Brian Kirby Posted June 21, 2015 Share Posted June 21, 2015 pelmetman - 2015-06-21 7:10 PM......................Or does accepting that folk should be allowed to make life style choices, that mean they sponge of the state make you more intelligent? ;-).......... Doesn't affect my intellignce one way or another, Dave. :-) There will always be stupid people around, whether supported by the state or left to starve. I just don't think the fact that some people are stupid is a sound basis for formulating government policy. You can't legislate for intelligence. If you could, many of us would never have been born! :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted June 21, 2015 Share Posted June 21, 2015 Brian Kirby - 2015-06-21 7:32 PM pelmetman - 2015-06-21 7:10 PM......................Or does accepting that folk should be allowed to make life style choices, that mean they sponge of the state make you more intelligent? ;-).......... Doesn't affect my intellignce one way or another, Dave. :-) There will always be stupid people around, whether supported by the state or left to starve. I just don't think the fact that some people are stupid is a sound basis for formulating government policy. You can't legislate for intelligence. If you could, many of us would never have been born! :-D Giving people the option of turning down paid work for a life on benefits seems pretty stupid to me *-)......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted June 21, 2015 Author Share Posted June 21, 2015 Brian Kirby - 2015-06-21 6:56 PM antony1969 - 2015-06-21 1:01 PM...............the generous handouts she recieves is of course the main reason all those young men in Calais are happy to travel all through Europe to get a slice And, of course, you have fairies at the bottom of your garden. :-D Fairies no Brian ... Some nice young men from Iraq renting my shed yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted June 21, 2015 Author Share Posted June 21, 2015 Peter James - 2015-06-21 5:17 PM antony1969 - 2015-06-21 1:01 PM If the taxpayer gives her money to help with living costs and she blows it on a couple of air bags instead of food on the table for her children then it is the taxpayer who is stupid for such generous handouts How generous? Her mum was apparently paying for her kids food so she could spend the money on a boob job antony1969 - 2015-06-21 1:01 PM She is of course one of many abusing the system up and down the land and the generous handouts she recieves is of course the main reason all those young men in Calais are happy to travel all through Europe to get a slice You keep telling us how generous her handouts are so perhaps you can tell us how much? All I know is it will be a lot less than French social security benefits. Except of course for housing benefit. But that reflects the cost of the cheapest available housing being much greater in parts of England, which benefits the landlord, not the claimant. I can tell you she obviously gets way too much benefits If it's less than the French receive , so what ? Your point is ? I imagine a lot of working folk may want to live in the area she lives for it's handy location , unfortunately due to the high rental costs they probably can't afford unlike someone who gets it through benefits ... Landlord benefits , claimant benefits , poor worker loses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted June 21, 2015 Author Share Posted June 21, 2015 One of my neighbours has just got a real bum deal at tax payers expense. ... Retired from the fire service with £100k payment and full pension .... How he's going to manage with him and his wife's NHS pension again at tax payers expense I just don't know .... Food banks probably Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Not sure who your target is, Antony. This one person, all firemen, or all public employees? We all retire at some point, so we should all have pensions. From time to time we all get ill. So we go to the doctor, and the less fortunate end up in hospital. Very expensive, if you had to pay for it. But you don't, because the treatment is provided at taxpayers' expense. So, abolish pensions and the NHS? Ditto education? Ditto the armed services? If a benefit is provided by the private sector, for example an employer's pension, how is that without impact on everyone else? Even if provided by a self-employed person at their own expense, how is it without impact on everyone else? The pensions have to be paid for, whether private or public. Where pension funds are invested, the returns on the investments must come from somewhere. Generally, that is from the stocks and bonds markets. Returns on the stocks and bonds markets are the (we hope!) profits made by trading stocks and bonds. Those profits, in turn, are generated by the companies (and other institutions) who issued the stocks and bonds. They earn the profits by selling their goods and services to you and me. In the end we all pay, through the price we are charged for those goods and services. So, one way or another, we all pay a premium for the pensions of others; the good, the bad, and the ugly. The only difference with uninvested public sector pensions (some are invested), is that the pension is funded via taxation rather than via increased general prices. One could debate for a year, I think without conclusion, whether or not that course results in higher public sector pension costs than if staff and employer paid a contribution to a pension provider who invested the pot to pay the pension. My hunch is that the difference is negligible: clearly