Total Posts:43|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Tories declare war on working class

brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2010 9:02:53 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
The Tory-led Government has launched a viscous, spiteful and cowardly assault on some of the most disadvantaged members of British society. In today's budget they have:

* Increased VAT on goods and services from 17.5% to 20%, which disproportionately affects those on low incomes.

* Cut spending on state education cut by 25% but instead of raising money by ending the tax-free profits status of private schools.

* Abolished the "health in pregnancy" grant and restricted the Sure Start maternity grant to the first child only. Lone parents will now be expected to look for work when their youngest child goes to school. Also, Child Benefit will be frozen for the next three years. Again, all these grants and benefits assisted families on low incomes.

* Housing Benefit will be restricted to a maximum limit of £400 a week which means families living on benefits in London will have squeeze into tiny, rundown flats.

Meanwhile, those on the highest incomes can still avoid tax by paying themselves in non-cash assets now taxed at 28% instead of the 50% higher rate of income tax.

http://www.direct.gov.uk...
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2010 9:04:16 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
"Cut spending on state education by 25% instead of raising money by ending the tax-free profits status of private schools."

Fixed!
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2010 10:00:22 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

They could have increased rate of Capital Gains Tax to match the Income Tax rate and closed the other tax loop-holes that multinational corporations and super-rich individuals use to avoid paying their fair share of taxes.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2010 10:20:14 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/22/2010 10:00:22 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

They could have increased rate of Capital Gains Tax to match the Income Tax rate and closed the other tax loop-holes that multinational corporations and super-rich individuals use to avoid paying their fair share of taxes.

Which harms the country by driving money away?
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2010 10:34:35 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/22/2010 9:16:32 AM, Kinesis wrote:
We should simply reintroduce slavery. That would solve all our debt problems.

Kinesis what makes you think that it ever was abolished? We have simply moved from one form to another. The type of slavery blacks endured between one and 3 hundred years ago is arguably better than what a lot of blacks go through these days.

We are condemneed to death unless we submit to entry-level hell to obtain purchasing power to survive. While many have the opportunity to advance, the vast majority of us do not. Most of the people in this country and on this site are really not free at all.
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2010 10:38:57 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/22/2010 10:20:14 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 6/22/2010 10:00:22 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

They could have increased rate of Capital Gains Tax to match the Income Tax rate and closed the other tax loop-holes that multinational corporations and super-rich individuals use to avoid paying their fair share of taxes.

Which harms the country by driving money away?

I know they say low tax economies attract wealth creators and there is some truth in that. But it's not fair that the poor should suffer in order to pay off the deficit while the rich aren't affected.

There must be a crackdown on tax evasion. That would raise tens of billions of pounds.

If that drives people who don't pay any tax out of the country I don't think that would be a bad thing.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2010 10:43:40 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/22/2010 10:38:57 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 6/22/2010 10:20:14 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 6/22/2010 10:00:22 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

They could have increased rate of Capital Gains Tax to match the Income Tax rate and closed the other tax loop-holes that multinational corporations and super-rich individuals use to avoid paying their fair share of taxes.

Which harms the country by driving money away?

I know they say low tax economies attract wealth creators and there is some truth in that. But it's not fair that the poor should suffer in order to pay off the deficit while the rich aren't affected.

Well I dont care for the massive hike in VAT, but then really that tax should be phased out.

What I like about you is despite having a few bob you still care about the working class. You are like the anti-prescott.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2010 10:56:05 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/22/2010 10:43:40 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 6/22/2010 10:38:57 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 6/22/2010 10:20:14 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 6/22/2010 10:00:22 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

They could have increased rate of Capital Gains Tax to match the Income Tax rate and closed the other tax loop-holes that multinational corporations and super-rich individuals use to avoid paying their fair share of taxes.

Which harms the country by driving money away?

I know they say low tax economies attract wealth creators and there is some truth in that. But it's not fair that the poor should suffer in order to pay off the deficit while the rich aren't affected.

Well I dont care for the massive hike in VAT, but then really that tax should be phased out.

What I like about you is despite having a few bob you still care about the working class. You are like the anti-prescott.

Thanks!

