General Election June 8th

[pirate]

Well I think people pushing that view are unthinking thick cunts.

and you are entitled to that view sir, and you articulate it well sir
you dont articulate why we are unthinking thick cunts and thats the bit I am interested in.

 

[pirate]

No it's a way of saying some are.

doesnt "plenty" that context imply majority?

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

doesnt "plenty" that context imply majority?

If I meant majority I would have said it. Plenty means a lot. Or are you saying everyone on the dole and benefits are actually hard working motivated people who just can't a job because there aren't any around. They all worked hard at school but the fuckin Tories took all the jobs from them and they have no future?

It's all the Tories fault, not that persons?

 

[SWP's back]

and you are entitled to that view sir, and you articulate it well sir
you dont articulate why we are unthinking thick cunts and thats the bit I am interested in.

Because you think that people voting Tory are selfish.

You don't have the political empathy to see another view point. You see Tory = Selfish.

You don't see that there are plenty of reasons for people to vote a certain way. They may wish keep atleast half their income and think the rates they pay are already too high. They may wish to pass on their hard earned assets to their kids. They may wish to exit an increasingly federalised Europe. They may dislike the politics of envy (maximum wage threshold etc). They may believe in sustaining a working nuclear deterrent. They may believe that a strong FS sector is helpful to the UK and increasing if introducing new taxes on it will harm us. They may wish for a government that improves the economy (which is good for everyone) rather than a party (Labour) which has left the economy in a worst state than the one it inherited every single time they came to power. They may simply dislike the class politics and comments such as "Id burn in hell for voting Tory so I'll vote Labour".

I'm eating my lunch so typing with hand but the point is that there are a large variety of reasons people may vote one way or another.

I'd understand your view if the Tories were looking to cut tax on high earners to 25% or end investment into education or the NHS but that's not the truth is it.

 

[SWP's back]

doesnt "plenty" that context imply majority?

I wouldn't say so no. Plenty of teams could challenge for the league next season.

 

[SWP's back]

I've not heard of the Other Party.

He misspelled it.

Should be "Otter Party", the single issue cunts only care about compulsory dams every 500 yards on all major water ways. Not entirely sure why Ric added them.

 

[law74]

Fine, but the funding of the poor is by others. There is a growing trend in the uk that the state needs to sort out people's problems, be it housing money etc. The " I have not got a big enough house or enough benefits to live nicely" is some how the governments responsibility. It's not. Corbyn represents these people not people who work hard, whatever their salary.

Those who have real issues and problems should be supported, but unfortunately there are plenty of people who just want the government to give them cash and contribute the fuck all to society.

By the government giving them cash do you mean companies who pay their staff so little we, the taxpayer, have to top it up, while the CEO's bonus and shareholders dividends increase? The companies that the government give free labour to?
The companies that get hugely lucrative government contracts but are unwilling to contribute back into the society they are quite happy to milk?
Cause these are the people that are afraid of Corbyn and socially just politics.

 

[pee dubya]

He misspelled it.

Should be "Otter Party", the single issue cunts only care about compulsory dams every 500 yards on all major water ways. Not entirely sure why Ric added them.

That's alright then, was worried only I could see them.

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

By the government giving them cash do you mean companies who pay their staff so little we, the taxpayer, have to top it up, while the CEO's bonus and shareholders dividends increase? The companies that the government give free labour to?
The companies that get hugely lucrative government contracts but are unwilling to contribute back into the society they are quite happy to milk?
Cause these are the people that are afraid of Corbyn and socially just politics.

If the CEO gets a bigger bonus we get half of it in tax? Good for him and us.

The bit about the govt giving free labour you have lost me.

 

[SWP's back]

If the CEO gets a bigger bonus we get half of it in tax? Good for him and us.

The bit about the govt giving free labour you have lost me.

That's a good point. A CEO on £250,000 getting a bonus of £1m means £450,000 in tax.

If that £1m went to 100 people earning £35,000 then the tax take is £200,000.

 

[Bill]

not plenty just me.

Based upon how the Tory party rhetoric labels those on welfare lazy and feckless and their actions when in power (at any point in my 47 years on this earth) appear to support this view by punishing those who claim welfare, limiting their education and access to healthcare.
I happen to believe if you keep voting for a party that does this it makes you a selfish ****.
I could and probably should have moderated my language and and left out the C bomb, but selfish is what Tory supporters appear to be.

here's the deal.

either you moderate your language or I will.

deal?

 

[Ban-jani]

If I meant majority I would have said it. Plenty means a lot. Or are you saying everyone on the dole and benefits are actually hard working motivated people who just can't a job because there aren't any around. They all worked hard at school but the fuckin Tories took all the jobs from them and they have no future?

