bill is greater than the revenues collected in income tax, thats you and i, and even Rooney paying for those who want to watch 'The Generally vile Show', rather than earn an honest days money!

I think we need a revolution too - one where only those who put something of substance into the system, are entitled to anything back.

[Col]

State spending has, over the last decade, reached unsustainable proportions but, unfortunately, this Con/Lib lot are not reducing it quickly enough.

The fact is there is not enough employment available for the population so either unemployment increases, public sector employment increases with results that we can all see, or a concerted effort to encourage private sector to grow by way of tax breaks for high exports for example.

Simplification of Tax, Benefit , Judicial, Social systems would result in less cost to/of government. A reduced levy paid to the E.U. is. also, essential as our contributions are too high for little ,or zero, return.

blah,blah,blah...................

.........anyway see y'all at the barricades [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

[BladeTriple]

I am more concerned about the amount of benifit scroungers that are living good lives while some of us slave... >:(


With you on that ... and a whole load of other things that I won't go into right now as its far too early and a day of rest after all ;) !

[redken1]

As a life long Man U fan I don't know how anyone can justify Rooney's salary. For the first time since the Seventies the Club never managed to sell all this year's season tickets and and owe a record £800 million of debt. For many working class fans like myself most premiership ticket prices are out of reach. Last Thursday Man City's stadium was only half-full for a top European match. You can bet that prices at OT will rise way above inflation rates next ytear to pay for Rooney's greed. Roy Keane was spot on with his comments about the Prawn sandwiches brigade.

[Mitch9128]

Good for Rooney. It don't matter wot job you do - If someone offerered you 230 grand a week you would not say No.

I am more concerned about the amount of benifit scroungers that are living good lives while some of us slave... >:(

Yep £850 billion of handouts...to the bankers. There will never be a revolution whilst people direct their anger at those who had no part in this economic downturn we are all suffering.

[Mitch9128]

Here's another bunch of scrounging bastards http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1323228/Queens-38m-year-offshore-windfarm-windfall--owns-seabed.html gawd knows she needs the money!

[redken1]

Good for Rooney. It don't matter wot job you do - If someone offerered you 230 grand a week you would not say No.

I am more concerned about the amount of benifit scroungers that are living good lives while some of us slave... >:(

Yep £850 billion of handouts...to the bankers. There will never be a revolution whilst people direct their anger at those who had no part in this economic downturn we are all suffering.

Echo your sentiments Mitch. Perhaps we should look across the channel. No work till you drop for the French. More biker friendly than the UK too. Instead of waiting for the revolution I could move to France. lol

[Mitch9128]

And while we're at it, why has overseas aid gone up? We give £297 million to India, a country with it's own nuclear arms program and a space program!

[t1pper]

Dont forget to declare your additional income to the tax man.

[Mark_Able]

Good for Rooney. It don't matter wot job you do - If someone offerered you 230 grand a week you would not say No.

I am more concerned about the amount of benifit scroungers that are living good lives while some of us slave... >:(

Yep £850 billion of handouts...to the bankers. There will never be a revolution whilst people direct their anger at those who had no part in this economic downturn we are all suffering.

Well said that man. Don't get me started on bankers... >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(

[Hunar]

VOTE HUNAR!

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Hunar-for-Prime-Minister/238421977309

got to love advertising muhahaha

join the campaign!

[JAYJAY]

Same ol' same ol' from right wing tories and their pale red 'liberals. Last time we had these austerity measures was under Maggie - she raised unemployment to an unprecedented level and sold off our assets to pay the unemplyed. She doctored the unemployment figures no less than five times, moving people off the unemployed figure onto other benefits (disabled etc.) Now these people are attacked as scroungers

Of course we will always have the sick, lame or lazy brigade - and I object to paying for them too - but what they cost us each, pales into insignificance when measured against the lost revenue of people / companies that make their fortune here but evade paying the dues for their success.

Add to that the fat cat bankers on massive bonuses that have cost us billions - and it was they who created the problem in the first place, even though tories would like us to believe the problemis caused by the few lazyites living a life on the poverty line.

Of course the Tories Will raid the banks to recover the monies we gave them under Brown -but at the same time they are set to massively increase unemployment - that has to be paid for so my question is....

Without the family jewels left to sell, and without the massive income enjoyed by Maggie from North sea oil - How the hell is Cameron and crew going to pay for the masses of unemployment they are openly planning????

[Thorkill_The_Tall]

The continued vitriol against benefit claimants is more proof how our 'betters' rule by division.
I would agree that there are those who abuse the system and this must be curtailed, but are all those on state subsidies really worthy of a witch hunt?

What about the foreign aid debacle?
Am I the only one to notice that a 37% increase of current levels was announced at the same time as swingeing cuts to everything else?
We give millions to India every year, yet they still manage to have a nuclear programme and have just bought a small fleet of nuclear subs from the Russians and send their sailors to Russia for training courses. They have just managed to stage the Commonwealth Games and have a space programme!
We even give aid to China, for gawd's sake!

We give all this away every year, yet we still have pensioners dying of hypothermia each winter.

[JAYJAY]

Well Said ThorKill - if we have pensioners unable to survive in our own system why the hell don't we deal with that first!! I know we have to be sensitive to the planet as a whole but surely charity begins at home. We abandoned our space program years ago - why should we pay for India's?

[redken1]

The Tories will always create high unemployment levels because it keeps wages low - not rocket science. Well said brothers - Come and Join the revolution. We could barricade the gates of the house of commons with our bikes. lol ;D

[redken1]

Vote for Hunar ;D

[Jon_W]

Good for Rooney. It don't matter wot job you do - If someone offerered you 230 grand a week you would not say No.

I am more concerned about the amount of benifit scroungers that are living good lives while some of us slave... >:(

Yep £850 billion of handouts...to the bankers. There will never be a revolution whilst people direct their anger at those who had no part in this economic downturn we are all suffering.

Well said that man. Don't get me started on bankers... >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(

Agreed! >:( >:( >:(

[Kevinb]

VOTE KEVINB

Forced emergration for people I don't like.
This would mean jobs for the forces getting rid of them.
Less people would mean the NHS could cope, less people in our prisons. We wouldn't need to build more houses, hospitals or schools.
Remember free cat fur coats for the elderly and free cat curry as we wouldn't want to waste anything. ;D
Beer duty down. Petrol duty down.

[Mitch9128]

The continued vitriol against benefit claimants is more proof how our 'betters' rule by division.
I would agree that there are those who abuse the system and this must be curtailed, but are all those on state subsidies really worthy of a witch hunt?

What about the foreign aid debacle?
Am I the only one to notice that a 37% increase of current levels was announced at the same time as swingeing cuts to everything else?
We give millions to India every year, yet they still manage to have a nuclear programme and have just bought a small fleet of nuclear subs from the Russians and send their sailors to Russia for training courses. They have just managed to stage the Commonwealth Games and have a space programme!
We even give aid to China, for gawd's sake!

We give all this away every year, yet we still have pensioners dying of hypothermia each winter.


I'm convinced the government is only increasing foreign aid, so we are all so busy complaining about the aid, that we ignore the fact that the banks only have to pay a teeny bank levy. Can't think of any other logical reason to give aid to countries with nuclear and space programs.

[pilninggas]

The continued vitriol against benefit claimants is more proof how our 'betters' rule by division.
I would agree that there are those who abuse the system and this must be curtailed, but are all those on state subsidies really worthy of a witch hunt?

What about the foreign aid debacle?
Am I the only one to notice that a 37% increase of current levels was announced at the same time as swingeing cuts to everything else?
We give millions to India every year, yet they still manage to have a nuclear programme and have just bought a small fleet of nuclear subs from the Russians and send their sailors to Russia for training courses. They have just managed to stage the Commonwealth Games and have a space programme!
We even give aid to China, for gawd's sake!

We give all this away every year, yet we still have pensioners dying of hypothermia each winter.



