It is tough NOW. So how are we coping

ceridwen

Churchmouse wrote: »

ceridwen, I've been searching for evidence to support this claim that I've heard made a few times. Do you have any links to the inevitable photos or video there would surely be? I think any who can be shown to have behaved like this should be punished for it.

It was there in the article on that Sky News link published above.

ceridwen

Re £2.59 for a cauliflower - I shall be having cauliflower cheese tonight from some of the remainder of a cauliflower that cost me 50p - but twas from a market stall and not a supermarket - so perhaps that explains the difference.

What I do think is one of the single biggest factors that could create major financial problems for many people is the lack of mortgage help for people (compared to what was available back in my time). Back in my time I would have received however much mortgage help I needed no limit/no time limit from Day 1 (okay Day 4 then....) and then those cuts in mortgage help were made. People were told at the time that they needed to take out mortgage protection policies now and I honestly thought that they would grumble and then do so. Errr.....I'm not sure whether anyone even read that "advice"....and I certainly have the feeling that few people actually took out those policies. So - I can see a lot of people losing their homes because they lose their job.

I am certainly surprised by the number of people generally who have little idea how much benefit they will get if they become unemployed - I can only presume they read all the articles about how much money those with large families get and then think "Well - I'll be okay then - because I dont have a large family" and havent realised the system is weighted against those who dont:mad:

elizabunny - couldnt agree more that we need fairness...no-one needs an income that is 6 figures or more a year and personally I couldnt live with receiving such an income comfortably - when others are struggling on NMW or even benefit money due to no fault or choice of their own. Having been friends with someone with plenty of money and nearly married someone with LOTS of money - I can confirm that many people in that situation honestly live in a degree of obliviousness about "how the other half lives" and feel a huge sense of "entitlement" to the high level of money they have (even if they havent had to work for it). That WAS one of the reasons those people are no longer in my life - as I felt I was beating my head against a brick wall trying to get them to realise how things are for many people.

We do have to bear in mind though - as well - the sheer HUGE amount of public money that has been spent on waging that succession of wars recently - Iraq, Afghanistan et al. There are absolutely enormous amounts of money gone in those directions - and we would all be a lot more comfortable financially as a country if that money hadnt been wasted.

ceridwen

This article gives some idea of the huge amounts of money that have been drained out of our Society in recent years in the course of this endless warfare (the first half is U.S. figures of money lost/the second half concerns Britain):

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article3419840.ece

so its worth sparing a thought or two for arms manufacturers etc - as well as the bankers - when we wonder where all our money has gone...

Penelope_Penguin

ceridwen wrote: »

It was there in the article on that Sky News link published above.

Sorry, I still can't find it, but if it was on Sky News, it must be true :rolleyes: There's a video on the BBC News site yesterday of someone throwing a missile. As it pans back, there are loads of journalists taking photos. Was it coincidence they were all trained on one protester, or was it set up

And since when did police have the powers to constrain people like cattle for hours on end (this happened not so long ago in Trafalgar Square) We seen to invoke Anti-terrorism legislation to deal with peaceful protest, and then are surprised at the outcome.

Penny. x

MRSTITTLEMOUSE

I think we'll be seeing a lot more of this as people are starting to get realy angry out there.
You can't realy blame the way they feel.
I don't like any form of violence,but I think what happened yesterday was'nt helped by the police not allowing people to move freely.
I also think we'll be seeing more legislation to stop the protests,which will cause even more problems.They're quick to change laws when it suits them.
This government need putting up against a wall and shot,the lot of them for what they've allowed to happen to this country.

BigMummaF

I watched some of the footage this morning & was--once again--left seething.
WHY attack the police? They are there to try & keep some stability to promote a safe environment for everyone & no, I don't think I am being niave. It really irks that the people who are so quick to critisise are usually the first to shout the loudest for help! I cannot abide double standards in any way, shape or form :mad:
But the biggest WHY is....you attend a peaceful protest so the assumption is you are prepared to "stand up & be counted" correct? Why then, would you go to such extremes to hide your identity, as per the many 'protesters' caught on camera committing acts of out & out thuggery?
My mother keeps saying she can't stand Brown, but it isn't only him--or his particular political ethos. It's the whole damned kit-n-kaboodle from where I'm sitting & they all appear to be as bad as each other!
The more it goes on, the more I can see another General Strike as per the 1920's, but less likely to be so due to the very fact there's no-one left in work TO strike!

Beki

Penelope_Penguin wrote: »

Sorry, I still can't find it, but if it was on Sky News, it must be true :rolleyes: There's a video on the BBC News site yesterday of someone throwing a missile. As it pans back, there are loads of journalists taking photos. Was it coincidence they were all trained on one protester, or was it set up

And since when did police have the powers to constrain people like cattle for hours on end (this happened not so long ago in Trafalgar Square) We seen to invoke Anti-terrorism legislation to deal with peaceful protest, and then are surprised at the outcome.

