ECCOnoob Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 I don't deny there is a problem but I question the scale of it. You can't just pluck a figure out of the air based on your own experience. Let's start with the number of economically inactive people of working age - it's about 1 in 5 of people of working age. If you'd said 20% instead of 50% it wouldn't be so easy to disagree with you. Incidentally, did you know there are only about 22-25 million full-time jobs in the economy? For a population of 62 million don't you think that seems low? But out of that 62 million population how many are actually able to work full time. How many of that figure are are children, pensioners, immigrants with non working status, people with disabilities unable to work. Lets look at some other figures. There are 2.5 million full time university students alone add on all the part time students, college and school students etc. Maybe that job figure is not so low after all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 I'm going to guess that Iain Duncan Smith would still be able to raise his 4 children properly without having child benefit for all of them. payed for by benefits coming from the taxpayer what planet you living on ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 There is a report on teletext today that IDS (the work & pensions sec) is considering capping child benefit after 2 children. If that did happen, then it would be the poorest affected most again. The man is a fool.What will happen if a woman has twins after the first child?Only one will receive benefit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happ Hazzard Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 payed for by benefits coming from the taxpayer what planet you living on ? I would think that IDS more than pays his fair share in tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 I would think that IDS more than pays his fair share in tax. yes thats what they they tell you :hihi: (muppet) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 I'm going to guess that Iain Duncan Smith would still be able to raise his 4 children properly without having child benefit for all of them. He is wealthy therefore he is exempt from criticism....bow and scrape to your Tory master, there's a good slave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.