It is not a witch-hunt against all benefit claimants - only those who have no desire to work, believe me there are plenty of them. We could stop paying those who can work and can't be arsed and give it to the pensioners - i like to see that.

We need personal responsibility - round here people are openly claiming dole and working/dealing. They sit at home and watch knocked-off sky on you and I.

I've never been out of work in my life, and i know i live in an area where unemployment is lower than many parts of the country. Whether its been digging up for gaslines, working nights in warehouse or driving a taxi, ive just got on and done it. We have lost a culture of work ethic amongst some.

I agree with the issue of tax-havens, this kind of tax-avoidance is a joke.


Maybe people like me could opt never to be entitled to unemployment benefit and then not pay into it, and those of you who are keen on it could pay more. It would suit me!

[Mitch9128]

The 'scroungers' haven't lost £40k off the value of my house for me, the bankers did. The scroungers are a drop in the ocean compared to the £850 billion the bankers have cost this country. Where is the work ethic in gambling with my money and future? One day we all may need benefits, why would any of us want to see them cut? Especially if you have worked all your life to be told there is nothing, due to the tories swathing cuts, i can't see any logic in this?

[Col]

Yeah there has to/ought to be a 'social safety net' funded by tax to help those genuinely in need of help as very often circumstances beyond an individuals control can result in severe financial hardship.

Don't agree about the Royals though as I would rather them than some corrupt republic.

Surely nobody could dispute that H.M.Queen has not been unstinting in her duties and bear in mind much of their perceived wealth they are only custodians of. I reckon much would be sold off/given away if there was a republic headed by the likes of say Blair as few of these 'big noises' are truly loyal to their country.

[pilninggas]

The 'scroungers' haven't lost £40k off the value of my house for me, the bankers did. The scroungers are a drop in the ocean compared to the £850 billion the bankers have cost this country. Where is the work ethic in gambling with my money and future? One day we all may need benefits, why would any of us want to see them cut? Especially if you have worked all your life to be told there is nothing, due to the tories swathing cuts, i can't see any logic in this?

I agree to some extent, what was Gordon Brown thinking? Glad i never voted for that shower.

It's gonna take the present coalition a long time to unpick the Blair/Brown mess.

[Kevinb]

The 'scroungers' haven't lost £40k off the value of my house for me, the bankers did. The scroungers are a drop in the ocean compared to the £850 billion the bankers have cost this country. Where is the work ethic in gambling with my money and future? One day we all may need benefits, why would any of us want to see them cut? Especially if you have worked all your life to be told there is nothing, due to the tories swathing cuts, i can't see any logic in this?

I agree to some extent, what was Gordon Brown thinking? Glad i never voted for that shower.

It's gonna take the present coalition, a long time to unpick the Blair/Brown mess.

History will repeat itself. the coalition will sort out this countries problems only to be ousted by morons in either 4 or 8 years time who will put Labour back in power and put us back in debt.

[Mitch9128]

Yeah there has to/ought to be a 'social safety net' funded by tax to help those genuinely in need of help as very often circumstances beyond an individuals control can result in severe financial hardship.

Don't agree about the Royals though as I would rather them than some corrupt republic.

Surely nobody could dispute that H.M.Queen has not been unstinting in her duties and bear in mind much of their perceived wealth they are only custodians of. I reckon much would be sold off/given away if there was a republic headed by the likes of say Blair as few of these 'big noises' are truly loyal to their country.

Custodians?? She's the richest woman in the world in her own right, nothing to do with crown property. Why should she reap £30 odd million a year from windfarm rates??? She heads the biggest bunch of scroungers in the land.

[redken1]

The poverty trap that still exists today is a legacy from the Thatcher years. The problem is that many unskilled people with families cannot afford to work because the minimum wage is set too low and is not relative to the economy. Eg: Three of the largest supermarket chains have all enjoyed a rise in profits year on year, yet the majority of their respective workforces's remuneration is subsidised by the taxpayer by way of the tax credit system. Scrap the current system, raise the minimum wage to a decent level and means test the companies who claim they cannot afford to pay the statutory rate. Sorted

Unless we give a real incentive to people to work the status quo will remain irrespective of whatever government is at the helm.

[DaytonaDog]

We had a revolution, it was called a general election.

This country was bordering on bankruptcy and is hughly in debt. We are currently paying 120 millions pounds a day in interest due to the current deficit.

I'm all for a fair society, but how is it fair that a person who has never done a days work, their parents have never done a days work and their parents parents have never done a days work, and has never ever contributed to society, has a better standard of living than someone who has worked their whole working life. This is not an exception to the rule. I go to houses were not a single member of the household works, yet there is a 50 inch plasma tv, plush leather sofas, a decent car, various gadgets and gizmos, they all smoke, drink, someetimes as early as 9.30 in the morning, (hardly employable), and have about 5 different pets. Everytime a fridge, washing machine etc etc breaks down it gets replaced by the tax payer. Housing is provided yet the house is treated like a pig sty and has to be repaired by the tax payer again.

Until you redress the balance of the benefits of not working against the benefits of working, a lot of people are going to take the easy option.

Its not that the minimum wage is too low, (at the end of the day you should cut you cloth accordingly) its that its too easy to have a comfortable lifestyle without working.

[pilninggas]

We had a revolution, it was called a general election.

This country was bordering on bankruptcy and is hughly in debt. We are currently paying 120 millions pounds a day in interest due to the current deficit.

I'm all for a fair society, but how is it fair that a person who has never done a days work, their parents have never done a days work and their parents parents have never done a days work, and has never ever contributed to society, has a better standard of living than someone who has worked their whole working life. This is not an exception to the rule. I go to houses were not a single member of the household works, yet there is a 50 inch plasma tv, plush leather sofas, a decent car, various gadgets and gizmos, they all smoke, drink, someetimes as early as 9.30 in the morning, (hardly employable), and have about 5 different pets. Everytime a fridge, washing machine etc etc breaks down it gets replaced by the tax payer. Housing is provided yet the house is treated like a pig sty and has to be repaired by the tax payer again.

Until you redress the balance of the benefits of not working against the benefits of working, a lot of people are going to take the easy option.

Its not that the minimum wage is too low, (at the end of the day you should cut you cloth accordingly) its that its too easy to have a comfortable lifestyle without working.

[smiley=thumbsup.gif]Great post, however comparing pigs to the work-shy is really rather unkind to porkers!

[JAYJAY]

I am really sorry DaytonaDog but I have to say that has to be one of the most biased, ill-informed, vitrilous, lopsided posts it's ever been my displeasure to have read!

If you think families on benefits, for whatever reason, are living a life of luxury with smart cars, huge plasma TV's, shall we assume nice holidays too, a new washing machine at the drop of a hat, all on us poor taxpayers, and presumably living a better life than you or I can afford, you are seriously deluded and totally out of touch with reality.

Pehaps your view is marred by the fact that by definition the people you are visiting (Quote "I go to houses were not a single member of the household works, yet there is a 50 inch plasma tv, plush leather sofas, a decent car, various gadgets and gizmos, they all smoke, drink" unquote) are criminals and their extra luxuries are paid for by crime!

With the liklihood of unemployment rising massively during this parliament, are you going to paint all the people unfortunate enough to lose there jobs and find it difficult to find work with the same brush? What if you lose yours? Is ANYONE on benefits to come under your dogmatic right wing description? I think Ken was a bit tongue in cheek when he titled this string - but the attitude you portray could possibly be a seed if given enough voice.

God protect the poor in your world, you obviously wont. Let's get it straight - Jobseekers benefit is £42 per week. Take a long time to live off that AND save for a 50" plasma - I hope you confiscated it!

Lock up the criminals by all means - please - we hate them. But be very careful with sweeping generalisations and dogmatic statements which bare no resemblance to the truth, that is damaging, totally inconstructive and unhelpful and fosters a feeling in society as unwelcome as race or religious hatred. There is a poverty trap in this country and too many of our citizens are caught in it. It is a social wrong which needs addressing. As do the criminally selfish bankers who are the architects of our debt.

