We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Question Time
Comments
-
If she had the opportunity to swap places with those on benefits, would she take it? I don't believe any of that naive 'proud to work' b*ll*cks btw.She had a very valid point.
For many people benefits are a lifestyle that pays very well and some do not work because it is not worth their while compared to their benefit entitlements.
This is cannot be right or fair on those paying tax.0 -
Yeyaaasssss!
Been on about this for ages.
Watch out for the following individuals garnering simplistic battery monkey mindless applause for hollow platitudes such as 'Bankers = fatcats' (even though somehow these individuals are fat cat tax dogers themselves);
+ Will Self
+Tony Robinson
+ Billy Bragg (massive Tax dodger fat cat)
+ Shirley Williams (huge wealth)
+ Lenny Henry (worth £50m)
+ Ben Elton - one of the biggest fat cats of all
+ Will Hutton - uses a Ltd co for all his speaking revenue etc
+ Janet St Porter
+ Tony Benn - huge state in Essex - stopped rambles walking round the premiter my the sea - main home in Holland park
Don't be a mug by falling for these crowd pleasers - always have in your mind the image of thier meet with thier Accoutant
Where is the evidence that supports whatever you are suggesting these public figures are doing?
There is nothing immoral about being wealthy and does not mean you do not pay your fair share of tax. Neither is it a crime to be successful or to inherit wealth. Neither is it wrong for a talented person to reap the benefits of their talents.Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
Where is the evidence that supports whatever you are suggesting these public figures are doing?
There is nothing immoral about being wealthy and does not mean you do not pay your fair share of tax. Neither is it a crime to be successful or to inherit wealth. Neither is it wrong for a talented person to reap the benefits of their talents.
No it isn't. But it's pretty audacious for some of those who have accumulated, and held onto, substantial wealth via show business or the media to then go on TV and slag off others who have acquired it by other means.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
yes but the proper way to look at benefits is to set them at the minimum needed. that is why people are getting it wrong. they are just saying people on benefits get more than some in jobs so cut all benefits when the issue probably lies with the wage levels not the benefit levels. they arent just looking to reduce benefits for people who get more than some jobs. they want to cut all benefits. under 25's get £56 per week jsa and they want to take housing benefit away from them. would you say someone getting £56 per week jsa is getting more than someone in work?The problem is the system is not working and something has to be done. You can’t have a system where someone claiming benefits gets more than someone earning above the average wage.0 -
-
of course but we need somebody criticising those who are out of order. if they dont who is going to? the average joe bloggs cant get on the panel of question time.GeorgeHowell wrote: »No it isn't. But it's pretty audacious for some of those who have accumulated, and held onto, substantial wealth via show business or the media to then go on TV and slag off others who have acquired it by other means.0 -
donnajunkie wrote: »yes but the proper way to look at benefits is to set them at the minimum needed. that is why people are getting it wrong. they are just saying people on benefits get more than some in jobs so cut all benefits when the issue probably lies with the wage levels not the benefit levels. they arent just looking to reduce benefits for people who get more than some jobs. they want to cut all benefits. under 25's get £56 per week jsa and they want to take housing benefit away from them. would you say someone getting £56 per week jsa is getting more than someone in work?
I personally would not support removing housing benefit from under 25s. But what do you think the minimum should cover, how do you suggest we increase wage levels without causing inflation which would negate wage rise.
0 -
i dont know how to solve the issue i just know cutting benefits in most cases is not the answer. if there were massive numbers of jobs available then they could start something that matches people to jobs. if they then refused then there would be justification in cutting that persons benefits in some way.I personally would not support removing housing benefit from under 25s. But what do you think the minimum should cover, how do you suggest we increase wage levels without causing inflation which would negate wage rise.0 -
donnajunkie wrote: »i dont know how to solve the issue i just know cutting benefits in most cases is not the answer. if there were massive numbers of jobs available then they could start something that matches people to jobs. if they then refused then there would be justification in cutting that persons benefits in some way.
I earned a lot less than the proposed benefit cap for all my working life and managed to bring up my children and have a reasonable life including running a car, foreign holidays and indulging in a fairly expensive holiday. So I would have though there must be room for some cuts.0 -
donnajunkie wrote: »of course but we need somebody criticising those who are out of order. if they dont who is going to? the average joe bloggs cant get on the panel of question time.
We do indeed need that. But we don't need the BBC-style policy of bringing on left-leaning 'celebrities' criticising only those they choose to see as out of order :- "the rich", Conservatives, the upper classes, big business etc. Apart from the odd Conservative MP who appears on QT to be shouted down and ridiculed, who criticises for example :- over-reaching Trade Unionists, those obsessed with repressive political correctness, those who dumb down education for reasons of 'anti-elitism', minorities who try to play the race card unjustifiably etc ?No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards