Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
TommyBarnes
22 Jun 15 15:09
Joined:
Date Joined: 20 Sep 10
| Topic/replies: 419 | Blogger: TommyBarnes's blog
David Cameron has promised an end to what he called the "ridiculous merry-go-round" of taxing low earners then handing them money back in benefits.

The prime minister said it was wrong to treat "the symptoms of the social and economic problems we face" while "ignoring the causes" of low pay.

He argued the UK should be a "lower tax, lower welfare society".

It comes amid a debate over plans for £12bn in welfare cuts, the details of which have not been revealed.

The government says the welfare bill has to take its fair share of cuts as part of its plan to balance the books and eliminate the £90bn deficit by 2017-8.


With ministers having pledged to protect pensioner benefits and child benefit, BBC assistant political editor Norman Smith said Mr Cameron's speech was a "pretty clear steer" that much of the £12bn would come from tax credits and housing benefit
Pause Switch to Standard View Tax Credits to be cut
Show More
Loading...
Report Whisperingdeath June 23, 2015 1:36 PM BST
The houses will not be built for sure but it is not the immigrants that are the problem. Easy for people to pick on them. I'd rather have them than the idle lazy lot who are claiming unemployment benefit ( or whatever it is called ).

I agree the market should not be flooded with cheap immigrant labour. There seems to be no flood of Eastern European Doctors, Solicitors, Dentist's or Judges. Why is that I wonder?

If closing our borders means leaving the United States of Europe then so be it. I don't blame anybody who comes to this country and wants to work, again I'd rather have them than some of our own.

The people with money in this country and the political classes cosying up to them are the problem. The working people are the ones who are getting ripped off. A large Welfare state harms the workers and enriches too many already wealthy people.
Report G1_Jockey_4 June 23, 2015 2:12 PM BST
think migration will adjust itself anyway.
just that it will be uncontrollable.

so the future becomes uncertain.

if you rely on rent ...good luck.
just admit if it goes wrong you read it all wrong and were greedy.

sadly i have mates who cant see the possibility of what what reversed migration will bring.
they think its all rosy.
fact is businesses then have to pay to get employees in (and employees market) or unemployemnt goes up because they have less people to sell to.

only thing the governemnt can do is to entice people to stay by offering them a bigger safety net like better benefits....say in line with countries like the netherlands....

that then ups the spending.

tough choices to come imo
Report pawras June 23, 2015 2:21 PM BST
I'd would happily pay more income tax (an that's saying something for me!) if meant chopping migration to a trickle and compelling to leave the vast majority of those without a uk passport who are already here ie just deny access to jobs or welfare state.
Report Ski-Wiz June 23, 2015 3:54 PM BST
If you allow business to pay less than minimum wage you solve a large part of youth unemployment.

The fact is that some people aren't worth £7 an hour to business, with cheap Labour from the EU further problems arise.


100% correct. Minimum wages destroy jobs and prevent businesses from creating jobs unless they use zero hours contract - which everyone loony complains about.
Report tony57 June 23, 2015 4:28 PM BST
wow back to the victorian era with workhouses eh ski..go get em..,
the government wanted our youngsters to work for their dole? Tesco and everyone getting slave labour for experience..disgusting!low pay does nothing for poverty..except help greedy bosses..make more money.

crippen you cannot get your head around the fact you receive HB which is given by the government as a benefit for people who cannot afford to pay for their own housing...yet you are against other people receiving benefits...its so hypocritical its laughable..but you wont see it cos it does not suit you?
Report pawras June 23, 2015 4:41 PM BST
no reason people shouldn't have to work for their dole provided it's at min wage rates ie jsa of 70 quid equals 2 days work, any further handouts should have to be equally worked for