[pilninggas]

I am really sorry DaytonaDog but I have to say that has to be one of the most biased, ill-informed, vitrilous, lopsided posts it's ever been my displeasure to have read!

If you think families on benefits, for whatever reason, are living a life of luxury with smart cars, huge plasma TV's, shall we assume nice holidays too, a new washing machine at the drop of a hat, all on us poor taxpayers, and presumably living a better life than you or I can afford, you are seriously deluded and totally out of touch with reality.

Pehaps your view is marred by the fact that by definition the people you are visiting (Quote "I go to houses were not a single member of the household works, yet there is a 50 inch plasma tv, plush leather sofas, a decent car, various gadgets and gizmos, they all smoke, drink" unquote) are criminals and their extra luxuries are paid for by crime!

With the liklihood of unemployment rising massively during this parliament, are you going to paint all the people unfortunate enough to lose there jobs and find it difficult to find work with the same brush? What if you lose yours? Is ANYONE on benefits to come under your dogmatic right wing description? I think Ken was a bit tongue in cheek when he titled this string - but the attitude you portray could possibly be a seed if given enough voice.

God protect the poor in your world, you obviously wont.

Lock up the criminal s by all means - please - we hate them. But be very careful with sweeping generalisations and dogmatic statements which bare no resemblance to the truth. There is a poverty trap in this country and too many of our citizens are caught in it. It is a social wrong which needs addressing. As do the criminally selfish bankers who are the architects of our debt.

i don't think DD is saying all people are benefits are living the life of luxury; only that far too many are.

The family opposite me could be the kind of place DD is visiting. The old-man (my age) doesn't work, about 2 years ago he got a job as a security guard, but packed it in after 6 weeks as he didn't like getting up at 5.30am (boo-hoo). Since then he's done nought - doesn't even look for work. They've got nice appliances, far better than most. They drink heavily, smoke (even though 3 out of 4 of their kids have asthma) and have a good standard of living. They are by no-means an exception in this area. You would be amazed at what they get hand-outs for; a taxi to the local health centre which is a 10 minute walk away!

What do you really mean by poor? I think you are seeing things from the very left-wing side. The government recently said they were gonna cap benefits at £26k p/a, this is still pretty significant and equates to £36k p/a if you are a tax-payer. That's more than most of us earn.

Whilst benefits cost more than income-tax generates, whatever your description of poor, things have to change.

[JAYJAY]

Again the supposed facts are wrong. Benefits DO NOT cost more than generated tax. In fact the expected tax take expected on closing the Swiss Bank loophole is set to benefit the exchequer billions.

£26k is the exception, not the rule (would equate to around £32K before deductions) but on the face of it I would cap it far lower and increase lower benefits. But not everything is as simple as it seems is it? There now seems to be a Goverment uturn about to happen as they have realised that without some of these 'taxpayer handouts' the major cities, especially London, the City will be 'cleansed of the poor which are currently supported to remain. That would mean no poor workers to empty the bins, no poor workers to clean the hospitals and offices, no poor workers to arrive and put the fire out. Nothing is so simple that a draconian measure can easily fix.

[commando1966]

Good for Rooney. It don't matter wot job you do - If someone offerered you 230 grand a week you would not say No.

I am more concerned about the amount of benifit scroungers that are living good lives while some of us slave... >:(

Too right, as a Bristol Rovers supporter i hate Man Ure - but they are a successful business (arguably the most successful FC in the world) and they want the best people; they therefore pay the best money for that. Rooney for all his faults, is very successful at United and they want to retain him for many reasons.

Redken, you'd have more money for beer, if you weren't paying for all the dole scroungers, oxygen wasters, resource parasites etc who live on the estate i live on and have absolutely no intention of working - why should they, you and i will pay! The benefits bill is greater than the revenues collected in income tax, thats you and i, and even Rooney paying for those who want to watch 'The Generally vile Show', rather than earn an honest days money!

I think we need a revolution too - one where only those who put something of substance into the system, are entitled to anything back.
Man U successful ?? LOL .. they are 300 million in Debt .. and as for Wayne (ape man) Rooney he's not worth £230 Quid a week .. never mind 230 Grand :P

[pilninggas]

Again the supposed facts are wrong. Benefits DO NOT cost more than generated tax. In fact the expected tax take expected on closing the Swiss Bank loophole is set to benefit the exchequer billions.

£26k is the exception, not the rule (would equate to around £32K before deductions) but on the face of it I would cap it far lower and increase lower benefits. But not everything is as simple as it seems is it? There now seems to be a Goverment uturn about to happen as they have realised that without some of these 'taxpayer handouts' the major cities, especially London, the City will be 'cleansed of the poor which are currently supported to remain. That would mean no poor workers to empty the bins, no poor workers to clean the hospitals and offices, no poor workers to arrive and put the fire out. Nothing is so simple that a draconian measure can easily fix.
Do i count as poor? i'm a teacher :o

[commando1966]

"Cap benefits to £26k ?!?!?!? thats TWICE what i earn working Full Time lol .. :D

[JAYJAY]

I'm a customer services executive and by no means well off. I am not one of the 'poor' caught in the poverty trap I refer to and neither are you. We have the luxury of feeling 'relative' poorness, not poverty.

There is an old socialist principle - To each according to their need, From each according to their ability. You would think that in a modern educated society in one of the richest countries in the world, we could come to somewhere near that principle which was actually founded in a socialogical study rather than socialism.

The problem is those that could afford to support the 'To each' part are the type who rob us of our tax monies to rescue the businesses they gambled away and then pay themselves millions in bonuses - with our money! You will never find those with such a criminal greed ready to play such a responsible part in society, they are too tied up with protecting the status quo and increasing personal wealth to the detriment of anyone or anything. And on the other side of the coin you have those who quite like the 'To each' part but conveniently forget the 'From each' part.

The straight fact in this country is that over the last 15 year the rich/poor divide has widened massively - in those terms I'm afraid you and I are on the poor side of that equation, unless you are a head teacher. On top of that the most disadvantaged have become poorer in the same period. You can check this out, it is fact, not opinion.

[DaytonaDog]

Jay jay, I think you missed my point. I was trying to highlight the reasons why staying on benefits may be more appealing than getting a job, because for some, not necessarily from the criminal fraternity have a very comfortable lifestyle because they know how to play the system. Is that fair? Not when you have student nurses on 8 grand a week and soldiers in afghan on less than 20,000 grand. An article I read a couple of weeks ago was about a lady who had 6 kids by 5 different fathers none if whom paid any maintenance. She receives 39000 pounds a year in benefits. I've got no issue with that as those children need a roof over there head and need feeding, however when she uses those benefits to give herself a 4500 pound boob job, take 3 holidays a year and fund a 10000 credit card bill I think I can justifiably question if that is right and fair especially when you have pensioners who have worked all their lifes barely able to afford to eat and keep warm.

I've got no issue whatsoever with those who have been or will soon become unemployed or are genuinely unable to work receiving benefits as we all have a right to a basic standard of living as it's not their choice to be out of work or in a poorly paid job. My issue is with those who manage to legitimately work the system, who have never worked nor intend to work and seem to be able to claim every single benefit going. Until you address that anomaly you will have people who choose not to work because it is the easier option. That was the point I was trying to make, albeit not very eloquently.

I can assure you I'm in touch with reality. I see reality on a far too regular basis. I see squalor, poverty and deprevation far too often, which is why I get annoyed with those I have moaned about as it diverts the money away from those who genuinely need it.

[redken1]

You are right JayJay, despite the biggest economic boom in UK history under New Labour the gap between the rich and poor widened. Sadly, the economic wealth of the boom years did not filter down to the disadvantaged and poor. Record numbers of homeless, record numbers of pensioners dying from cold related illness etc etc. The right wing media propaganda appears to have succeeded in convincing many people that our economic woes were caused by benefit recipients and/or asylum seekers. Kick the vulnerable and poor because they are easy targets. A bit more difficult for the government of the day to go after the rich club tax dodgers or unscrupulous bankers (which costs the country fifty fold more in lost revenue). Who is funding the political parties? Come the revolution I'll be one of the flag bearers.

