The harsh truth about Tory policies

PaulW1965

Emy1501 wrote: »

Did I? I said I knew someone who had refused to take job because they were better off on benefit. I also pointed out that someone on that figure could be given benefits to top up their wage rather than making work pointless. I also pointed out they were part of a family and therefore they could have both been encouraged to work maybe one part time with the relevant help;)

Sorry I no longer see you as someone with a valid pov, just someone who is argumentative.

Emy1501

PaulW1965 wrote: »

Sorry I no longer see you as someone with a valid pov, just someone who is argumentative.

Fair enough you are entitled to your opinion.

kabayiri

JayScottGreenspan wrote: »

What about a sensible nationwide cap on LHA allowances? That would mean no family could claim £4.5k per month, regardless of where they live. If they were accustomed to living in a very posh area of London then maybe they would have to move down the road a mile or two (big deal!).
Problem solved._party_

I kind of agree, as long as you don't propose setting the limit at 4,400 per month :rolleyes:

Who is worse though? The family who believe they are entitled to 4K+ housing allowance, or the housing officials who don't question handing over this sort of money (as long as its not out of their own pockets).

To me, it's the latter.

kabayiri

abaxas wrote: »

The pole tax as a flat rate, and although 'fair' look what happened.

Eeeks, I've a forty foot pole out in the back garden (it seemed a good idea at the time....), I am SO not looking forward to my next task bill.

abaxas

kabayiri wrote: »

Eeeks, I've a forty foot pole out in the back garden (it seemed a good idea at the time....), I am SO not looking forward to my next task bill.

WORP WORP Selppung and rgamarm NAZI!

kabayiri

abaxas wrote: »

WORP WORP Selppung and rgamarm NAZI!

I thought Liz had already played the Nazi card earlier?

:rotfl:

We need Hamish to check the rule book and adjudicate.

abaxas

kabayiri wrote: »

I thought Liz had already played the Nazi card earlier?

:rotfl:

We need Hamish to check the rule book and adjudicate.

The only rule I know for Hamish, is that he survives about 3-6 months on a forum, before being banned.

chucky

abaxas wrote: »

The only rule I know for Hamish, is that he survives about 3-6 months on a forum, before being banned.

or translated in the real world - it means that Hamish got banned from HPC.co.uk forum for being realistic and putting realistic arguments against those "people" that expected 30% unemployment, 70% house price falls, Sterling to drop 85% in value, the IMF to rescue the UK and the FTSE to reach 1,500...

Emy1501

chucky wrote: »

or translated in the real world - it means that Hamish got banned from HPC.co.uk forum for being realistic and putting realistic arguments against those "people" that expected 30% unemployment, 70% house price falls, Sterling to drop 85% in value, the IMF to rescue the UK and the FTSE to reach 1,500...

Hamish got trolled not banned from HPC, wrongly in my opinion. He and a couple of others did gang up on one poster which was not right but nothing worse than worse than others have done to people on there with bullish opinions.

cootambear

When is Mark Thatcher going to be jailed for organising a coup?