Penny. x

I watched the coverage all day, and i hardly think it can be called a peaceful protest :rolleyes:

The police were only doing their job, and give them a big pat on the back i say :T

BigMummaF

ceridwen wrote: »

What I do think is one of the single biggest factors that could create major financial problems for many people is the lack of mortgage help for people (compared to what was available back in my time). Back in my time I would have received however much mortgage help I needed no limit/no time limit from Day 1 (okay Day 4 then....) and then those cuts in mortgage help were made. People were told at the time that they needed to take out mortgage protection policies* now and I honestly thought that they would grumble and then do so. Errr.....I'm not sure whether anyone even read that "advice"....and I certainly have the feeling that few people actually took out those policies. So - I can see a lot of people losing their homes because they lose their job.

I am certainly surprised by the number of people generally who have little idea how much benefit they will get if they become unemployed - I can only presume they read all the articles about how much money those with large families get** and then think "Well - I'll be okay then - because I dont have a large family" and havent realised the system is weighted against those who dont:mad:

elizabunny - couldnt agree more that we need fairness ME TOO...no-one needs an income that is 6 figures or more a year - when others are struggling on NMW or even benefit money due to no fault or choice of their own***......many people in that situation honestly live in a degree of obliviousness about "how the other half lives" and feel a huge sense of "entitlement" to the high level of money they have Let them eat cake!......

I know nothing of mortgages--we decided at the time that we couldn't afford to buy our own home AND have a family. I've also never agreed to the principle of selling local authority housing--& that's a debate for another time :rolleyes: Wasn't this* the biggy that started off the whole insurance mis-selling cockeral rising? I'm also curious to know if the policy would cover just the initial mortgage, or also have provision for allowance on the amount the home-owner had been positively encouraged to borrow against it. [I know of several who live well above their means through 'borrowing' in this way. Might not be so bad if they had had no other alternative, but to "help" finance two foreign holidays a year for the past five years :mad: ] Having had a ppi on a very small cc balance [less than £300], attempted to claim & been refused on the most ridiculous grounds, it may not be so clear cut as to assume the home-owners DIDN'T have insurance.
This** only applies to serial loop-hole & systems wranglers I can assure you! My marriage ended & I came to loathe the term 'single mother' & all the derision it brought with it...SIZE=1]Why can't we have a 'deserted wife' catagory????[SIZE=2 I was so sick of the assumption my three had different fathers; that I entertained male company at every opportunity & I was 'up for it cuz I wasn't getting it at home' :mad: The worst thing was a snotty little jobsworth sitting in her pearls & twin-set, warning me that if I persisted in continuing a civil relationship with my husband they would investigate further & I could "be facing a justodial sentance if we find evidence of fraud." My crime? I offered my husband something to eat if he was visiting the children around meal times, & we had shared occasional day trips! I was very restrained when I told her where she could put her aligations & left the office
This*** has often caused me to consider the very basics of an idea I used to have of Communism, in that NO JOB is worth any more or any less than another. I was in one particular employ where it was a common practise to snub the cleaning staff, so when I actually nade the first approach to exchange pleasantries they all--both 'sides'--thought I was even more insane than first imagined But! I didn't particularly relish the thought of shoving my hand down the MD's U-bend & was thankful someone else was prepared to do so for me! We need dustmen as much as a brain surgeon so why not pay them the same :wall:
[/SIZE][/SIZE]

tim_n

BigMummaF - you don't pay them the same because one went through many years of college and university, especially these days where they rack up huge debt and the other could pretty much leave school at 16 and start earning.

Start paying the student who's studying hard (it's a job in itself) and you might have a deal. But I'm guessing the person who might have left school to do the mucky job might be a bit peeved that rather than sticking his hands in smelly u-bends etc he could be at college still learning.

Capitalism is complex and unfair, but it generally works which is why it's more in use today then ever before.

Trouble with the world is that we're on it. We don't control population, everyone is generally free to do what they want. Put in place population control so we'd reach a sustainable level, make sure everyone obeys the laws and everyone is allocated a job and we'll truely have our orwellian future!

Read the Dispossessed by Ursula LeGuin

fedupfreda

BigMummaF wrote: »

Having had a ppi on a very small cc balance [less than £300], attempted to claim & been refused on the most ridiculous grounds, it may not be so clear cut as to assume the home-owners DIDN'T have insurance.

It also may be that, due to past employment history, the insurance premium may have been excessive or may even have made them ineligible. Definitely the case with me and OH - we bought our house in 93 when the govt covered you (at least partially) and when the rules changed, we looked into getting PPI and the premium was extortionate. As I was expecting my eldest at the time, and would have to reduce to part time hours, it was beyond our budget. I believe that because we have the same mortgage and same house as then, that we would still be eligible for support under the old rules (but I am not holding my breath, bet the goalposts have been moved, I wait to stand corrected).

I definitely wish I had been eligible for council housing, Unfortunately I was unwilling to do what many of my contemporaries had done, and become a deliberate single parent. And yes, I know a lot of people end up on their own because of circumstances beyond their control - but there are still an awful lot who do it because the system is deliberately weighted that way. Where is the incentive to work and save when you are effectively going to be penalised for it? My next door neighbour has worked all his life - and when he needed some updating done to his council house, the council took a fair chunk of his meagre savings to go towards the cost. Where's the justification in that??:mad: I definitely believe change is way overdue.