Cyclone Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 How do quantify "plenty" then? Are you just guessing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxmaximus Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 How do quantify "plenty" then? Are you just guessing? A large or sufficient amount or quantity; more than enough. No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 But you've no idea what the number is, so how large is it, in what way is it sufficient, what are you actually basing your opinion on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheff1johnny Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 to add insult to injury MP's want a 32 percent rise, imagine if everyone got that, life'd be brilliant. But no we get a 1 percent rise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxmaximus Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 to add insult to injury MP's want a 32 percent rise, imagine if everyone got that, life'd be brilliant. But no we get a 1 percent rise Not really, everything would just go up in price and no one would be better off, the rich would still be rich and poor would still be poor when compared to the rich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheff1johnny Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 Not really, everything would just go up in price and no one would be better off, the rich would still be rich and poor would still be poor when compared to the rich. But instead the divide ever widens. Rich get even richer, and poor are made to pay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 But instead the divide ever widens. Rich get even richer, and poor are made to pay Everyone is made to pay through taxation - the richer you are the more income tax you pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxmaximus Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 But instead the divide ever widens. Rich get even richer, and poor are made to pay When the wealth of both rich and poor increases the gap will inevitably widen. So if the wealth of the rich increases by 10% and the poor increases by 100% you will probably find the gap as still widened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 Perhaps employers are better qualified to answer that than me. I only think that anyone who seems to think that all those people who once worked, now don't want to work has challenging levels of intelligence. Don't believe the nonsense the govt publish! No, I choose to believe my eyes when I was made redundant and had to sign on for a short period. There was a huge number of knuckle dragging chavs queuing up for their byfortnightly signing on session. I never saw any of them looking at the job points and if I was an employer, I wouldn't employ a single one of them. I chatted to the staff about how things changed over the recession and how the influx of people who want to work had changed his job. So, if I had seen it with my own eyes and the people working in the Job Centre was of the same opinion. I think its pretty close to the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 But you've no idea what the number is, so how large is it, in what way is it sufficient, what are you actually basing your opinion on? Quite a few. Sorry to send you to the daily mail but it's first I found. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2195174/Britain-340-000-households-EVER-job.html I don't know the percentage of them that are in the overall unemployment figures but in these times of austerity why are we wasting money on people who don't want to work ? If they were unemployed 10 years ago, chances they'll be unemployed in another 10. Spend money on those who have been unemployed for more than 6 months but less than 2 years where their skills are still relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.