Actually, although I have a comfortable middle-class lifestyle my roots are strictly working class.

My family comes from Tyneside where my Dad was a shipyard worker - until the Tories threw him out of a job.

The whole family then moved to Poole in Dorset where Dad found work making Sunseeker yachts instead of ocean-going ships.

Dorset's a nice enough place but I was young when we moved there and I quickly lost my Geordie accent, which I am sad about.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
mongoose
Posts: 3,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2010 12:30:08 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/22/2010 10:34:35 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
At 6/22/2010 9:16:32 AM, Kinesis wrote:
We should simply reintroduce slavery. That would solve all our debt problems.

Kinesis what makes you think that it ever was abolished? We have simply moved from one form to another. The type of slavery blacks endured between one and 3 hundred years ago is arguably better than what a lot of blacks go through these days.

Arguably better? Go for it. Argue how it is better.
It is odd when one's capacity for compassion is measured not in what he is willing to do by his own time, effort, and property, but what he will force others to do with their own property instead.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2010 12:47:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/22/2010 10:34:35 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
We are condemneed to death unless we submit to entry-level hell to obtain purchasing power to survive. While many have the opportunity to advance, the vast majority of us do not. Most of the people in this country and on this site are really not free at all.
If you just lived by yourself, you would be condemned to death unless you worked hard for food, water, and shelter. Being "forced" to work in order to live is really just nature. And you're most certainly better off than slaves. Slaves have no freedom to leave their master. Slaves have no freedom to eat what they want to eat. Slaves can't advance; you can. Slaves could never have a DDO account and argue against slavery; you can.
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2010 1:43:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

And you call yourself liberal, because...?
Veridas
Posts: 733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2010 11:18:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

I can tell you haven't been out of work for any great deal of time. God forbid that people actually rely on that money.
What fresh dickery is the internet up to today?
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2010 5:09:53 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/22/2010 1:43:11 PM, feverish wrote:
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

And you call yourself liberal, because...?

Because I am a liberal.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2010 5:12:43 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/22/2010 11:18:22 PM, Veridas wrote:
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

I can tell you haven't been out of work for any great deal of time. God forbid that people actually rely on that money.

Actually I have, and it is not the tax payers job to pay able bodied people not to work. I am certain that people do rely on that money, but they have no right to it.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Veridas
Posts: 733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2010 11:31:58 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/23/2010 5:12:43 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 6/22/2010 11:18:22 PM, Veridas wrote:
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

I can tell you haven't been out of work for any great deal of time. God forbid that people actually rely on that money.

Actually I have, and it is not the tax payers job to pay able bodied people not to work. I am certain that people do rely on that money, but they have no right to it.

Then riddle me this.

How is a person with no income supposed to support him or herself?

Before you answer, consider the fact that depending on who you ask we are going through or have just been through a global recession, in England alone unemployment is at 20% and some of the people who need the money and are claiming it have young families or children to support.

I personally was out of work for three years and not for lack of effort either, I got a job about two months ago and to be honest I don't enjoy it, but it's a job. I tell you now I would not have survived if my money had ended after six months and even if I had, the sheer amount of money I had to spend in order to find this job and then work the first month in which I received no unemployment money would mean that actually getting a job was temporarily worse, two months later and I am still paying off the money I owe in order to simply get to work for that first month and next month's paycheck will likely have a small portion going towards topping it off.

This was not due to me being lazy or unco-operative, this was due to the fact that I'm relatively inexperienced despite my age because my job history has been unliucky at best, I temped for a while hoping to pick something up but nothing ever came, and websites like Reed.com that show you the number of people applying for jobs would sometimes show job applications in the triple f*cking figures for one position and I'm supposed to compete with that, and you'd be the guy sat there saying "hey buddy, it's been six months, enjoy starving to death."

You know what else people don't have a right to, CN? Citizenships. Most people do not have the right to citizenship because they aren't born citizens, but then some of these people come from countries where their personal choices or their lives will get them vilified, so we say "ok, lets see if we can work something out."

