• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Foreign benefit scroungers!"

Collapse

  • lilelvis2000
    replied
    Who cares? The vast majority of benefits is paid to pensioner who have seen their takings massively increased over the past couple of years. And the kicker is..most don't need it!

    'Course the lot say they "paid their fair share". What a load. Eating the young is what is feeding them.

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by GlenW View Post
    You associate with people on benefits? How very enlightened of you.
    Only upper-middle class benefits claimants of course; recent graduates often end up on benefits and even professional white-collar types get laid off

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    these are quite interesting

    Average duration of unemployment

    you will note there is a hardcore of > 1 year.

    Those need sorting.

    I suppose the upshot of 'Benefit Street' is that at least two people got off long term unemployed.

    Leave a comment:


  • NickyBoy
    replied
    Originally posted by petergriffin View Post
    But benefits and pensions CAN be dropped. It's actually a virtuous cycle: you save money by not spending it on the poor, then the poor die and you save money on pensions.
    Nope. The majority of welfare costs are spent on people who are on it temporarily.


    You need a moderate sized pool of short/moderate term unemployed for a healthy economy. Its the bubbly froth at the sharp end of economic creative destruction and inflation control (no unemployed = no available employees to support new growth = rampant wage increases = rampant inflation). That money the real contractors have tucked away would need to be making double-digit returns each year to stop it being worthless.

    Not to mention dead people don't go back to work and start paying taxes/ buying goods and services when they find another job.


    Then, of course, you have to face the social/justice/order problem.

    6 million unemployed with no income and hungry children, with nothing to loose.... I hope your home is well fortified.
    Last edited by NickyBoy; 19 January 2015, 17:24.

    Leave a comment:


  • petergriffin
    replied
    Originally posted by DodgyAgent View Post
    There are plenty of jobs for everyone.
    Rubbish! The concept of "job" has died. I want to think that the genuine contractors on this board will agree.

    Job creation in this country was fuelled in the 90s, early 2000's, by public spending.

    Leave a comment:


  • DodgyAgent
    replied
    Originally posted by petergriffin View Post
    What fruit do you pick now in January? Where? How do you make money from it? I want a piece of the cake too.

    Feck contracting, picking fruit is the new Forex!
    There are plenty of jobs for everyone. There is no excuse for anyone to not work unless they are terminally ill.

    Leave a comment:


  • petergriffin
    replied
    Originally posted by NickyBoy View Post
    Welfare costs about 60 billion a year.

    The government collects over 600 billion in tax each year.

    Welfare abuse is estimated to cost the state a few million a year and 'extreme' cases of welfare use (single moms with 10 kids etc etc) cost another few million a year (note: million. Not billion). As such, most of that 60 billion is basic legitimate, efficient use of welfare money that can't be dropped.

    So if people want to assume their taxes are spent on it and that 'printy printy' covers other things that CAN be dropped, that's a legitimate assumption to make
    But benefits and pensions CAN be dropped. It's actually a virtuous cycle: you save money by not spending it on the poor, then the poor die and you save money on pensions.

    Leave a comment:


  • DodgyAgent
    replied
    Originally posted by TykeMerc View Post
    Harsh, but at the same time, true

    Maybe we should encourage more of our benefits generational types to bog off abroad and claim in the lands of the EU taxpayer, possibly Scooter will appreciate funding them in his beloved land of the Boxhead.
    You have a point. It is much cheaper to live in Romania than here. we house their workers who want to work in the council houses and benefits accommodation of those who do want to work here. We put the benefits recipients out to Romania where the cost of keeping them would be so much less.

    Leave a comment:


  • petergriffin
    replied
    Originally posted by DodgyAgent View Post
    Yep - They can go and pick fruit. If they are physically incapable they can go out and sell it.
    You make your own luck
    What fruit do you pick now in January? Where? How do you make money from it? I want a piece of the cake too.

    Feck contracting, picking fruit is the new Forex!

    Leave a comment:


  • NickyBoy
    replied
    Originally posted by petergriffin View Post
    Public spending doesn't come from taxes anymore and it hasn't come for many years. It comes from printy-printy. Otherwise we would be in a much better state than today.

    The "my taxes are spent on..." argument is pointless.
    Welfare costs about 100 billion a year.

    The government collects over 600 billion in tax each year.

    Welfare abuse is estimated to cost the state a few million a year and 'extreme' cases of welfare use (single moms with 10 kids etc etc) cost another few million a year (note: million. Not billion). As such most of that 100 billion is basic legitimate use of welfare money that can't be dropped or skimmed by efficiency drives.

    So if people want to assume their taxes are spent on it and that 'printy printy' covers other things that CAN be dropped, that's a legitimate assumption to make

    FYI costs are here (it breaks down central and local costs into 2 different columns) http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/ye...c1n_40#ukgs302

    It also makes it very obvious how stupid people look when they piss and moan about welfare tourism. 60 thousand foreigners claiming welfare makes sod all difference to the budget of a country of 60 million people.
    Last edited by NickyBoy; 19 January 2015, 16:58.

    Leave a comment:


  • DodgyAgent
    replied
    Originally posted by scooterscot View Post
    On people that are down on their luck when times are tough?
    Yep - They can go and pick fruit. If they are physically incapable they can go out and sell it.
    You make your own luck

    Leave a comment:


  • petergriffin
    replied
    Originally posted by GlenW View Post
    I haven't got a clue what this means.
    I had no doubt.

    Leave a comment:


  • GlenW
    replied
    Originally posted by petergriffin View Post
    Public spending doesn't come from taxes anymore and it hasn't come for many years. It comes from printy-printy. Otherwise we would be in a much better state than today.

    The "my taxes are spent on..." argument is pointless.
    I haven't got a clue what this means.

    Leave a comment:


  • petergriffin
    replied
    Public spending doesn't come from taxes anymore and it hasn't come for many years. It comes from printy-printy. Otherwise we would be in a much better state than today.

    The "my taxes are spent on..." argument is pointless.

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post
    We got one of those "where your tax got spent" pie charts for my wife. I think the amount her tax paid towards benefits was very close to what one of our young friends, on benefits, stood to claim that year. It made it feel better that we were "paying to look after our friend"
    when you think your wife is probably paying more tax than most don't you find that a bit scary?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X