yours is that it is substantial, and you would pay less tax were it not so. Bet you can't prove it, though! :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted June 22, 2015 Author Share Posted June 22, 2015 The ludicrous unaffordable public pensions we the tax payer continue to have to pay for is my target Brian ... Along with our bonkers benefits system ... For every £14 spent on welfare globally £1 is spent here in blighty ... Britain is the worlds biggest provider of benefits ... We are leading the world in sumat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 antony1969 - 2015-06-22 12:22 PM The ludicrous unaffordable public pensions we the tax payer continue to have to pay for is my target Brian ... Along with our bonkers benefits system ... For every £14 spent on welfare globally £1 is spent here in blighty ... Britain is the worlds biggest provider of benefits ... We are leading the world in sumat Separate issues, Antony. So, is it the level of public pension that concerns you, or the fact that they are paid from taxation? Not sure the UK's present proportion of world benefits spending means anything, unless you know the basis of the figure, and what it is being compared with. Many countries have nothing at all, so that could skew the figures more than a bit. But, if you want a country with no benefits, try persuading people to vote for it. You're a supporter of democracy and free speech, so see how you get on. Somehow, I don't see it catching on! :-D BTW, I didn't realise you had retired - thought you were still working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted June 22, 2015 Author Share Posted June 22, 2015 Brian Kirby - 2015-06-22 12:33 PM antony1969 - 2015-06-22 12:22 PM The ludicrous unaffordable public pensions we the tax payer continue to have to pay for is my target Brian ... Along with our bonkers benefits system ... For every £14 spent on welfare globally £1 is spent here in blighty ... Britain is the worlds biggest provider of benefits ... We are leading the world in sumat Separate issues, Antony. So, is it the level of public pension that concerns you, or the fact that they are paid from taxation? Not sure the UK's present proportion of world benefits spending means anything, unless you know the basis of the figure, and what it is being compared with. Many countries have nothing at all, so that could skew the figures more than a bit. But, if you want a country with no benefits, try persuading people to vote for it. You're a supporter of democracy and free speech, so see how you get on. Somehow, I don't see it catching on! :-D BTW, I didn't realise you had retired - thought you were still working. Seperate issues same public purse it's paid from I've never said I want a country with no benefits ... What I would like is a country that does not reward idleness and does not have a benefits system that appeals so much young men travel all through Europe to get it If the Tories live up to pre-election promises then hopefully the welfare system and our public spending will be cut as they say ( in the right places ) Maybe they could cut out foreign aid payments too which I believe we are the one of the biggest if not the biggest contributor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 OK, which just means it is a metter of judgement as to what level of benefit is appropriate, and for whom. I doubt anyone, anywhere, is deliriously happy with the present level and distribution: my pet hate is working tax credits. Ridiculous. Subsidising employers to pay low wages at public expense. A you say, in the end we just have to wait and see. But, it'll never be perfect, though that is no reason not to try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted June 22, 2015 Author Share Posted June 22, 2015 Agreed Brian .... Time will tell ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peter James Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 antony1969 - 2015-06-22 1:50 PM Maybe they could cut out foreign aid payments too which I believe we are the one of the biggest if not the biggest contributor Politicians like foreign aid payments because, like the biggest military spending in Europe, it enables them to strut their stuff on the world stage. Remember 'plebgate' Andrew Mitchell whose job it was to disperse foreign aid payments abroad to people who treated his visits like royalty. Presumably he liked that foreign travel all expenses paid job better than distributing aid to the foodbanks and homeless shelters on his own doorstep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted June 23, 2015 Author Share Posted June 23, 2015 Peter James - 2015-06-23 9:57 AM antony1969 - 2015-06-22 1:50 PM Maybe they could cut out foreign aid payments too which I believe we are the one of the biggest if not the biggest contributor Politicians like foreign aid payments because, like the biggest military spending in Europe, it enables them to strut their stuff on the world stage. Remember 'plebgate' Andrew Mitchell whose job it was to disperse foreign aid payments abroad to people who treated his visits like royalty. Presumably he liked that foreign travel all expenses paid job better than distributing aid to the foodbanks and homeless shelters on his own doorstep. Mitchell came across as a bit of a numpty to me but I don't think even he'd fall for all that homeless , food bank twaddle ... Seems we have enough suckers falling for the. ' hard luck ' stories and donating grub to the needy without old Plebbers getting involved ... Suckers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.