The harsh truth about Tory policies

StevieJ

PaulW1965 wrote: »

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

No they are not

leveller2911

cootambear wrote: »

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

Totally off topic Coot, but as you ask, given that Simon Mann is to be released I would think Thatcher may be safer in prison...:rolleyes:

Keep thinking back to the final scenes to the film "The Wild Geese" where Richard Burton and Roger Moore take the ultimate revenge on a coup financier who shafted them.

StevieJ

cootambear wrote: »

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

He couldn't organise a p1ss up in a brewery

drc

ghanagirl wrote: »

When the Benefit, Pension and NHS systems were created there was nothing for the ordinary poor people of this country who were paid pennies when working and nothing when they became old or ill and had to rely on charity to survive.
Now these systems are available to all no matter how rich you are and thats the problem, these systems are being exploited by the rich who can pay for their own pensions and medical / health needs yet choose to claim from these systems.
so for my 2p worth as the saying goes
Anyone who earns over £50.000 should loose the following
State Pension, Free NHS treatment, Child Benefit, Tax Credits,
and they should have to get their own Medical insurance and pension.

I don't get this. Not everyone who is "rich" has inherited their money. Some people have got rich through sheer hard work and taking risks, whilsts paying taxes for many years. If you penalise people like this then there will be no incentive to try and better yourself and we will lose entrepreneurs and hardworkers to countries who actually reward hard work and determination.

What is more, people earning over £50k will already have paid a huge amount of tax and NI contributions, will not get free NHS treatment since so many services involve paying extra (and are essentially means tested), will get a paltry state pension at retirement age (which means they are already paying for a private pension to subsidise this anyway). Many also pay for private healthcare already since the 'free' NHS is not so free if you are earning and would have to pay for any 'perks' (in some cases fairly basic treatment).

On the other hand, there are plenty of people out there who have never paid into the system because they have never worked, yet in extreme cases they are entitled to more in benefits than many average wage workers get before tax. Why should a rich person who has earned their wealth be punished for doing well yet a 'poor' person who has never worked, yet gets thousands in benefits be rewarded? Surely working hard and earning your wealth should be encouraged, not deemed something shameful?

JayScottGreenspan

kabayiri wrote: »

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.

Yeah, I agree.

To a certain extent the local officials hands are tied by central government:
https://lha-direct.voa.gov.uk/Secure/LHARateSearch.aspx?SearchType=LA

ess0two

Geoffo_M wrote: »

Surely you don't expect anyone to believe this rubbish. Link please?

=

Here you go


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1227998/Speed-camera-rakes-500-000-year-blamed-doubling-motorway-casualties.html?ITO=1490&referrer=yahoo

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

A motorway speed camera responsible for earning the Government £500,000-a-year in fines has been blamed for increasing accidents since it was installed.

The camera, which monitors a busy stretch of the M11 in Essex, results in 9,000 tickets a year, but figures released by police show crashes have risen by a quarter at the site.

A Freedom of Information request made by campaigners who oppose what they see as revenue-based penalty tickets also showed casualties have almost doubled since 2001 when the camera was set up.

Safety camera or money maker? The M11 Gatso in Essex at the centre of the controversy


Paul Pearson, who runs motoring website penaltychargenotice.co.uk, said: 'No wonder they haven't removed the camera that is causing these accidents.


'It is just raising too much money and they clearly want to keep it there.'
Essex Police, which runs the camera together with Essex Council and the Highways Agency, had initially refused a Freedom of Information request by Mr Pearson for details about the speeding tickets issued by the machine.

But after a ruling by the Information Commissioner, the police have been forced to disclose that in 2003 alone the M11 camera was responsible for 9,639 fines and a further 8,451 in 2004.


The following year 9,047 motorists were caught by the camera and in 2006 a total of 7,801 were sent fines. In 2007, the number fell to 3,305.

There are no complete figures for 2008, but in the year up to May 2009, the number of fines had risen to 6,445.

Mr Pearson has highlighted the danger he claims the camera poses, after he put in an earlier Freedom of Information request, having witnessed an accident on the road.

He said: 'The speed limit reduces from 70mph to 50mph without prior warning, the carriageway narrows from 3 to 2 lanes and just beyond is a speed camera.


'In February 2008 we witnessed the aftermath of a three-car pile up immediately in front of the camera.


'It was obvious that it was the camera that caused the accident because cars were having to reduce speed and merge and then of course some motorists slam on their brakes when they pass the camera.

'So we asked the Department of Transport for the accident and casualty statistics.'

The data showed that in the five years before the camera was installed, there were 13 accidents and 14 casualties in the area. In the following five years, the number of accidents rose to 16 and casualties to 24.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1227998/Speed-camera-rakes-500-000-year-blamed-doubling-motorway-casualties.html?ITO=1490&referrer=yahoo#ixzz0WxZQVDOf

WOW....:eek:

£500,000 in revenue from one scamera in just one year, and accident rates increase by 25% AFTER it was installed.

Absolutely Outrageous.

No wonder some Conservative councils are removing them.

It's a Scam, nothing more.

nearlynew

Is this your latest "thing" mcTittish?

Speed cameras?


I don't know how anyone can take you seriously anymore.

It must be obvious to everyone now that you are just a very silly boy.

JayScottGreenspan

Anyone looking for an example of an ad hominem attack - well, there you go...

For me, anyone going ad hominem immediately loses the argument (bit like Godwin's Law).

jsp_1983

carolt wrote: »

Link removed, because the commenting rules on this forum are bizzare

Scary article. :eek:

Thoughts, anyone?

Just a load of white noise from an androgenous moaner.

I'm no fan of Cameron, but if you find the prospect of a Conservative government 'scary', where have you been for the past 12 years? It probably won't be any better, but it certainly won't be any worse.