[Mitch9128]

This housing benefits cap is an ethnic cleansing of types, drive the poor from the cities into ghettos in the outskirts. Leave the once poor areas for the rich to develop, for their rich cronies to buy. Hitler/Thatcher/Cameron, all the same.
One of my personal favourite quotes:-
Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative.
John Stuart Mill

[wiltshire builders]

The gap between rich and poor has widened but certainly not in the way you lot claim. The rich are getting richer but so are the poor.
Thing that years ago were seen as luxury items are now the norm. Average people now have the opportunity to excel in fields that before were not available to them.

As for the rash statements about record numbers of deaths due to the cold, that is just not true. It's a well know fact that people are living longer. More old people = more deaths of old people. Cold related illnesses covers a wide spectrum.

As for the views on Tories I only have one thing to say:
"LORD Prescott!"

[Kevinb]

Shall we all start talking about religion now as I think the politcal debate is getting a bit heated.
We will have to agree to disagree. Those who voted labour should be put up against a wall deported or shot and those who voted Tory thank you for giving this county a chance. ;D

Only joking I think we should all move on from this

[DaytonaDog]

Kev I think that's a very good idea. This is a bikers forum after all. They always say you should never talk politics or religion.

[JAYJAY]

DaytonaDog - thanks for the qualification which I read much more happily. I havn't seen the report you quote but would like to if you can remember it's source I think it could be an educational read.
[smiley=thumbsup.gif]

[Thorkill_The_Tall]

NOT A POLITICAL STATEMENT IN ANY WAY

So winter mortality rates simply aren't true, eh?
So I guess this lot have got it all wrong, then......

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=574

[redken1]

Kev I think that's a very good idea. This is a bikers forum after all. They always say you should never talk politics or religion.

My original post on this thread was a tongue in cheek submission to express my anger at Wayne Rooney's new contract at a time when most of us are pulling our belts in. It was not intended to be political in the wider sense. Although I am calm I do accept that the debate has become a bit heated and perhaps it is time to move on.

Like most if not all of the members on this site I have a real passion for bikes. It's so enjoyable to chat with like minded people about bikes, but what really appeals to me about this site is that I can also chat about other topics in the non-bike section. And when the mood arises I can engage in a bit of banter on the muppet forum. In my personal view the best biking site by a country mile.

[pilninggas]

Kev I think that's a very good idea. This is a bikers forum after all. They always say you should never talk politics or religion.

My original post on this thread was a tongue in cheek submission to express my anger at Wayne Rooney's new contract at a time when most of us are pulling our belts in. It was not intended to be political in the wider sense. Although I am calm I do accept that the debate has become a bit heated and perhaps it is time to move on.

Like most if not all of the members on this site I have a real passion for bikes. It's so enjoyable to chat with like minded people about bikes, but what really appeals to me about this site is that I can also chat about other topics in the non-bike section. And when the mood arises I can engage in a bit of banter on the muppet forum. In my personal view the best biking site by a country mile.
Something we definitely agree on! [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

[redken1]

how did you do that bold print?

[pilninggas]

how did you do that bold print?
start a reply and then the text you want to be bold (either in your own text or in the quote) put these either side. There is also the option in the toolbar above the posting box (if that makes sense?)- its a capital B.

[wiltshire builders]

NOT A POLITICAL STATEMENT IN ANY WAY

So winter mortality rates simply aren't true, eh?
So I guess this lot have got it all wrong, then......

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=574
No the stats are right, it's you that's wrong.
Redken said we are seeing RECORD numbers of deaths due to the cold and as your graph shows the current death rates are NOT at record highs.
If you're going to post statistics it's a good idea to make sure they back up your arguement rather than disprove it. Also don't pick an argument with the boyfriend of the woman who provides the government with these statistics for the NHS.

[redken1]

how did you do that bold print?
start a reply and then the text you want to be bold (either in your own text or in the quote) put these either side. There is also the option in the toolbar above the posting box (if that makes sense?)- its a capital B.

Oh got you I have been using the quick reply box. Cheers

[redken1]

NOT A POLITICAL STATEMENT IN ANY WAY

So winter mortality rates simply aren't true, eh?
So I guess this lot have got it all wrong, then......

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=574
No the stats are right, it's you that's wrong.
Redken said we are seeing RECORD numbers of deaths due to the cold and as your graph shows the current death rates are NOT at record highs.
If you're going to post statistics it's a good idea to make sure they back up your arguement rather than disprove it. Also don't pick an argument with the boyfriend of the woman who provides the government with these statistics for the NHS.

Wiltshire Builders, if I have made a mistake I apologise - was 99/2000 not a record high?

[JAYJAY]

Political discussion is good - why avoid it - this is the NON bike heading after all!
It shows far more intelligence to be able to share facts and views than to avoid it. Only by having open minds to discussion and evidence do we learn. iF our forbears had not followed this principle we would still be waiting to invent the wheel.
The dumb thing is to be in a prejudiced, unimformed position refusing to listen to either fact or argument. Therein lies the truth of the maxim that those who do not learn by history are destined to re-live it

[JAYJAY]

NOT A POLITICAL STATEMENT IN ANY WAY

So winter mortality rates simply aren't true, eh?
So I guess this lot have got it all wrong, then......

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=574
No the stats are right, it's you that's wrong.
Redken said we are seeing RECORD numbers of deaths due to the cold and as your graph shows the current death rates are NOT at record highs.
If you're going to post statistics it's a good idea to make sure they back up your arguement rather than disprove it. Also don't pick an argument with the boyfriend of the woman who provides the government with these statistics for the NHS.

So last winter was not the record year for additional winter deaths - I'm sure it was worse in Dickensian days! But the graph clearly shows it was the worst in the last 10 years - so your point is.....?
All old people are warm enough?

[DaytonaDog]

Political discussion is good - why avoid it - this is the NON bike heading after all!
It shows far more intelligence to be able to share facts and views than to avoid it. Only by having open minds to discussion and evidence do we learn. iF our forbears had not followed this principle we would still be waiting to invent the wheel.
The dumb thing is to be in a prejudiced, unimformed position refusing to listen to either fact or argument. Therein lies the truth of the maxim that those who do not learn by history are destined to re-live it
JayJay - A very good point, well made.

I'm going to opt out for the time being due to my own shortcomings in being able to convey my thoughts via the written word. However i will still enjoy reading the thoughts and opinions of others. [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

[JAYJAY]

ok - how about a bit of political trivia?

Only un-googled answer before midnight counted!

During the '70s we had a period of enforced 50 mph speed limit on motorways - all drivers issued with petrol ration coupons, factories offices shops and other businesses reduced to a 3 day working week - television ended at 10.00 p.m.

Who was the Prime Minister
a. Harold Wilson
b. James Calaghan
c. Edward Heath
d. Margaret Thatcher

No Prizes - ok maybe a pint or coffee tomorrow for the first correct!

[redken1]

Ted Heath

[Thorkill_The_Tall]

NOT A POLITICAL STATEMENT IN ANY WAY

So winter mortality rates simply aren't true, eh?
So I guess this lot have got it all wrong, then......

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=574
No the stats are right, it's you that's wrong.
Redken said we are seeing RECORD numbers of deaths due to the cold and as your graph shows the current death rates are NOT at record highs.
If you're going to post statistics it's a good idea to make sure they back up your arguement rather than disprove it.

Please read my original post more carefully.

The text accompanying the graph states:

The elderly population experiences the greatest increase in deaths each winter. In the winter of 2008/09 there were 29,400 more deaths among those aged 75 and over, compared with levels in the non-winter period. In contrast, there were 7,300 excess winter deaths among those under the age of 75.