I'm in no way suggesting anyone should work for free but NONE of you have come up with a single reason why anyone (barring GENUINELY disabled) should get 'free' money, free to you that get it but not us that work so you get it.
Report tony57 June 23, 2015 4:50 PM BST
pawras.no one is in favour of anyone unless sick getting free money,but im not for people working for the dole, the dole is for people looking for work..its only 70 week now..ffs..who can live on that pawras..in this day and age...come on be fair..and you want people to work for it..?they should be spending time trying to find work? if they are working how are they to find work that pays?
Report pawras June 23, 2015 5:02 PM BST
afraid not , 70 quid would only equate to 2 days work, they have another 5 days in the week to be looking for work
Report tony57 June 23, 2015 5:13 PM BST
oh right I get you..but what about sat or sun?..so its 3 days looking for work?..its just more bureaucracy
Report 1st time poster June 23, 2015 5:20 PM BST
nice of dave to give people a leg up on the housing laddder with all his different schemes before pulling the rug away
Report Ski-Wiz June 23, 2015 5:20 PM BST
tony57.....your understanding of economics is zero. Minimum wages is a nominal sum of money and irrelevant. Purchasing power is more important. Goods and services price going down all the time raises living standard.....politicians pushed up prices via inflation, stupid laws, and basically doing all the wrong policies.....hence the poor stayed poor all the time.
Report pawras June 23, 2015 5:29 PM BST
Depending on what you do you can be looking for work at the weekend as well, or some of the work could be on a weekend depending on what they are allocated. But if someone isn't willing to give up two days of their time to be handed tax payers money then they can go rot in a ditch.

It's about gradually removing the concept of 'free' money from the minds of everyone but especially a certain underclass that have no intention of doing f all as it is a lifestyle choice to them because they're not much use for anything but the most menial sh&t anyway. Plus the reducing the negative social consequences of neds being able to roam the streets 7 days week.
These people exist and in large numbers, no matter how much matter middle class luvvies try to deny it.
I was back up north in my hometown at the weekend and got my usual reminder on all this.
Report anxious June 23, 2015 5:40 PM BST
free money whats this then
Report anxious June 23, 2015 5:40 PM BST
social security ive heard of
Report anxious June 23, 2015 5:41 PM BST
the likes of the tea party in america advocate the kind of garbage we hear from the free market fanatics on here
Report anxious June 23, 2015 5:42 PM BST
just to the right of genghis khan they are
Report pawras June 23, 2015 5:43 PM BST
ah a prime example has arrived
Report CJ70 June 23, 2015 5:56 PM BST
I like how earning a wage is likened to slave labour by the benefits boys Laugh
Report Dr Crippen June 23, 2015 5:56 PM BST
tony, you can't be reading my posts properly, or understand them if you are reading them.

So consider this question, it's very simply:

Can you see the difference between money that has to be earned, and money that given free?

The LHA that a landlord receives via a tenant is in payment for a providing a service.

While benefits that are given to a benefit claimer, come with no strings attached, other than an assurance that they will look for a job in some cases.

Now try very hard - can you spot the difference there?
Report Dr Crippen June 23, 2015 6:00 PM BST
it's very simply

And very simple too.
Report Ski-Wiz June 23, 2015 6:45 PM BST
Dr Crippen.......your defence for receiving welfare by providing a services is crap. Landlords who gets money from the government, that stole it from taxpayers are no different to that of benefits breeders, immigrants, scroungers etc. A bank robber (government) who share the spoils of stolen money with a getaway driver (landlords), who was receiving payments for providing a services, does not justify the crime. Landlords who receives housing benefit does not earn the money legally......it's crony capitalism and the same as corporation who benefits from the government stealing money from taxpayers.

New houses are expensive to build, and there's little you can do about the cost of building them.

And if house prices tumble. That would be the end of house building for a good many years to come.

Which would simply make matters worse.


Utter rubbish. The cost of building houses can easily fall when those holding vast amount of land and order to build or lose the land. Stop expanding the money supply, remove housing subsidies, let the market fall to its correct level and the cost of building will fall too. The profit of building new houses are around £30k each house. Builders will just have to make do with less profit. Remove stupid regulations and the cost will fall.
Report Eeternaloptimist June 23, 2015 6:58 PM BST
I wonder if Hanks had a bump on his head in the 60's and has only just woke up? He keeps going on about social security as if everybody claiming is merely between jobs. Can nobody enlighten the dope that there are generations of families who have never worked. Social security? Laugh
Report Dr Crippen June 23, 2015 6:58 PM BST
is crap
benefits breeders, immigrants, scroungers
A bank robber
a getaway driver (landlords
does not justify the crime
Utter rubbish


Ski-Wiz,
Have you been eating red meat again?

