Mecky Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 hmm. I'm not anyone, just airing my own opinion, same as you. No offence intended my dear. I do believe now that only fools live beyond their means... I should know, got in trouble big time when I was younger, armani, versace, all good friends that lived in my wardrobe... at the expense of my credit card. Point is, nothing in life worth having comes easy. Work hard and that's the way forward now, for me personally There are people working hard at the bottom but it doesn't get them anywhere and that's the problem. There are people who are working hard and can only just afford the rent for bottom-line property and not much else, they still have to scrounge food off relatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supertramp Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Way, you're just pathetic aren't you? And Calm down dear, you'll end up getting your knickers in a twist. I'm commando today. Anyway so you believe people should be able to choose to sponge off the state because their aspirations are higher than those provided by a minimum wage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supertramp Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 There are people working hard at the bottom but it doesn't get them anywhere and that's the problem. There are people who are working hard and can only just afford the rent for bottom-line property and not much else, they still have to scrounge food off relatives. I don't think anybody begrudges the hard workers at the bottom of the ladder receiving government help, it's the people who choose to sit on their arse and expect the taxpayer to pay for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Peter Oborne summed up Labours approach and legacy on this issue perfectly: "Gordon Brown developed a social security system that entrenched dependency and trapped the unemployed in poverty. Certainly he gave them more money – the benefits to which a single mother is entitled rose by 85 per cent under New Labour. But he made one crucial mistake as he set out to create a Labour client state. He did not give people hope or self-respect. Indeed, as Iain Duncan Smith, the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, is starting to discover, Brown made it economically irrational for many people to seek work, thus turning unemployment into a way of life. I would guess that many of the young men and women drawn into last week’s frenzy come from families where there have been no jobs for generations" Funny that because Thatcher did the same in the 1980s, then put thousands on incapacity benefits so they did nt sign on.I am surprised that she did not co-opt GB into her cabinet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freudstheory Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 There are people working hard at the bottom but it doesn't get them anywhere and that's the problem. There are people who are working hard and can only just afford the rent for bottom-line property and not much else, they still have to scrounge food off relatives. True Mecky, and I am still one of those! I cannot afford to rent my own place, I am struggling financially as I have student debts from when I was at Uni'. But working hard as opposed to claiming benefits (which I could do), is long term, going to get me further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Why is it ranting and raving, why should people get more for sitting at home then for working? And I've never read the Mail. That's just Rich's standard response to anything they disagree with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titanic99 Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 The thing I don't understand about this is why employers aren't forced to pay a decent living wage to help get the benefit bill down. It seems the decent employers are subsidising those not so decemt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hardie Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Foregn? Are you Adolf Hitler by any chance? When you say foregn, what do you mean? Who is foregn? An Equadorian who can't speak a word of English is foreign my friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Well, at least they have the good sense not to create them in the tax income-draining public sector, like Labour did After all, if they did, no doubt the left would then accuse them of buying themselves an electorate...you know, like Labour did and the tories arnt asking the boe to print more money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 The thing I don't understand about this is why employers aren't forced to pay a decent living wage to help get the benefit bill down. It seems the decent employers are subsidising those not so decemt. Would you describe minimum wage as less than decent? Do you think jobs that only pay minimum wage should be paid more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.