Irrespective of what Redken may have said, my original comment concerned the fact that winter mortality rates for the elderly are in excess of the rate for the rest of the year. This seems to be true for all the sample years, not just for the year given in this instance.
I don't see how I have disproved anything.



Also don't pick an argument with the boyfriend of the woman who provides the government with these statistics for the NHS.

I hadn't realised I had.
Please offer my apologies when you see him.

[BB]

As long as you lot keep the arguments on this thread and don't get personal I see no problem with it.

The rest of us can read or not read it as we choose. I personally read it but keep my thoughts to myself.

I would also prefer not to listen to too much of it in a pub, but I can always find someone else to talk to I'm sure! ;)

Nothing like a bit of healthy discussion [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

BB

[Kevinb]

I will start another thread with another discussion point ;)

[Mitch9128]

Healthy debate, is just that, healthy. I try not to be personal, and if some of my comments are found to be insulting to some, then i personally apologise. I don't mention politics hardly ever in real life, so i find it refreshing to have a debate online with people. Let's not censor this thread and let's not be personal, i'm sure a lot of you know each other offline, and i'm sure over time you may get to know me. For the record i don't wear dungarees, or live in a teepee, i eat lots of red meat, and don't smoke drugs ;)

[wiltshire builders]

My original post:

As for the rash statements about record numbers of deaths due to the cold, that is just not true. It's a well know fact that people are living longer. More old people = more deaths of old people. Cold related illnesses covers a wide spectrum.

Thorkill's response:

So winter mortality rates simply aren't true, eh?
So I guess this lot have got it all wrong, then......

As you can see at no point did I say that winter mortality rates aren't true I said they aren't at a record high as the graph clearly shows. That is the only point I wanted to make and thought it was clear enough. I think you just read what you wanted.

Jayjay I think you might have your graph upside down as it certainly doesn't show that last year was a record high for winter deaths. I'm deffinately not saying any increase is ok.

[redken1]

My original post:

As for the rash statements about record numbers of deaths due to the cold, that is just not true. It's a well know fact that people are living longer. More old people = more deaths of old people. Cold related illnesses covers a wide spectrum.

Thorkill's response:

So winter mortality rates simply aren't true, eh?
So I guess this lot have got it all wrong, then......

As you can see at no point did I say that winter mortality rates aren't true I said they aren't at a record high as the graph clearly shows. That is the only point I wanted to make and thought it was clear enough. I think you just read what you wanted.

Wiltshire builders, (sorry I don't know your first name)

I apologise again for my mistake. However, in the context of my argument I peronally believe thousands of such deaths in one of the world's richest economies is a national scandal.

[Col]

On that 'cold' subject did you guys notice that the main gas suppliers are about to hike prices by around 10% :o Now that could have some serious consequences on elderly people with low or static incomes if they heat/cook with gas. The gummint should force these suppliers to charge a minimum to any elderly persons who are struggling.

[wiltshire builders]

[/quote]
I apologise again for my mistake. However, in the context of my argument I peronally believe thousands of such deaths in one of the world's richest economies is a national scandal. [/quote]

You are absolutely right. Heating shouldn't be seen as a luxury. The energy companies seem to able to act with impunity. If they ever are brought to account it's by way of a fine which in turn is passed onto the public. It's very difficult to voice your displeasure these days without falling foul of any of the new laws brought in to silence the masses.
Like Col said, it's only going to get worse.

[JAYJAY]

My original post:


Jayjay I think you might have your graph upside down as it certainly doesn't show that last year was a record high for winter deaths. I'm deffinately not saying any increase is ok.



Please read my post - I said the worst in 10 years not a record - 10 years ealier was clearly higher - on a right way up graph.

[commando1966]

"Gordon Bennett" This thread is MISERABLE and GLOOMY .. Cheer up you lot for goodness sakes .. Most of you all have Great bikes on the road , money in your pockets !! Im struggling to get my Trike on the road on Minimum wage but im still happy and excited about when it is finally on the road !! NOW SNAP OUT OF IT .. LOL :D ;D 8-) 8-)

[JAYJAY]

Sorry Nick - Although I applaude your outlook on life - after all we are here for a good time not a long time - we wont solve the problem of thousands of pensioners having to make the decision between 'heat' or 'eat' by burying our heads in the sand and pretending is isn't so.

I have only 4 years to go til my company throws me on the scrap heap and I start to pull my state pension - currently less than £98 per week. I started work at 15 and will have worked, and payed for my state pension, for 50 years. Less than £100 per week for that is wrong, a social injustice and a damned insult.

Aside from that - good luck with the bike - I hope we see you on the road with it soon [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

By the way, as Adante will no doubt confirm - Jewish John (JAYJAY) rareley has any spare cash - my bank manager can back that up too!

[RichTT]

The UK has no appetite for revolution.

The majority are all too happy moaning about things, but can't really be bothered to do anything about it.

As long as we have the right to free speach, protest and vote - why revolt?

http://mercuriuspoliticus.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/down-with-this-sort-of-thing1.jpg?w=387&h=365

But, if we were to lose those rights............................................ ...

http://moviesmedia.ign.com/movies/image/article/690/690251/v-for-vendetta-20060221085724795.jpg

[Mitch9128]

People should not be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people. Brilliant film.

[Ducatista]

I peronally believe thousands of such deaths in one of the world's richest economies is a national scandal.

I'm new to this debate, but don't elderly people get quite a reasonable winter fuel allowance these days?

I suspect some of it is not down to the actual fuel money.
It's perhaps down to their frugal attittude or perhaps that they are not well looked after enough (for example their flat could be draughty).

I make sure my in-laws in their 80s get everything they are entitled to (attendance allowance, carers allwances, pension credit, council tax benefit, winter fuel allowance etc.) but I think there are some elderly people who have no help and no-one to look out for them.

I don't think it's simply a question of money.
There are grants for insulation, pension credit, winter fuel allowance, but not all elderly people are able to access the help they need.
I think it's a more complicated issue.

Same for most of the folks out on the streets.
There is help available but you need a degree to fill out some of the forms and some people fall through the safety net.

[commando1966]

I peronally believe thousands of such deaths in one of the world's richest economies is a national scandal.

I'm new to this debate, but don't elderly people get quite a reasonable winter fuel allowance these days?

I suspect some of it is not down to the actual fuel money.
It's perhaps down to their frugal attittude or perhaps that they are not well looked after enough (for example their flat could be draughty).

I make sure my in-laws in their 80s get everything they are entitled to (attendance allowance, carers allwances, pension credit, council tax benefit, winter fuel allowance etc.) but I think there are some elderly people who have no help and no-one to look out for them.

I don't think it's simply a question of money.
There are grants for insulation, pension credit, winter fuel allowance, but not all elderly people are able to access the help they need.
I think it's a more complicated issue.

Same for most of the folks out on the streets.
There is help available but you need a degree to fill out some of the forms and some people fall through the safety net.
Yes Ducatista there is Loads of help out there if people would use the brain god gave them . Yes the elderly Do get a generous heating allowance - my mother recieves it Plus if she wanted she could have upgraded her loft insulation and door seals etc.
8-)

[commando1966]

Sorry Nick - Although I applaude your outlook on life - after all we are here for a good time not a long time - we wont solve the problem of thousands of pensioners having to make the decision between 'heat' or 'eat' by burying our heads in the sand and pretending is isn't so.

I have only 4 years to go til my company throws me on the scrap heap and I start to pull my state pension - currently less than £98 per week. I started work at 15 and will have worked, and payed for my state pension, for 50 years. Less than £100 per week for that is wrong, a social injustice and a damned insult.

