Jump to content

Should MP'S be made to live on benefits or min wage for a month.


Recommended Posts

Have you considered the kind of MP that would create? Rich trustafarians, those with a private income. In other words MP's less representative than we have at present.

 

Isnt that what we already have? Precisely WHO do the MPs truely represent apart from the rich?

 

---------- Post added 13-08-2013 at 15:36 ----------

 

So now MPs wages should be means tested

 

Now THERES an idea, after all most benefits are and the MPs salary is DEF a benefit!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isnt that what we already have? Precisely WHO do the MPs truely represent apart from the rich?

 

---------- Post added 13-08-2013 at 15:36 ----------

 

 

Now THERES an idea, after all most benefits are and the MPs salary is DEF a benefit!!

 

Well it's getting that way but its not the full picture just yet. The recent Labour scandal was a backlash against old Labour types trying to reverse the trend of naive posho's running everything. There are still good people with life experience on the Labour side. Even the Tory front bench contains an ex miner, albeit a dimwitted scab.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If MPs had to live on benefits and the minimum wage for a set period of time maybe those already on the minimum wage and benefits should have to do the work of an MP, taking responsibility and being answerable for their decisions.

Maybe they would also be willing to try and sort out the problems of the constituents and listen to their problems as an MP does.

Maybe then we would all have a better understanding of different peoples lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its good that you've confirmed that you have nothing to contribute and are just some rabid dog on here to spout political prejudice and not seriously discuss the point. We can now get on without you and just dismiss your words as mindless politically motivated clap trap.

 

Even Mecky makes more sensible posts than you. :hihi:

 

It is very relevant and factual, if you don't like to question anything that cuts against your conformation bias then it is you who have taken a politicly motivated view not me, just another blinkered flag waving Tory.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/apr/01/iain-duncan-smith-live-benefits

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/housing-cuts-ids-gets-mansion-258616

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/may/30/hugh-muir-diary-iain-duncan-smith

 

http://tompride.wordpress.com/2013/04/06/iain-duncan-smith-bullied-aide-to-tears-over-his-expenses-claims-for-underwear/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree the OPs assertion that MPs should understand what it's like to struggle as many people do in this country is nothing to do with British people hating success. I think it's about wanting to have MPs whose feet are on the ground and who don't take money for granted.

Compared to Italy, Spain and some other countries, our politics is comparatively clean.

The fact that you'd be too outspoken would mean more people would vote for you surely :confused:

 

One thing i have learnt about Sheffield from this forum is that its citizens fear change.

 

They like things the way they've always been (the Yorkshire way) and miss the days when people worked 16 hrs down a mine shaft.

 

Why do you think there is an overwhelming vote for labour in this city? The conservatives could end the recession tomorrow and it wouldnt mean a thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Now THERES an idea, after all most benefits are and the MPs salary is DEF a benefit!!

 

So the candidates could declare their wealth and we could vote for the richest one as that would mean they worked for now't.

 

---------- Post added 13-08-2013 at 16:25 ----------

 

 

 

I don't have time to read all your irrelevant garbage that you think you have found to support your personal prejudices . I'll leave you to trawl your sewer to to try to justify your stance and the planets oxygen that your existence is wasting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have time to read all your irrelevant garbage that you think you have found to support your personal prejudices . I'll leave you to trawl your sewer to to try to justify your stance and the planets oxygen that your existence is wasting.

 

Oh dear, you mean you don't have the ability to form an opinion based on facts that don't support your blind faith and prefer to insult anyone who puts forward facts that clearly show something that you don't want to see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh dear, you mean you don't have the ability to form an opinion based on facts that don't support your blind faith and prefer to insult anyone who puts forward facts that clearly show something that you don't want to see.

 

I wasn't insulting you. You do that well enough for yourself. I'm struggling with your logic of pointing out that ministerial office comes with a house. That's why the Prime Minister lives in Downing Street and the Chancellor lives next door. Did you not notice that the last Labour government had exactly the same perks?

 

Perhaps if you took an interest in politics beyond the opinions on your council estate it would broaden your outlook on life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If MPs had to live on benefits and the minimum wage for a set period of time maybe those already on the minimum wage and benefits should have to do the work of an MP, taking responsibility and being answerable for their decisions.

Maybe they would also be willing to try and sort out the problems of the constituents and listen to their problems as an MP does.

Maybe then we would all have a better understanding of different peoples lives.

 

I wish! When will Gordon Brown, for example, 'take responsibility' for what he did?

 

If MPS were held responsible for their actions/inactions, you would need a few more prisons, because many of them would go down for a very long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You forgot this one..

 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/341801/Wealthy-Tony-Blair-still-costing-us-435k-a-year

 

TONY Blair is costing taxpayers £435,000 a year despite a personal fortune estimated at £30million, it emerged yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.