The poor like being underpaid it seems

[Anna B]

Your views are that of a sick man. Seek help.

 

i really don't understand your response. Can you explain?

[tinfoilhat]

i really don't understand your response. Can you explain?

 

I don't like his views or how he presents them. I don't like the way he thinks he knows it all and doesn't, the spiteful oh so funny and ironic digs at the unemployed or elderly, it takes a sick mind to come up with it. And he is mostly wrong too , I've yet to find a post slating someone who is on low pay, if you can find one show me. He isn't well.

 

We've had our crossed words in the past Anna but I've always felt whilst we've had differing views there has been, id like to think, mutual respect. Knocking about with that nutcase does your cause no good at all.

[Southsheff]

The underpaid and getting benefits, thus according to many on this site are scroungers.

 

They are too stupid, as in underskilled, poorly educated to better themselves, thus a burden to society, like all scroungers, brought it all on themselves and are solely to blame...maybe.

 

Just wait till the Eastern Europeans arrive and drive down wages even more. In the USA they have cut benefits by 25% so they have to starve for a few days every month, thus allowing their immune system to be vulnerable to disease and possibly helping the poor into an early grave. In the USA it is being suggested that the poor should be prevented from breeding, as they are seen as a plague.

 

Who is suggesting they should be prevented from breeding? A few days without food wouldn't go amiss for the majority of Americans or Brits. That fast diet actually works. Also can't imagine gluttony doing much for your immune system.

If you really wanted the poor to die sooner and thus reduce the burden on the state what you need to do is give them more money each month so they can buy even more junk food, fags and booze.

[avidcameron]

I don't like his views or how he presents them. I don't like the way he thinks he knows it all and doesn't, the spiteful oh so funny and ironic digs at the unemployed or elderly, it takes a sick mind to come up with it. And he is mostly wrong too , I've yet to find a post slating someone who is on low pay, if you can find one show me. He isn't well.

 

We've had our crossed words in the past Anna but I've always felt whilst we've had differing views there has been, id like to think, mutual respect. Knocking about with that nutcase does your cause no good at all.

 

 

 

You should not take the comments at face value,as he is exercising irony albeit clumsily.He was saying that many SF people slate benefits claimants(fact) and therefore those whose wages need supplementation9from benefits) should therefore be criticised also.

[erebus]

I don't like his views or how he presents them. I don't like the way he thinks he knows it all and doesn't, the spiteful oh so funny and ironic digs at the unemployed or elderly, it takes a sick mind to come up with it. And he is mostly wrong too , I've yet to find a post slating someone who is on low pay, if you can find one show me. He isn't well.

 

 

He think he knows it all??????? A bit of projection there me-finks! The intimidated ones, them that know little and pretend to know but in reality just cannot be assed to find out tend to develop an inferiority complex, which of course has to be countered by appearing tough and strong, in frot of others.

 

I present reality not as choc-box thing, as we live in a climate of greed, self gratification, where everyone is out for themselves, and sod the people down the street, the old who refuse to admit they are desperate, the poor who try and keep up appearances while the boat slowly sinks. People judge others by superficial appearances, do not see, and refuse to see the crap being handed out to those that cannot defend themselves that well. This climate breeds sadistic actions, and heartlessness, and if I have to ram this message down people's throats till they choke enough to realise what is going on I will.

 

An attitude portrayed through an example as this...guess how many will die of cold this winter is a two edged sword. It makes a sick point which is the point. and it makes some realise that fairness has almost ebbed out of the British culture. I cannot fight tyranny alone, and don't give me the bo****ks to stand for parliament, which is all sewn up by the boys with the money, and anyway our democracy is a sham, with the square mile squarely in charge of all government policy. So no change there, but now its obvious to them that look hard and long enough.

 

People should be outraged by how we are treated, and what lies are continuously told to us, to give the poor and struggling HOPE. There is no hope, just ask business, there is no profit in it. So we live in an ever increasing desert for millions of hopelessness, with 5 million people employed and not getting a living wage, never mind them on pensions and benefits, and the millions them with poorly paid jobs hovering above the 5 million.

 

People should be on the streets, complaining, despite politicians never listen, till they want the plebs cross, with bags of empty promises, people desperately grasp. But they sit devouring the game shows and celebrity candy floss, as everything is sold off to influential institutions, when if you cannot pay, one does NOT deserve to be a part of society, and are better off dead????? This is where we are heading, through the tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths where for a significant minority is a race to the bottom.

[Resident]

Making the "Living wage" the legal minimum will cause one or both of two problems:

 

1. Employer's wage costs will rise so they'll lay some staff off, leading to more people on benefits

 

2. The company raises it's product prices to cover the extra wage costs which knocks on throughout the economy meaning that the now the cost of "living" is higher than the "living wage".

[avidcameron]

Making the "Living wage" the legal minimum will cause one or both of two problems:

 

1. Employer's wage costs will rise so they'll lay some staff off, leading to more people on benefits

 

2. The company raises it's product prices to cover the extra wage costs which knocks on throughout the economy meaning that the now the cost of "living" is higher than the "living wage".

 

Or the employer accepts lower margins OR becomes more efficient in labour utilisation and raises productivity.

[Resident]

Or the employer accepts lower margins OR becomes more efficient in labour utilisation and raises productivity.

 

And pigs will fly.

[avidcameron]

And pigs will fly.

 

no need to do one:)

[slugger]

Businesses who employ people at the minimum wage aren't doing anybody any favours, excepting themselves and their own pockets !

 

At the end of the day its the taxpayer that foots the bill by having to subsidise these low wages with credits so the unfortunate low paid can make ends meet without a proper living wage.

 

The government determine the low paid peoples standard of living by dictating the amount of subsidies they pay to them.

 

Just way of controlling the low paid masses.

 

legalised exploitation, nothing more !