Cyclone Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 They can't invent money, so any spending has to be cut from other areas, unless you're suggesting that an increase in taxation would be a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms Macbeth Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 It is but they don't deserve much credit. They haven't put any more money into the problem, just diverted funds from another department. I heard that it will be funded by cuts to tax credits...don't know if this is true though.. So when youth unemployment started going through the roof a few years ago, why was this money not 'diverted' then? This isn't a problem that has arisen over a few weeks, or even months. I'm not a follower of any political party, but even I would have thought the 'Labour' Party's aim would be to help people get paid work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 , but even I would have thought the 'Labour' Party's aim would be to help people get paid work? Putting my cynical hat on here..why would it be? Surely a body of people reliant on benefits would be a good source of votes for Labour? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fruitisbad Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 If there was no one claiming dole how would you guys get your daily superiority fix? That alone is surely worth the tiny fraction of your taxes that fund benfits? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 If there was no one claiming dole how would you guys get your daily superiority fix? That alone is surely worth the tiny fraction of your taxes that fund benfits? Is that addressed to anyone in particular? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 They can't invent money, so any spending has to be cut from other areas, unless you're suggesting that an increase in taxation would be a good idea. Perhaps its not diverted from the right areas then...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 Isn't it? It's your comment that it was diverted from other areas. Do you actually know where it's come from? Or you were going to criticise anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 Isn't it? It's your comment that it was diverted from other areas. Do you actually know where it's come from? Or you were going to criticise anyway? Allegedly, from tax credits..Anyway, that's not the point I was making, the funding.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tradescanthia Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 'Retiring' at an earlier age than 65 would compromise your private pension, so how could it be considered acceptable for the government to force you to do it to save themselves money? There's no moral way to force someone not to work no matter what their age, at best it's age discrimination in the name of saving money isn't it. I have already drawn 2 pensions, I got a bit better deal out of the pension companies by the reason of being 'of impaired life'. The private companies allow for reduction of life expectancy so why not HM Govt ???? I did this so as to be able to have time to enjoy my hobbies, I cut my working hours by half and the pensions provide my 'pocket money' for holidays and camera equipment etc. There was no 'forcing' involved, it was my choice. I have the funds so why not enjoy it. You cant take it with you............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 I have already drawn 2 pensions, I got a bit better deal out of the pension companies by the reason of being 'of impaired life'. The private companies allow for reduction of life expectancy so why not HM Govt ???? I did this so as to be able to have time to enjoy my hobbies, I cut my working hours by half and the pensions provide my 'pocket money' for holidays and camera equipment etc. There was no 'forcing' involved, it was my choice. I have the funds so why not enjoy it. You cant take it with you............. So your situation is hardly simple or common... Let me retire early You pretty much are retired by the sound of it, so what were you really saying? "Let me claim my statement pension early"? As a way of saving the government money... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.