It's called simple compassion, and sadly while there will always be those that abuse it, it is because of that simple thought that maybe someone else could use a hand that I am now working, which means I can now pull in a small income which I can use to look for something better, I can now better myself because someone, somewhere, said "you know unemployed people need money too, what if we could give them just enough to get by?"

This isn't a personal belief of mine, it's a personal experience. If you are so heartless that you would take away the one lifeline that people have, especially in a time when one in five people need it, then I honestly don't think "cruel" encompasses what you are, CN.
What fresh dickery is the internet up to today?
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2010 2:11:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/23/2010 11:31:58 AM, Veridas wrote:
At 6/23/2010 5:12:43 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 6/22/2010 11:18:22 PM, Veridas wrote:
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

I can tell you haven't been out of work for any great deal of time. God forbid that people actually rely on that money.

Actually I have, and it is not the tax payers job to pay able bodied people not to work. I am certain that people do rely on that money, but they have no right to it.

Then riddle me this.

How is a person with no income supposed to support him or herself?

Before you answer, consider the fact that depending on who you ask we are going through or have just been through a global recession, in England alone unemployment is at 20% and some of the people who need the money and are claiming it have young families or children to support.

People have had the option to refuse to work, and go on benefits. As a result we have been swamped by immigrants only too happy to do the jobs we are too good to do. The option should never have been there, the country is now skint, people have to fend for themselves. If people chose to have children on benefits, that is there irresponsible choice, that is why we have social services.

I personally was out of work for three years and not for lack of effort either

Three years ago when the economy was not in the crapper certain places, such as supermarkets and macdonalds were always hiring. You did not take such a job because the state paid you not to.

I got a job about two months ago and to be honest I don't enjoy it, but it's a job.

Thats life.

I can now better myself because someone, somewhere, said "you know unemployed people need money too, what if we could give them just enough to get by?"

You were given money for three years on the understanding that you were looking for work. If you genuinely applied to every crappy worthless job going then I am an idiot, if you did not then I am right and I am certain it was the latter.


This isn't a personal belief of mine, it's a personal experience. If you are so heartless that you would take away the one lifeline that people have, especially in a time when one in five people need it, then I honestly don't think "cruel" encompasses what you are, CN.

Civil order suggests that benefits should not be instantly stopped, but by the end of this Parliament we need to cut the umbilical cord for the 'can work dont work' part of society.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2010 3:03:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/23/2010 5:09:53 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 6/22/2010 1:43:11 PM, feverish wrote:
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

And you call yourself liberal, because...?

Because I am a liberal.

Those aren't very liberal positions.
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2010 3:06:57 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/23/2010 3:03:28 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
At 6/23/2010 5:09:53 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 6/22/2010 1:43:11 PM, feverish wrote:
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

And you call yourself liberal, because...?

Because I am a liberal.

Those aren't very liberal positions.

They are neither liberal nor iliberal positions.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2010 4:28:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/22/2010 9:02:53 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
The Tory-led Government has launched a viscous,

Vicious*

spiteful and cowardly assault on some of the most disadvantaged members of British society. In today's budget they have:

* Increased VAT on goods and services from 17.5% to 20%, which disproportionately affects those on low incomes.

Boo! Hiss!

* Cut spending on state education cut by 25%

Yes!

but instead of raising money by ending the tax-free profits status of private schools.

I thought taxes were bad. Besides, taxing private schools would lower their supply, which is the last thing you would want if you want to make somewhat decent education more affordable.

* Abolished the "health in pregnancy" grant and restricted the Sure Start maternity grant to the first child only. Lone parents will now be expected to look for work when their youngest child goes to school. Also, Child Benefit will be frozen for the next three years. Again, all these grants and benefits assisted families on low incomes.

Have you ever taken an economics course?

* Housing Benefit will be restricted to a maximum limit of £400 a week which means families living on benefits in London will have squeeze into tiny, rundown flats.

Seriously? Subsidies are bad, they squander scarce resources.

Meanwhile, those on the highest incomes can still avoid tax by paying themselves in non-cash assets now taxed at 28% instead of the 50% higher rate of income tax.

Boo, less theft?
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2010 4:29:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/22/2010 9:16:32 AM, Kinesis wrote:
We should simply reintroduce slavery. That would solve all our debt problems.