I disagree with everything in your post by the way.
Report pawras June 23, 2015 7:09 PM BST
I'm waiting for one of them trying to claim hu'man ri'ghts cos they've been forced to do a menial job and it clashes with "Deal or No Deal"
Report tony57 June 23, 2015 7:26 PM BST
I disagree with ski on some..but hes right about you with this service crap crippen..
here we go again..the old families who have never worked ..it has been said by the dwp that we have 40 problem families in this country, most are as eo(who's not a tory by the way but just believes all the tory hype)on benefits,but the% who have never worked is very small..disgusting as it is..its just another smoke screen..

today we are paying millions in legal aid to bankers who helped cause the crash(not labour)bosses of hbos Halifax bank of Scotland..all these men were well paid one has a 400.000 a year pension..the others not far behind...and not a word!!!yet here we go again about benefits..i for one am sick of the bullshiiters..
james Crosby andy Hornby, lord Stevenson,
just 3 men, we have hundreds of bankers who fix the libor rate, cost billions, yet wrote off..hmrc tax officers in bed with rich corporations let them off with a fine..then get jobs with them after wards...
yet its always the poor who are the ones to get ridiculed.ignorance is no excuse.
Report anxious June 23, 2015 7:28 PM BST
et being the right wing murdoch loving fool that you are surely even you must realise that the language of social security is that exactly what it is , it is only in the last 30 years that the language devised by thatcher spiv culture and neo liberal monetarists in america have started calling it welfare , job-seekers, personal independence payment, etc, then the right wing billionaire foriegn owned press call it handouts, scroungers, hard working people and the sheep who read the brainwashing right wing filth start to think yeah this is the problem blah blah, may i remind you that when thatcher created deliberately 4 milion unemployed in the 80s this was the first such mas employement since the thirties so there were not generations of families who had never worked, the underclass as you call it is deliberate policy of capitalism, the sink estates, drugs, misery is all created by a system that thrives on a few winners and a lot of losers so stick where the sun dont shine you abysmal toad.
Report spellingandgrammarchecker June 23, 2015 7:32 PM BST
^^^^ medication time. Laugh
Report Dr Crippen June 23, 2015 7:46 PM BST
but hes right about you with this service crap crippen..

Then tony why don't you let a house to a benefit claimer for cost only?

By the way.
When you see your doctor do you tell him he's living off taxpayers' money?
When the police come around to answer your call do you tell them the same?
When the ambulance driver is scraping you out of your car, do you give him a hard time over where his wages come from?

Oh I see, it doesn't apply to them.

You must think they're getting paid for providing a service
Report Eeternaloptimist June 23, 2015 7:51 PM BST
As usual you are talking nonsense Hanks. Even in times of notional full employment there was always a hard core of hundreds of thousands of layabout who wouldn't work. Simple as that. Like I said there are hundreds of thousands for whom generations of family haven't worked and won't work. That is before we get into what happened in Thatcher's time about which again you are talking tripe.
Report anxious June 23, 2015 7:53 PM BST
hundreds and thousands my arse
Report anxious June 23, 2015 7:54 PM BST
the biggest layabouts are the ones from buckingham palace
Report anxious June 23, 2015 7:55 PM BST
and the rest of the parasites and hangers on
Report anxious June 23, 2015 7:55 PM BST
thatcher spiv culture brainwashed a fool like you
Report Dr Crippen June 23, 2015 7:58 PM BST
They'd never manage to brainwash anxious.
Report Eeternaloptimist June 23, 2015 7:59 PM BST
Here you go Hanks:

The 20th century British economist William Beveridge stated that an unemployment rate of 3% was full employment. Other economists have provided estimates between 2% and 13%, depending on the country, time period, and their political biases. For the United States, economist William T. Dickens found that full-employment unemployment rate varied a lot over time but equaled about 5.5 percent of the civilian labor force during the 2000s.[2] Recently, economists have emphasized the idea that full employment represents a "range" of possible unemployment rates.