Aside from that - good luck with the bike - I hope we see you on the road with it soon [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

By the way, as Adante will no doubt confirm - Jewish John (JAYJAY) rareley has any spare cash - my bank manager can back that up too!
You just Totally contradicted yourself JAYJAY lol .. you say applaud my outlook but you "carry on moaning" Yes we are here for a good time and not a long time , so STOP all this whining and live your life .. Manager / Moderator .. Please Please Please DELETE this miserable T

[commando1966]

Thread ... lol .. god knows what happened there 8-)

[Mitch9128]

Nick i wholeheartedly do not applaud your outlook, if we all went about our business never questioning the governments, we would be rode rough-shod over. If you don't like the thread, then don't comment, stop advocating cencorship.

[redken1]

Nick i wholeheartedly do not applaud your outlook, if we all went about our business never questioning the governments, we would be rode rough-shod over. If you don't like the thread, then don't comment, stop advocating cencorship.

Yes Nick with respect, if I do not wish to view or comment on a particular topic/thread then I don't. Just because I don't agree with another member(s) post(s) I am not going to call on the management team to remove it. As long as folk don't get personal free speech should remain. If we go down the road of censorship this site will be dead in the water.

[commando1966]

Not once have i mentioned Censorship .. all iam saying is Chill out and Lighten up .. it seems all British people do is moan about one thing or another .. if it aint the wheather is Politics lol .. Nuff said .. enjoy your d :Pepressing banter

[commando1966]

...... Has gone off to look for a HAPPY THREAD !!

[JAYJAY]

Nick Said You just Totally contradicted yourself JAYJAY lol .. you say applaud my outlook but you "carry on moaning" Yes we are here for a good time and not a long time , so STOP all this whining and live your life .. Manager / Moderator .. Please Please Please DELETE this miserable T[/quote]

I neither contradicted myself - or got personal. Neither did I appeal to an authority to censor something I don't like! Neither am I a whining moaner.
If we ignore the plight of our countrymen and women I think we become part of the problem. Only by keeping discussion alive can we put any kind of pressure on our law makers to address the problem.
I don't think one is a miserablre whining old git for holding that view or voicing it!

[BladeTriple]

Guys,

Lisa (Ducatista) has it spot on , its more a case of old folk not having someone to look out for them with a bit of allowance savvy rather than them not having enough allowances to cover their needs. (Either that or keep the old buggers off the 888 online bingo sites! [smiley=happy.gif])

Censorship is not needed , the censors/ media have more than enough I'd even say too much power in this country, look really at who runs this country and you will see its the Media, the Press. They build up peoples opinion try and tell us how to think overtly and not so overtly. Its in the crap you watch on tv, the news, the papers you read. They build people up and then when they've made them the next big thing or are bored with them they decide to cut them down, spread their PRIVATE lives their dirt all over the media and show them as nothing more than HUMAN and yet everyone gasps that these people who have been built up to be almost immortal are just human like the rest of us.

Nobody is perfect, everyone strives for something better if not why do we all own cars, ride motorbikes, try and have nice homes and nice clothes, many of us with the latest gadgets... (who here ISN'T on a PC or Laptop reading this or even a Smart Phone?) No Rooney doesn't deserve that kind of money a week no bugger does,however people continue to pay to be entertained and if they are daft enough to go out and buy the match tickets, the sky subscriptions , the magazines, the replica shirts then these greedy buggers will continue to demand astronomical pay.

No footballers don't deserve this kind of wage and yes Policemen, Nurses, Firemen , Soldiers who are on a pittance in comparison could do with more as could the school system but the facts are PEOPLE PAY TO BE ENTERTAINED..... Nobody would 'Sponsor' a School, A Fire Department, A Hospital or their favourite Regiment.... The Royal Signals ... Sponsored by Cisco and EADS Astrium .... Nope I don't think so !

With regards to this being a country of moaners ... well what else are folk going to do , if you cannot whine it means you either accept it or get out there and do something about it , to be honest I don't see many folk here doing anything about it apart from p1$$ing and moaning about their plight .

Labour folk , you're in an area where you know your vote is going to be wasted , Redken I know Westbury is has a Labour club but its Tory blue through and through. Tories you voted these buggers in lets hope they get it right with all their sweeping cuts and Lib Dems... well you must be over the moon that your leadership sold out just for a little bit of power, I wonder if Labour get in next time if they would offer a power share with them and in turn change their colours to the Italian flag.

Getting back to the picture someone posted from 'V' for Vendetta... I know its an extreme and the graphic novel was actually written in the 70s, last time the Tories got in power , but it is scarily accurate in some areas with respect to the media and actually what could happen.

The world right now in terrified of terror threats, we are poisoned against anyone with a darker skin tone than ours, who are not christians, who dress differently or have different lifestyles. Even tho equal rights for the homosexual community are wider spread fact is that anyone who is not conforming to the norm is treated at some level like an outcasts. Our own community of bikers suffers that as we all know, most of us being reasonably well paid , well behaved individuals with jobs , homes and families and not the stereotype of HA gang members involved in organised crime , or greasy unclean bikers of Quadrophenia infamy , look at all the crap in the press with Wooton Bassett when '1000's of smelly hairy bikers thundered through the peaceful town of Wooton Bassett where nobody wanted them' A rough idea of what some idiot in the Express or some other tabloid rag said about us all who took part in that emotional event .

Gents whine , complain and discuss all you want but be very careful what you wish for .... You might just get it !

[commando1966]

Well said !! i'm glad im not the only one on here who thinks there's too much whining and moaning going on ;) . Let's all sit back and laugh at Fawlty Towers or watch Black Adder .. im sure Baldrick has a cunning plan to turn the world into Utopia lol 8-)

[redken1]

Thank heavens that Emmeline Pankhurst and her ilk were moaners.

[BB]

As I posted earlier in this thread, enjoy the argument, don't get personal and keep it on this thread. [smiley=happy.gif]

If you don't want to read it there are plenty of other threads to choose from [smiley=thumbsup.gif]


BB

[JAYJAY]

Blade Triple - Good post - most of which I agree with - maybe not the old folks bit - I'm almost one of them - you think £97 per week is suitable reward by way of pension for 50 years contribution? I think not! And the 'generous' winter fuel allowance as someone in another post said, is £60. I would call that paltry even on top of £97 per week which I spent 50 years paying for, not generous.
But I digress - I DO agree with the most part of your post.
Nick - did you read it?
Everyone else - PLEASE keep moaning! Don't let the right wing press indoctrinate the masses with lies!

[pilninggas]

Blade Triple - Good post - most of which I agree with - maybe not the old folks bit - I'm almost one of them - you think £97 per week is suitable reward by way of pension for 50 years contribution? I think not! And the 'generous' winter fuel allowance as someone in another post said, is £60. I would call that paltry even on top of £97 per week which I spent 50 years paying for, not generous.
But I digress - I DO agree with the most part of your post.
Nick - did you read it?
Everyone else - PLEASE keep moaning! Don't let the right wing press indoctrinate the masses with lies!
Also don't let the left-wing press blame the coalition for their darling Blair's legacy.

btw £97 a week is paltry, however i would anticipate that in 30 years there will be no state pension at all.

[Mitch9128]

Blair/Brown, it's not their legacy we're picking the tab up for under ConLib, it's the bankers. The fact is up until November 2008 (the date of the banks crash) the Tories had promised to match Labour spending and more, so Labour were doing pretty well in fact and it was endorsed by that waxy faced buffoon Cameron.

[Ducatista]

Thank heavens that Emmeline Pankhurst and her ilk were moaners.

Pankhurst was an activist.
That means she did something rather than just moaned.

[Ducatista]

And the 'generous' winter fuel allowance as someone in another post said, is £60.

Well it's says £125 to £400 on here and I certainly think the top end is generous for a small flat.
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Pensionsandretirementplanning/Benefits/BenefitsInRetirement/DG_10018657

There are cold weather payments on top if it's below freezing for a week.
It may vary with corcumstances, so that might be what's going on in your case.


I would call that paltry even on top of £97 per week which I spent 50 years paying for, not generous.