Not so. Chattel Slavery is a very inefficient economic system.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Veridas
Posts: 733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2010 6:12:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
People have had the option to refuse to work, and go on benefits.

I received no such option, I have been told repeatedly that if I ever refused a job my benefits would have been cut, that was that.

The option should never have been there, the country is now skint, people have to fend for themselves. If people chose to have children on benefits, that is there irresponsible choice, that is why we have social services.

Implying that all children are a result of choice and deliberate action.

Three years ago when the economy was not in the crapper certain places, such as supermarkets and macdonalds were always hiring. You did not take such a job because the state paid you not to.

Three years ago when I took my CV to stores and supermarkets and, yes, mcdonalds, none of the f*ckers ever got back to me. Places like that tend to prefer experie, see, and at the time I had no experience, hell I have very little experience now, in any kind of retail.

You were given money for three years on the understanding that you were looking for work. If you genuinely applied to every crappy worthless job going then I am an idiot, if you did not then I am right and I am certain it was the latter.

Every time I went to the job centre I had to give them a list of companies and jobs I had applied for, once I hit the new deal scheme after six months my advisor told me he would begin keeping the lists to check, fine I said.

After two months of that he asked me to stop bringing in the lists entirely, because the lists I were giving him were too long and he took up too much time contacting every company asking for confirmation and he never once found reason to doubt me, and that was fine by me because I was wasting a fortune on printer ink and my handwriting is terrible.

Normally CB I find that I agree with you on a great many things, on this occasion, however, you're by your own admission an idiot. I admit I'd go for jobs I wanted first, from the retail perspective I'd look at shops that sold electronics or video games, they were first choice, but clothing shops and supermarkets, place of little interest of me, were always on the list and were applied for. Honestly it wouldn't surprise me if all retail work was really the same, I'm not really one for fashion, clothes shopping has never interested me, but unpacking boxes and handling deliveries and searching through stock and serving people is probably the same whether you're handling clothes or computer games so in t end it didn't really matter, but that lack of experience still blighted me, as I said my work history has been a mixture of bad luck and temping, if it hadn't been for that bad luck then I would still have my first job at the DVLA, that was pretty sweet, hell of a score for a first job too, no experience, young, mouldable, I loved that job.

Listen CB, the benefits system of western countries are usually exploitable, and there will always be those that actively seek to exploit them or take advantage of them, but the people they help and the resources they provide help immeasurably when you have nothing and no other method of gaining anything. If you had suggested stricter regulation of the benefit system, I'd agree. If you suggested deeper checks on jobsearch activity, I'd agree, if you suggested proof of nationality and the ability to speak the native language and proof of credentials before any benefits of any kind are handed out, I'd agree, but your opinion just goes too far, in my opinion.
What fresh dickery is the internet up to today?
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2010 6:44:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/23/2010 3:06:57 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 6/23/2010 3:03:28 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
At 6/23/2010 5:09:53 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 6/22/2010 1:43:11 PM, feverish wrote:
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

And you call yourself liberal, because...?

Because I am a liberal.

Those aren't very liberal positions.

They are neither liberal nor iliberal positions.

Would you say they were conservative decisions?
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2010 6:47:59 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/23/2010 3:03:28 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
At 6/23/2010 5:09:53 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 6/22/2010 1:43:11 PM, feverish wrote:
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

And you call yourself liberal, because...?

Because I am a liberal.

Those aren't very liberal positions.

On the contrary.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2010 7:10:19 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/23/2010 6:44:56 PM, feverish wrote:
At 6/23/2010 3:06:57 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 6/23/2010 3:03:28 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
At 6/23/2010 5:09:53 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 6/22/2010 1:43:11 PM, feverish wrote:
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

And you call yourself liberal, because...?

Because I am a liberal.

Those aren't very liberal positions.

They are neither liberal nor iliberal positions.

Would you say they were conservative *decisions?

Blurgh conservative *positions, d'oh! Never mind, I'll get me coat.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2010 3:19:29 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/23/2010 6:12:53 PM, Veridas wrote:
People have had the option to refuse to work, and go on benefits.