I can assure you that this applies to the UK.
Report cryoftruth June 23, 2015 8:00 PM BST
As usual you are talking nonsense Hanks. Even in times of notional full employment there was always a hard core of hundreds of thousands of layabout who wouldn't work. Simple as that. Like I said there are hundreds of thousands for whom generations of family haven't worked and won't work. That is before we get into what happened in Thatcher's time about which again you are talking tripe.

Don't worry Hanks. The eeternalbigot has a sad but extensive history of telling shocking lies whilst accusing other less extreme people of "talking tripe". He is the forum's resident nuuter, trying to bully others and then celebrating when he thinks he has harmed someone. His views are really quite predictable.

Generally he likes fascists (he had a thing about General Pinochet). He loves the memory of Enoch Powell naturally. He hates anyone half intelligent especially if they are black so watch out for frequent bile laden attacks on Diane Abbott, Nelson Mandela and Obama. He obviously cannot stand an "uppity" black man like Umuna who he  decided was a "cnunt".

Just in case you hadn't noticed Hanks you will get no sensible argument out of the eeternalbigot. Just extrene abuse and bigoted drivel.
Report Eeternaloptimist June 23, 2015 8:00 PM BST
For sure Crippen. Miracle of science is old Hanks. He does all that he does without a brain. Marvellous or extremely sad depending on your perspective.
Report Eeternaloptimist June 23, 2015 8:02 PM BST
Well that's something you don't see every day, Abbott and half intelligent in the same sentence. Somebody will be using it about you one day crybaby. Just not today.
Report anxious June 23, 2015 8:02 PM BST
probably the TORY GRASS
Report anxious June 23, 2015 8:03 PM BST
sad pieces of work the rednecks on here
Report Eeternaloptimist June 23, 2015 8:03 PM BST
I don't recall calling Obama a cnunt crybaby. Can you provide the quotation from me for that one?
Report cryoftruth June 23, 2015 8:04 PM BST
He does all that he does without a brain.

another example of what the eeternalbigot thinks passes for a good argument. Its just unfunny abuse but he keeps happy slaggging off others more fortunate in the grey matter dept.
Report Eeternaloptimist June 23, 2015 8:05 PM BST
Let's not deflect the discussion Hanks but I'm certainly no grass. Perhaps you'd like to comment on my post of 19.59 laying waste to your pathetic argument?
Report Eeternaloptimist June 23, 2015 8:07 PM BST
That wouldn't be you would it crybaby? I'm more than happy to discuss any of those lies you keep repeating but unfortunately you don't want to do that do you crybaby? Nor do you want to discuss the issue I am flaying Hanks over do you? You're daft but not that daft are you sucker? Laugh
Report cryoftruth June 23, 2015 8:07 PM BST
but I'm certainly no grass.

so said the eeternalbigot. This statement increases the chances of him being a grass very greatly. This is becasue the eeternalbigot is of course a proven and much repeated liar.
Report Eeternaloptimist June 23, 2015 8:08 PM BST
I'll pop back later to see if either of you two Chuckle Brothers come out of your bomb shelter.
Report cryoftruth June 23, 2015 8:09 PM BST
Even if I was a sucker it would be better than a lying stinking bigot like you!

I get sick of slapping you down and demonstrating your odious character.
Report Ski-Wiz June 23, 2015 8:12 PM BST

Jun 23, 2015 -- 1:46PM, Dr Crippen wrote:


but hes right about you with this service crap crippen..Then tony why don't you let a house to a benefit claimer for cost only? By the way.When you see your doctor do you tell him he's living off taxpayers' money?When the police come around to answer your call do you tell them the same?When the ambulance driver is scraping you out of your car, do you give him a hard time over where his wages come from? Oh I see, it doesn't apply to them. You must think they're getting paid for providing a service


I give a hard time to all public sectors workers.....especially when they go on strikes demanding more money from the government- in turn steals more from the taxpayers. Why don't public sectors workers ask the private sector workers directly?