NO you didn't pay in for your own pension.
That's not how it works (I'm assuming you are referring to a state pension).
Our state pensions are UNFUNDED.
What that means is that you paid in for pensioners at the time.
You did not pay into your own pot for yourself.
Youngsters now will pay for you.
As you may have heard we have a demographic timebomb and this scheme is flawed.
But it's a plain fact, that you did not pay in to fund your own state pension.
I would entirely agree that it's flawed, but when they set the scheme up a long time ago, very few people actually lived until retirement whereas now it's 80%. No goverment has so far has taken the bull by the horms to change it.

Relying entirely on your state pension has been a bad idea for quite a long time (at least the 20 years I've been working).

[commando1966]

Blade Triple - Good post - most of which I agree with - maybe not the old folks bit - I'm almost one of them - you think £97 per week is suitable reward by way of pension for 50 years contribution? I think not! And the 'generous' winter fuel allowance as someone in another post said, is £60. I would call that paltry even on top of £97 per week which I spent 50 years paying for, not generous.
But I digress - I DO agree with the most part of your post.
Nick - did you read it?
Everyone else - PLEASE keep moaning! Don't let the right wing press indoctrinate the masses with lies!
Yeah im reading all this .. to be honest this is better than BBC comedies ;D and you think £97 a week is a Paltry ammount to live on ? Do you all have 4 Bed detached homes then? Before my current job i was Unemployed for 14 months and lived on £30 less than that .. STOP WHINGING lol :P

[redken1]

Thank heavens that Emmeline Pankhurst and her ilk were moaners.

Pankhurst was an activist.
That means she did something rather than just moaned.

Perhaps I should clarify my above comments. I was responding to earlier contributors to the debate, who implied that there was too much moaning about issues and no action from members on this thread. I have been an activist for over 30 years, campaigning and demonstrating against the so called poll tax, nuclear weapons, the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, etc. I have no doubt that when the current government's imminent cuts start to bite and hits the working class disproportionately there will be millions of ordinary people ready to take action. I won't have much time to moan because I will be one of them.

[JAYJAY]

Ducatista - thanks for your post I checked out that link and it seems that somehow I'm being done on my £60 payment! Useful link which i am using to challenge it.

Whilst agreeing with the rest of your post - I think it is slightly pedantic (please forgive me for saying so) - So I've spent 50 years paying my predecessors pensions, now it's my turn we can't afford it?

Of course you're right - the system is flawed - but whichever way you want to argue it - the amount of state pension you receive up to the maximum (£97 for a single person) is related to the amount of years you have paid into it.

Our 'flawed' system is why we have one of the worst state pensions in Western Europe and the oldest qualifying age.

All that apart - Thanks for that link [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

[Ducatista]

the amount of state pension you receive up to the maximum (£97 for a single person) is related to the amount of years you have paid into it.

No it isn't. Sorry if you think it's pedantic but I think it's relevant to your initial point.

You usually build up qualifying years if you are:

* in paid full-time or part-time work
* self-employed
* caring for someone for over 20 hours a week
* getting child benefit
* receiving certain benefits
* in full-time training

So you see you initial point is that you thought it's not good value, for what you have paid in, but you also have to subsidise a lot of other people listed above.
This is why you might not be getting as much as you think you are entitled to.

The state pension works as a society. If you were out working whilst other people (perhaps in your direct family) were undertaking child care then as a member of a society then you need to subsidise them.

If you don't like this scheme and you would like your own then the answer is very simple i.e. get your own.
Subject to the rules and taxes, you can have complete control over how it's invested and when you take it.

I am aware that you cannot opt out of the basic state pension, but you can opt ut of SERPS.
As a memebr of a society where you want to have free NHS, free fire service etc. then at times you will be subsidising others.
If you had been in full time child care, then you yourself would get subsidised, that's what being part of a society is all about.

If you don't like the way it works then do something about it, but bear in mind that if you take it away from disabled people or people who have been in full time child care then you will need an alternative (euthanasia? put them out on the streets?)
But as I said earlier it has been obvious for a very long time (at least 20 years) that the state pension would be insufficient for your needs on it's own and that it's necessary to make your own provision for your own retirement.

The most obvious answer, to do something about it, is to make your own provision for your own retirement and not rely on the state.
I appreciate that in your early working career this may not have been obvious or affordable, but I can certainly say it has been for 20 years.

[Ducatista]

Perhaps I should clarify my above comments. I was responding to earlier contributors to the debate, who implied that there was too much moaning about issues and no action from members on this thread. I have been an activist for over 30 years, campaigning and demonstrating against the so called poll tax, nuclear weapons, the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, etc. I have no doubt that when the current government's imminent cuts start to bite and hits the working class disproportionately there will be millions of ordinary people ready to take action. I won't have much time to moan because I will be one of them.

I have no issue with anyone that wants to change things in fact I think that's desireable.
It's moaning and doing nothing that I have an issue with and of course you aren't in that category.

I don't see millions out on the streets.
I don't want to see people in harship but I think many of us as taxpayers accept that we cannot as a nation continue to live beyond our means and that cuts are necessary.
There may be some protests and not all the cuts may be entirely fair, but I don't see the country coming to a standstill.
For example the child benefit where two parents are working is clearly an unfarirness but are people really going to go on strike and go without income over it???
I can't see it myself.

There have already been protests in France, but nothing at all on any majoe scale over here. If people were up in arms then why aren't they out on the streets already?
A lot of us see it as necessary and traditionally the conservatives have always done a better job of sorting out the economy.

[wiltshire builders]

[/quote]
Perhaps I should clarify my above comments. I was responding to earlier contributors to the debate, who implied that there was too much moaning about issues and no action from members on this thread. I have been an activist for over 30 years, campaigning and demonstrating against the so called poll tax, nuclear weapons, the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, etc. I have no doubt that when the current government's imminent cuts start to bite and hits the working class disproportionately there will be millions of ordinary people ready to take action. I won't have much time to moan because I will be one of them.[/quote]

Didn't you start a thread mocking the Tories for hitting the middle classes with their cuts the other week? Surely you should've been pleased that for once it wasn't the working classes that were suffering and maybe changed your views slightly? You seem a bit stuck in your ways and it doesn't matter what any political party does you'll find fault with it. I don't want to pre-judge you and you have made some very valid points but the impression you're giving is edging towards anarchist rather than activist.
I don't like any of our political parties because they are only interested in votes and not the voters. Something needs to be done about the current situation and it's not going to be to everyones liking. The fact is, the country costs X amount to run. Put more money into schools = less money for health care. Invest in health care = less money for policing.......and moats and duck houses.

[JAYJAY]

We're going to have to wait to see how these cuts pan out in reality before we can make any real judgements - there is a lot we still no little about.

However, if the economists who are supposed to be the people in the know are to believed, whilst the cuts WILL unusually hit the middle classes - it will hit those with little or no disposable income (the poor) a lot harder.

As someone who has never voted Conservative in a General election, and never Labour in a local election, as a citizen I still pray that the coalition is successful in solving the problem - Even though I think they've got it wrong. :-?

[redken1]

Wiltshire Builders I enjoyed reading your post and I can reassure you that I am most certainly not an anarchist and condemn anyone who is involved in violence or intimidating behaviour as a means of bringing about change. Of course I was pleased that the Tories are scrapping child benefit for those in the higher income, but its hardly a policy, which will bring about large-scale wealth redistribution. As I am a democratic socialist, surely you would not expect me to support any of the three mainstream parties (including Labour) who are all champions of the capitalist free market economy.

I peacefully protested against the poll tax because it was not income based and there were no safeguard mechanisims in place for those who never had the ability to pay. I continue to campaign to bring our troops home from Afghanistan because it breaks my heart when I switch on my tv and see another young life lost.

I accept that the economy is in bad shape to say the least but the imminent cuts are about choices. Why should ordinary people be expected to pick up the tab for the unscrupulous bankers' mess, who are still drawing huge bonuses.

I am happy to wear the moaner/leftie/activist badge but I am certainly not an anarchist.

