Work or be homeless!

Generali

Phoenixx73 wrote: »

After reading the countless posts about ciggie smoking, special brew drinking dole scroungers I wonder just how many people hav taken into account that the benefits system is partially self funding just on taxation of those two commodities alone?

How much of the average benefit payment made to the stereotype people you mentioned is subsequently reclaimed by the government in VAT, ciggie tax, alcohol tax, fuel tax ect?

Now not having figures in front of me I would guess that about 30-40% of the disposable income after rent is paid goes back into the governments coffers (as well as council tax into the local governments funds)

In excess of 40% of the GDP of the UK is taken by the government in tax. Of course they spend a lot more than that as they will borrow another 3.2% in 2008 (Economist estimate). On top of that the Government are kindly accruing liabilities on our behalf that they don't account for (pensions and PPI mostly).

Generali amazing fact: the reason the Government doesn't account for the future liability of pension payments according to the Government is because they can always Welsh on the promise so it doesn't matter!

clutton_2

""the cost of land for all the people who make the stuff they buy, and the cost of land for all the people who make the stuff they buy, and the cost of land for all the people who make the stuff they buy, and the cost of land for all the people who make the stuff they buy... shall I go on?""

please don't - its such a tedious set of non-sequitors

Phoenixx73

SquatNow wrote: »

I love it when people make this argument, it's so funny. As a comparison, if I steal £1m from the taxpayer, say, by benefit fraud, it doesn't matter as long as I spend it on beer and cigs, as the government gets most of the money back anyway. So surely most benefit fraudsters should be let off, or at least be able to tax deduct their theft, that is, only pay back the money, less the tax they paid with it.

What about if I steal £1m and use it to pay an outstanding income tax bill... surely the taxpayer is no worse off?

So basicly what you are saying is anyone who is on benefit and buys ciggies is a fraudster?

Not everyone who is on benefit is a theif. The point i was making was that what the government gives with one hand, it takes with the other with an APR of about 300%

(and we think the BANKS rip us off!)

SquatNow

Phoenixx73 wrote: »

So basicly what you are saying is anyone who is on benefit and buys ciggies is a fraudster?

No I was simply pointing out that you cant use the maths of "what they spend of cigs doesn't counts as it all comes back in tax".

Generali wrote: »

On top of that the Government are kindly accruing liabilities on our behalf that they don't account for (pensions and PPI mostly)

And it racks up day by day.

Generali wrote: »

Generali amazing fact: the reason the Government doesn't account for the future liability of pension payments according to the Government is because they can always Welsh on the promise so it doesn't matter!

That and the fact it would become obvious were totally screwed. More than a trillion pounds in civil service pensions alone.

Phoenixx73

I never implied that it all comes back in tax. but you can't deny that a certain ammount does. Which at the very least is better than a non-smoking, non-drinking doel scrounger

Retired_I.F.A.

Dont you just hate having to buy a pack of fags from the corner shop when your duty free has run out and your lorry driver mate is on holiday.

Lorry drivers should not be allowed to have holidays I say.:D

SquatNow

Phoenixx73 wrote: »

I never implied that it all comes back in tax. but you can't deny that a certain ammount does. Which at the very least is better than a non-smoking, non-drinking doel scrounger

I'de prefer them to spend the money on feeding themselves/their children properly.

Phoenixx73

wouldn't we all. unfortunatly there are a small minority who taint everyones perception and they all get tarred with the same brush as a result.

SquatNow

Phoenixx73 wrote: »

wouldn't we all. unfortunatly there are a small minority who taint everyones perception and they all get tarred with the same brush as a result.

The question is, how small a minority is it.

nightwatchman

The minority it may not be so small. I have barely ten living relatives in UK (many are overseas so they do not tally) and among them ten, there is one stereotypical scrounger. (In my case the minority is the 10%)
My brother in-law is in his twenties and perfectly able-bodied. He dropped off college although he was bright. He was on benefits for two years. Then he got a job, for some time, as computer engineer and it look like he would have made something of himself.
However as his first salary was only scarcely above what he could have if he was on benefits he give up his job. For the last two years he is scrounging from the state, friends and relatives.

Is this sound somewhat familiar to you?