Report anxious June 23, 2015 8:12 PM BST
so if there no such thing as full employement then where does your generation of families never worked and hundreds of thousands of layabouts come from , you have been reading the sun,mail and toryraph for to long, and if in the 80s when thatcher created 4 milion on the dole and paid for it with north sea oil money at least you could not blame the foriegners then could you because there wasnt that many here
Report Dr Crippen June 23, 2015 8:14 PM BST
you have been reading the sun,mail and toryraph

Why, what papers have you been reading anxious?
Report anxious June 23, 2015 8:15 PM BST
the truth is the establishment , banks , finacial institutions, right wing press run this country and they run it on behalf of themselves , their friends, paymasters and let 85 percent of the population fight like dogs for a few crumbs
Report anxious June 23, 2015 8:16 PM BST
none of them rachman
Report Captain Wurzel June 23, 2015 8:16 PM BST
Hey splash you waiting for any apologies this evening ?
Report cryoftruth June 23, 2015 8:18 PM BST
No but having created by policy the 4 miillions of newly unemployed people  the evil Thatch started to blame them for being workshy and her henchman told them to get on their bikes.

Nothing much changes. The modern version is Greasy and flashman making loads unemployed through Thatcherite cuts, and then cutting the benefits for the poor sick and disabled and giving the dough to the bankers whio fund the conservative party whilst claiming "we are all in it together".
Report cryoftruth June 23, 2015 8:20 PM BST
That would be the evil Thatch who spent British money on arming and training the Kymer Rouge mass murderers. But of course she "never did that" did she eeternalbigot aka lying swine.
Report pawras June 23, 2015 8:32 PM BST
Tony - 40 problem families in this country?  I can’t believe you typed that with a straight face, you lost any tiny shred credibility with that comment, there’s more that that have never done f all where I’m from and that’s just 1 sh&tty town up north.
Some of the women there will NEVER work while they have a hole between their legs that they drop kids out of.
I’m actually all for harsh law re corporate negligence and some bankers would be doing time, but it would be equally applied to the deadwood fkups in the public that waste billions either in single projects or via an accumulation of incompetence.
But at least the banking system generates money for the country, whilst those perpetually on handouts generate nothing but Co2 and a new generation of useless cnts like themselves.

I see anx etal are dribbling about thatcher again with the usual student union politics, this country was FKD in 1979 compared to 1997 when they left power simple as that. Some suffered and the unions were quite rightly gelded but the bottom line net result for the overall majority was a massive positive
Report pawras June 23, 2015 8:33 PM BST
in the public sector - I meant
Report anxious June 23, 2015 8:41 PM BST
talking of waste what about the bilions spent on weapons of mass destruction over and over again and not one them used , thats value for money  and peace  of mind eh as for thatcher t history will show her to be the worst thing that ever happened to this country the witch and her ilk destroyed the social fabric
Report pawras June 23, 2015 8:44 PM BST
Try to understand a bit about realpolitik and why we need nuclear weapons that we won’t use to prevent being threatened and blackmailed by other states either overtly or subtly.
Oh yeah I forgot everyone is going to sing ebony and ivory or chant give peace a chance…..hahahahahahahahahahaha


One of the best prime ministers we’ve ever had
Report anxious June 23, 2015 8:47 PM BST
why whose going to threaten us
Report anxious June 23, 2015 8:48 PM BST
at least peace is better than glorifying war you idiot
Report CJ70 June 23, 2015 8:49 PM BST
The peace in Ukraine at the moment must fill you with pride, anxious.
Report pawras June 23, 2015 9:12 PM BST
I see nothing glorious about war but I am a hardened realist re the past,present and future

But I know you prefer this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LajppsE2_LY

However I doubt it would hold much weight when dealing with the likes of Putin and why he thinks he can fly his war/spy planes over our airspace
Report pawras June 23, 2015 9:58 PM BST
anx - I know I take the p&ss but the world would be a better place if it was all ebony and ivory but it's not, never has been and I don't see it heading in that direction. The world is full of cnts that would have no qualms about doing things others would not, so it's necessary to prepare/plan/act accordingly.
Report Gin June 24, 2015 9:33 AM BST
.
http://moneyweek.com/merryns-blog/why-productivity-in-the-uk-is-so-low-in-work-benefits/

“The majority of the £215bn (12.5% of GDP) of benefit expenditure is paid to the retired (£87bn) but the next largest chunk goes, not to the unemployed (just £8bn) but to the employed (£76bn), says James, “via supplementary payments to boost earned income, such as tax credit and housing benefit and other allowances”.