I received no such option, I have been told repeatedly that if I ever refused a job my benefits would have been cut, that was that.

The option should never have been there, the country is now skint, people have to fend for themselves. If people chose to have children on benefits, that is there irresponsible choice, that is why we have social services.


Implying that all children are a result of choice and deliberate action.

Three years ago when the economy was not in the crapper certain places, such as supermarkets and macdonalds were always hiring. You did not take such a job because the state paid you not to.


Three years ago when I took my CV to stores and supermarkets and, yes, mcdonalds, none of the f*ckers ever got back to me. Places like that tend to prefer experie, see, and at the time I had no experience, hell I have very little experience now, in any kind of retail.

You were given money for three years on the understanding that you were looking for work. If you genuinely applied to every crappy worthless job going then I am an idiot, if you did not then I am right and I am certain it was the latter.

Every time I went to the job centre I had to give them a list of companies and jobs I had applied for, once I hit the new deal scheme after six months my advisor told me he would begin keeping the lists to check, fine I said.

After two months of that he asked me to stop bringing in the lists entirely, because the lists I were giving him were too long and he took up too much time contacting every company asking for confirmation and he never once found reason to doubt me, and that was fine by me because I was wasting a fortune on printer ink and my handwriting is terrible.

Normally CB I find that I agree with you on a great many things, on this occasion, however, you're by your own admission an idiot. I admit I'd go for jobs I wanted first, from the retail perspective I'd look at shops that sold electronics or video games, they were first choice, but clothing shops and supermarkets, place of little interest of me, were always on the list and were applied for. Honestly it wouldn't surprise me if all retail work was really the same, I'm not really one for fashion, clothes shopping has never interested me, but unpacking boxes and handling deliveries and searching through stock and serving people is probably the same whether you're handling clothes or computer games so in t end it didn't really matter, but that lack of experience still blighted me, as I said my work history has been a mixture of bad luck and temping, if it hadn't been for that bad luck then I would still have my first job at the DVLA, that was pretty sweet, hell of a score for a first job too, no experience, young, mouldable, I loved that job.

Listen CB, the benefits system of western countries are usually exploitable, and there will always be those that actively seek to exploit them or take advantage of them, but the people they help and the resources they provide help immeasurably when you have nothing and no other method of gaining anything. If you had suggested stricter regulation of the benefit system, I'd agree. If you suggested deeper checks on jobsearch activity, I'd agree, if you suggested proof of nationality and the ability to speak the native language and proof of credentials before any benefits of any kind are handed out, I'd agree, but your opinion just goes too far, in my opinion.

Fine, if you are telling me the truth I am a big fat idiot with bells on.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2010 3:21:30 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/23/2010 6:44:56 PM, feverish wrote:
At 6/23/2010 3:06:57 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 6/23/2010 3:03:28 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
At 6/23/2010 5:09:53 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 6/22/2010 1:43:11 PM, feverish wrote:
At 6/22/2010 9:10:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
So what would have been your budget then?

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

And you call yourself liberal, because...?

Because I am a liberal.

Those aren't very liberal positions.

They are neither liberal nor iliberal positions.

Would you say they were conservative decisions?

Child benefits can be supported or opposed by conservatives, conservatives do want to cut benefits... but then it was never the intention of liberals for people to be permanently on welfare, privatisation of the state schools would be supported by some conservatives and some liberals.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2010 4:58:26 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/24/2010 3:21:30 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:

I personally would have abolished all child benefits, cut unemployment benefits for those claiming for six months or longer and sold off the state schools.

Child benefits can be supported or opposed by conservatives, conservatives do want to cut benefits... but then it was never the intention of liberals for people to be permanently on welfare, privatisation of the state schools would be supported by some conservatives and some liberals.

I don't have much of an opinion on the unemployment benefit issue and depending on the circumstances would probably be inclined to agree with you, it's the other two that get me.

Abolishing child benefit would be taking food straight out of the mouths of hungry kids.

Privatising the schools is just going to further the gulf between rich and poor in terms of opportunities.

What have you got against poor children?

I can't imagine anyone left of the Conservative party in England, or even most Tories themselves supporting such cuts. That is why I am questioning your self-applied liberal status.