[JAYJAY]

Special thanks go to Ducista [smiley=thumbsup.gif] [smiley=thumbsup.gif] [smiley=thumbsup.gif] [smiley=thumbsup.gif]
Thanks to your post / persuasion and the link you posted I have claimed for my winter fuel allowance and you were quite right as it seems I have been awarded £250 - certainly more worth having than the £60 I thought! :)

I still don't entirely agree with you on pensions but we have spent our adult lives through different eras - a private pension just wasn't available to us poor downtrodden underpaid workers of the '60s. Having manged to elect a couple of socially responsible goverments during the 50's and 60's who managed to end rations, found the NHS, and pay off the war debt in the face of fierce opposition, we had other things to strive for as young people.

My first weeks wages in '65 was £4.10.00 (yes £4.50) AND I paid NI and tax on it! Mind you I could buy a pint for about 8p!!!

[Toph]

I started work at 16 years old at Jack Plowrights Motorcycles in Trowbridge , I worked a 48 hour week and was paid £12.00 ....... no pension scheme though!! ;D

[Ducatista]

Wow, I'm gald some good came out of it JAYJAY :) :)

[Kevinb]

I started work at 16 years old at Jack Plowrights Motorcycles in Trowbridge , I worked a 48 hour week and was paid £12.00 ....... no pension scheme though!! ;D

That's a blast from the past. Jack Plowrights.

I wouldn't worry about a pension as all non bike riders think if you ride a bike you will be dead before to long anyway. ;D

[Last Train]

I started work at 16 years old at Jack Plowrights Motorcycles in Trowbridge , I worked a 48 hour week and was paid £12.00 ....... no pension scheme though!! ;D

That's a blast from the past. Jack Plowrights.

I wouldn't worry about a pension as all non bike riders think if you ride a bike you will be dead before to long anyway. ;D


;D

[redken1]

I started work at 16 years old at Jack Plowrights Motorcycles in Trowbridge , I worked a 48 hour week and was paid £12.00 ....... no pension scheme though!! ;D

That's a blast from the past. Jack Plowrights.

I wouldn't worry about a pension as all non bike riders think if you ride a bike you will be dead before to long anyway. ;D


;D

If we make it to 75 do we get exemption fron vehicle tax? [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

[JAYJAY]

Here's a sad report from the Telegraph - just as I was getting exited by my winter fuel payment too!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/7951203/Winter-fuel-payment-cuts-to-hit-millions-of-pensioners.html

It seems that Mr Cameron is no different from his predecessors and pre-election promises are acceptable lies designed to win votes and should never be believed! >:( >:( >:( >:(

[redken1]

Here's a sad report from the Telegraph - just as I was getting exited by my winter fuel payment too!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/7951203/Winter-fuel-payment-cuts-to-hit-millions-of-pensioners.html

It seems that Mr Cameron is no different from his predecessors and pre-election promises are acceptable lies designed to win votes and should never be believed! >:( >:( >:( >:(

Ye John and what happened to the Lib-dems pre-election promise to oppose a rise in tuition fees?

[JAYJAY]

Seems the aged are going to have to contribute to Tory funds to pay for the unemplyed masses they are planning - ho-hum - Keith Joseph, the Mad Monk all over again! When will this country ever learn!!

And absolutely right Ken - with tuition fees set to treble guess which level of our society wont be going to Uni?

[6T]

EMA payments are also being stopped from january next year this will also effect children of lower income family,s wanting to go into further education, the tories are very good at reducing debt but at what cost ?.I well remember the Thatcher years with mass unemployment and rioting in most major city,s. I just hope history dosent repeat itself :-/

[redken1]

Sorry JayJay, but it looks like there is more bad news on the horizon with regards to heating costs. Some of the energy suppliers are hiking costs to the tune of 9.4 per cent in December (the norm when winter approaches). Doubless, the rest will follow. I don't know if there is any truth in the rumour that the rise is due to lost revenue as a result of so many of the elderly dying from the cold? :P

[BladeTriple]

Maybe so many old folk wouldn't die of the cold if we took better care of our relatives like the Germans do. I know many German family where Oma and Opa (grandma and grandpa) move in with their kids and they look after their own and they don't have the worry of them being warm enough at night , eating enough etc.

I know older relatives can be annoying old buggers and get under your feet but they did after all take good care of us when we were younger too. If my Mam was old and infirm and struggling to make ends meet I'm sure as hell that Kaz and I would have her living with us.

Now while we tend to knock our Asian counterparts in this country for umpteen reasons, the one thing they do well that we do not any longer is look after their elderly relatives.

So I'm adding the way WE as a nation care for our old folk to the pot not just what the government do , that to me is passing off the responsibility of our own family off to the government and other tax payers.

[JAYJAY]

A very good point very well made BladeTriple, and a point I've long agreed with. In our society the principle of 'looking after number one' to the detriment of others fostered in the Thatcher years lives on. (Particularly amongst many ballot paper waiving tory MP's.)

But in defence of younger (non aged :)) generations, the pride of the older generation in our society is probably a part of the problem too.

[Col]

The whole benefits/social welfare system needs a complete re-think and overhaul with an emphasis on having less benefit 'categories' to make administration and availability much less like finding your way thru a maze.

Trouble is anything to do with gummint is always extraordinarily and unnecessarily so complex that even the public servants are bewildered by it all let alone prospective claimants ::)

[redken1]

I agree with you BladeTriple, my own Father moved in with my daughter because he could not afford the upkeep of his own home. You are right, as a society we can learn alot from our Asian counterparts. I do believe however, that if an elderly person wishes to stay independent and stay in their own home they should not have to make a choice between eating or keeping warm. We must not forget that most of our pensioners have paid in to the state through out their working lives. Not much point paying for the state if you can't rely on it when you relly need it.

[Mitch9128]

It's very different in Germany, in a lot of towns the houses are mansion like, with 3 different generations living over 3 different floors. The houses get handed down from generation to generation, negating the need for crippling mortgages, hence why they all drive flash motors, they take out mortgages on them.

[BladeTriple]

Mitch 'dass stimmt doch nicht' not all german families are like that , after 12 years based over there, my brother being married to a German lass and I have a lot of german civvy friends I can tell you that its not at all like that in the more rural areas maybe in the bigger built up cities like Berlin.

Not sure how long you were out there for and how good your German was at the time, as Bde/Sqn interpretor I got really involved with the locals and their customs etc and I promise you it wasn't all like that at all. They simply have a better understanding of family and taking care of their own over there.

Ken I understand theres a level of pride however when you're freezing your backside off and find yourself unable to climb the stairs a little bit of pride has to take a back seat to practicality , another problem with being British, we're far too stubborn to take help from others and would rather freeze/starve to death than accept help from those we love.

[Mitch9128]

Sure i concede it's not every family, my experience was it was more widespread in the wealthy rural areas. I saw it in Korbecke and the surrounding villages and towns, but it was an affluent area, less so in Herford a less wealthy area. I also think the UK's attitude to elderly relatives is also pretty unique in the world, in that we don't care for them within the family unit. Symptoms of a selfish society perhaps?

[Col]

It is of interest to note that the beginning of modern state welfare was brought about by a royalist bureaucrat who was anti socialist...Bismarck the Iron Chancellor.

Think Dunc-Smith has some good ideas on reform but this community work is very slippery ground and you'd have to say that if long term unemployeds are asked to paint, garden, clean stuff then by definition there is actually a job available. It could lead to a cost assessment by cash wasting councils that many jobs could be filled by lower paid employees recruited thru these schemes.

[redken1]

It is of interest to note that the beginning of modern state welfare was brought about by a royalist bureaucrat who was anti socialist...Bismarck the Iron Chancellor.

Think Dunc-Smith has some good ideas on reform but this community work is very slippery ground and you'd have to say that if long term unemployeds are asked to paint, garden, clean stuff then by definition there is actually a job available. It could lead to a cost assessment by cash wasting councils that many jobs could be filled by lower paid employees recruited thru these schemes.

William Wilberforce must be turning in his grave