To qualify for tax credits, you must, if you are in a couple, work 24 hours a week between you (12 each) – if you are single you must work for 16 hours a week. It should come as no surprise to any cynic to discover that not only does a third of the working population only work part-time (nine million in total) but that the average hours worked per person is just over 12 hours per week, ie 24 hours per couple, says James.

“Although part-time work on average pays £11.24 per hour, implying post-tax income of £14,250 per annum for a couple, tax credits alone would boost disposable income for a fully able-bodied family with three children and childcare costs to £35,203 – and that’s before any other welfare entitlements, including the ubiquitous housing benefit. For a full-time salaried worker to earn the same disposable income, they’d have to be on £48,500, or almost double the average wage.”
Report pawras June 24, 2015 9:40 AM BST
exactly , why the fck should the rest of us be subsidising them or their employers like that?????????????????????????Angry
Report Early Morning Riser June 24, 2015 9:48 AM BST
if you are single you must work for 16 hours a week.

Thats wrong for a startLaugh
Report Early Morning Riser June 24, 2015 9:56 AM BST
I remember Thatchers champagne Charlies, They celebrated while the rest of the UK suffered.
Report Angel Gabrial June 24, 2015 10:16 AM BST
When you can work a 30 hour week and be better off than your work colleague who works 40 hours a week then you know there is something wrong.

Work 30 hours a week -
Get your top ups via tax credits
Help with rent.
Free dentist treatment
Cheaper child care
Help with further education.
And more

Work 40 hours a week.
Get nothing.
Pay for everything.
Report tony57 June 24, 2015 10:44 AM BST
pawras..I meant 400 problem families I missed the 0,..but that is according to dwp figures not mine.
Report tony57 June 24, 2015 10:49 AM BST
nice to see someone else showing that benefits go to pensioners..then to the EMPLOYED? yet the loons on here are fine with the poor and the disabled taking the biggest wack..

pawras,
Margaret thatcher destroyed the infrastructure of this country and helped create the north south divide..if you honestly think she was a great pm..you need you head examined
Report Dr Crippen June 24, 2015 11:11 AM BST
tony didn't you read this?
You continue to ignore any post that shows your case to be wrong.

but hes right about you with this service crap crippen..

Then tony why don't you let a house to a benefit claimer for cost only?

By the way.
When you see your doctor do you tell him he's living off taxpayers' money?
When the police come around to answer your call do you tell them the same?
When the ambulance driver is scraping you out of your car, do you give him a hard time over where his wages come from?

Oh I see, it doesn't apply to them.

You must think they're getting paid for providing a service
Report pawras June 24, 2015 11:18 AM BST
I do and she was.
The country was way better off in 97 vs 79 and no amount of socialist bleating will change that fact
Report tony57 June 24, 2015 11:25 AM BST
I saw it crippen, you are not a doctor?doctors get wages, doctors didn't buy houses to make money? but to then get taxpayers money also..the argument you make is nonsensical, buy to let is not government sponsored?
Report tony57 June 24, 2015 11:29 AM BST
socialist bleating? I lived threw her time, she destroyed my city and many others,she is the reason why we have no social housing ..you put her on a pedestal yet say nothing of her signing away our rights to the eu?i always remember her taking the milk away from kids in school when she was education sec, THATCHER THE SNATCHER, evil woman, her politics divided my country and destroyed many a family.
Report Dr Crippen June 24, 2015 11:32 AM BST
doctors didn't buy houses to make money?

Doctors set up practices to make money. They're private companies taking public money.
Just like a private landlord does.

Grow up tony, doctors are just as avaricious as other professional people.
Report pawras June 24, 2015 11:33 AM BST
more socialist bleating Laugh

I lived through her time as well and 80s and 90s were a hell of a lot better than the 70s

The houses are still there they are just privately owned now, many people are glad they were able to own their own home thanks to her

The core reason for housing shortages now, social or otherwise, is the massive immigration influx created by labour
Report Dr Crippen June 24, 2015 11:37 AM BST
i always remember her taking the milk away from kids in school when she was education sec, THATCHER THE SNATCHER, evil woman


''Labour education secretary Ted Short who scrapped the practice for secondary schools in 1968, three years before Margaret Thatcher followed suit for primary school pupils over seven.''

tony puts his foot in it again.
Report Dr Crippen June 24, 2015 11:39 AM BST
she is the reason why we have no social housing

The golden years under Labour 1997 on, provided an ideal climate to invest in new housing.

Why didn't they?
Report pawras June 24, 2015 11:40 AM BST
they were more interested in ramping up public spending, the more public sector workers and people getting handouts the more votes for labour
Report Dr Crippen June 24, 2015 11:41 AM BST
you put her on a pedestal yet say nothing of her signing away our rights to the eu?

And what did Labour do when they were in power?

It was only Gordon Brown who stopped us joining the Euro.
Blair and his cronies wanted us in that as well.
Report tony57 June 24, 2015 11:41 AM BST
she was pure evil, I notice you blame labour for all the ills of our country yet we have been out of power for over 6 yrs,
give people a bribe they will take it..if a house goes for 7000, and the next day is worth 30 what will people do?..but when them houses were meant for people who could not afford to buy in the private sector then its wrong..as what is happing now..

crippen you cannot help yourself with this crap doctors work for the nhs..they get paid by the nhs.they do not buy homes to rent out ...and then get government money, as ive said..you wont admit your a hypocrite..
Report pawras June 24, 2015 11:42 AM BST
and one of the reasons he did that was just to spite blair
Report Dr Crippen June 24, 2015 11:43 AM BST
You see tony, I can answer your questions and comments.

So why don't you ever answer mine instead of dismissing them with cries of rubbish etc.
Report Dr Crippen June 24, 2015 11:48 AM BST
According to you tony it's wrong for anybody to take payment for a service from someone who is claiming.

If someone on benefits has their central heating serviced, do you criticise the engineer for taking taxpayers' money?
Or do you think they should simply shiver in the cold if it their heating breaks down and the engineer won't mend it for free?

I'm sure you'd rather see women and children living in the park rather that pay a private company to house them using public money.
Report tony57 June 24, 2015 11:48 AM BST
why say blair is a socialist? when you know full well he is not? you just bring him up to suit yourself ..he is not labour, and has been gone for a long time..yet yourself and others continually put him and labour of today in the same box?
Report pawras June 24, 2015 11:49 AM BST
get a grip and less of the pathetic bleating histrionics about a prime minster that won 3 general elections, really evil and unpopular eh??? LOL
the country was down the toilet by the end of the 70s simple as that. things had been turned around by 97, some people suffered but the bottom line was a massive positive

I agree the Tories haven’t done nearly enough to counter act the destruction caused by tony and Gordon.
I truly looking forward to a lot of people having to take stabilisers off and carry their own ar&e a lot more! Laugh
Report tony57 June 24, 2015 11:51 AM BST
why are you saying such things crippen? I have never said these things or implied any ..I merely made 1 point ..you continually demonise the people in our country who rely on government handouts..I just brought to your attention that you yourself benefit from said handouts also?
Report Dr Crippen June 24, 2015 11:56 AM BST
why say blair is a socialist? when you know full well he is not?

Because he gave you and your ungrateful lot more than any other PM before him starting with Harold Wilson.

You're biting the hand that fed you.

tony why do you get everything wrong?
Report tony57 June 24, 2015 12:02 PM BST
wrong? the thing you don't understand crippen probably cos you have never understood party politics is partys are broad churches..they have people in who don't agree on lots of things blair was a acceptable face to the public ..but he was a disaster for us and took the party to far towards the right with the results that we let the banks run riot for fear of being thought of as against business..same as today..but the tories were trying to be blair..Cameron said he was the air to blair...crippen why did we get it so wrong?Laugh
Report Dr Crippen June 24, 2015 12:09 PM BST
blair was a acceptable face to the public ..but he was a disaster for us and took the party

Blair delivered more that even Harold Wilson did for the working classes in his first term alone.

He won you three elections.

Unbelievable attitude from tony over Blair.
I truly believe that people like tony would prefer the Labour Party to be a left wing debating society perpetually in opposition, but saying the things they want hear instead of governing.
Report salmon spray June 24, 2015 2:16 PM BST
Blair was a Tory plant as you well know Crippen     Devil
Report Ski-Wiz June 24, 2015 5:36 PM BST

Jun 23, 2015 -- 12:45PM, Ski-Wiz wrote:


Dr Crippen.......your defence for receiving welfare by providing a services is crap. Landlords who gets money from the government, that stole it from taxpayers are no different to that of benefits breeders, immigrants, scroungers etc. A bank robber (government) who share the spoils of stolen money with a getaway driver (landlords), who was receiving payments for providing a services, does not justify the crime. Landlords who receives housing benefit does not earn the money legally......it's crony capitalism and the same as corporation who benefits from the government stealing money from taxpayers.New houses are expensive to build, and there's little you can do about the cost of building them.And if house prices tumble. That would be the end of house building for a good many years to come.Which would simply make matters worse. Utter rubbish. The cost of building houses can easily fall when those holding vast amount of land and order to build or lose the land. Stop expanding the money supply, remove housing subsidies, let the market fall to its correct level and the cost of building will fall too. The profit of building new houses are around £30k each house. Builders will just have to make do with less profit. Remove stupid regulations and the cost will fall.


https://mises.org/library/12%C2%A2-hamburgers-and-600-cars

Proof that house price can go down and so does the cost of building when government stops expanding the money supply.

Report Ski-Wiz June 24, 2015 5:39 PM BST
I'm sure you'd rather see women and children living in the park rather that pay a private company to house them using public money.

Giving it to private companies is transferring wealth from the poor to the rich....public money should be used so that the recipient can use it to pay their mortgage rather than give it to the landlord to pay their mortgage.....100% home ownership and no landlords.
Report pawras June 24, 2015 5:52 PM BST
....100% home ownership and no landlords...... meanwhile back down on planet earth lol
Report Dr Crippen June 24, 2015 6:47 PM BST
Ski-Wiz would like to see taxpayers' money being used to fund mortgages for the unemployed instead of paying them LHA.

I don't know where these homes would come from.

What he proposes would result in a society where no one under a certain income would actually work.

People on low wages can't afford to buy their own homes.
Yet if they were unemployed in the world that Ski-Wiz proposes, the government would buy a home for them.
Report tony57 June 24, 2015 7:22 PM BST
people on low wages carnt afford to buy the own home?? oh yes they can when the torys hand over social housing at a fraction of the price , and give the owners tax payer help..?
Report Ski-Wiz June 24, 2015 7:33 PM BST

Jun 24, 2015 -- 12:47PM, Dr Crippen wrote:


Ski-Wiz would like to see taxpayers' money being used to fund mortgages for the unemployed instead of paying them LHA.I don't know where these homes would come from.What he proposes would result in a society where no one under a certain income would actually work.People on low wages can't afford to buy their own homes.Yet if they were unemployed in the world that Ski-Wiz proposes, the government would buy a home for them.


If there are no landlords then there will be plenty of houses at cheaper prices.....I rather spend taxes on helping poor people rather than landlords....helping poor is max of 25 years rather than 25 to 60 years of my money to landlords. A condition can be attached to those who never worked that when they die.....the property is sold and the money used to reduce future housing benefit bills.

Landlords are nothing but scums.....to take money from taxpayers for their own benefit and will always defend their 'rights' and attack those poor people who can't get a job due to politicians incompetences.

Report Dr Crippen June 24, 2015 7:36 PM BST
There aren't many homes available under the scheme tony.

Half the houses aren't worth buying, because you'd never sell them again except to BTL landlords at a knock down price.
Report Dr Crippen June 24, 2015 7:48 PM BST
Landlords are nothing but scums

Lol.

Ski-Wiz getting hot under the collar.
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com