It's all the Tories fault, not that persons?

I work in recruitment and the market is ridiculous.

There are more jobs than people in a lot of industries and if you cannot get a job in today's climate, then you've really fucked up.

 

[Ban-jani]

here's the deal.

either you moderate your language or I will.

deal?

You tell him Bill.

"Selfish c****" for wanting to be given opportunity haha.

 

[Magicpole]

Be a man in a million. Vote Conservative in Scotland at the election!

I would rather not, if you don't mind. It would cause me such anguish. :)

 

[Gelsons Dad]

Well some of the problems were caused by the state and therefore really should be sorted by the state.
For example housing.
We have a shortage and rental costs are too high.
Caused in a large part by the Government decision in the 1980's to sell off council houses and not replace them. Successive governments have failed to address the issue. Government policy caused the issue, therefore the surely we should look to the government to fund a solution.

and your last bit reinforces what I have been saying about the basis of the debate and the Tories view of those who claim welfare.
"Those who have real issues and problems should be supported, but unfortunately there are plenty of people who just want the government to give them cash and contribute the fuck all to society."
Isnt that just another way of saying the majority of those on welfare are lazy and feckless?

Blaming the housing shortage on the 80's government is about as valid as blaming it on the Blitz.

Correct me if I'm wrong but between then and now we had the longest continuous serving Labour government. What the fuck were they doing about housing? Oh yeah, they were openly encouraging mass immigration of untrained labour from all corners of the EU/Globe. Enticing them with huge welfare pots in order to increase their own political support.

 

[pirate]

If I meant majority I would have said it. Plenty means a lot. Or are you saying everyone on the dole and benefits are actually hard working motivated people who just can't a job because there aren't any around. They all worked hard at school but the fuckin Tories took all the jobs from them and they have no future?

It's all the Tories fault, not that persons?

So you mean a lot, Ok whats a lot? do you mean 10% or 40% or something else.

I think that those that play the system are a very small minority, less than 5% if I have to put a figure on it.
I do think that the vast majority would work if the jobs were available. The evidence for this is easy to come by. The vast majority of those claiming welfare are people with jobs 4.8 million people claiming tax credits in 2015-16 (last year figures were available) because they are low paid and 5.0 million people claiming other benefits because of low pay (they are probably the same people). That alone counts for nearly 26% of the welfare budget. Whereas unemployment benefits were claimed by 705,000 and accounted for 1.1% of the welfare budget.
Just for clarity the majority of the rest goes to the disabled (19%), pensions (46%) and family benefits not based on income (6%) and the total welfare budget is 211 billion

Yes I think the movement of the global economy and how the impact of that has been managed by successive governments of three parties have taken away the jobs and more importantly secure jobs.
I think the experience of those claiming welfare benefits (about 6 million people) and how they are portrayed by especially Tory politicians leads them to believe they have a very limited future.

 

[law74]

If the CEO gets a bigger bonus we get half of it in tax? Good for him and us.

The bit about the govt giving free labour you have lost me.

Workfare, my next door neighbours daughter could only get a 4 hour a week contract in a retail shop about a year ago, so was still claiming job seekersey allowance, because she was on JSA she was sent on "workfare" and placed in the shop she had her 4 hours per week contract.
Add the hours she was working between her contracted (paid) hours and her workfare (unpaid) hours & dividing it into her total weekly income and she was getting about £2.20 per hour.
Can you justify this?

That's a good point. A CEO on £250,000 getting a bonus of £1m means £450,000 in tax.

If that £1m went to 100 people earning £35,000 then the tax take is £200,000.

Though the 100 people getting the £35,000 per annum will be spending most of that in the local economy, paying VAT on their purchases, keeping shops and suppliers open and employing staff and keeping the chain moving, whereas the CEO would be more likely to have it hidden in an offshore account, or buying a bigger villa abroad, with little if any further gain to the regional economy (& that's before getting into the discussion of is it better to help one person massively or many people moderately).

 

[SWP's back]

the CEO would be more likely to have it hidden in an offshore account

Not likely to save him much tax that plus the offshore savings account rates are shite. I'm barely getting 0.4%.

If he'd had that in a UK account getting 1% and then paying tax on the income he'd have been better off.

As for the "helping one person or many", capitalism isn't about helping anyone with a free ride. There's a reason conference players get £200 a week and Yaya earns that in an hour.

Regarding where the money is spent. That's a macroeconomic argument and has some merit but when the economy is stable and growing then it's of less use. We were being fairly specific regarding taxes on income.

 

[Gelsons Dad]

Workfare, my next door neighbours daughter could only get a 4 hour a week contract in a retail shop about a year ago, so was still claiming job seekersey allowance, because she was on JSA she was sent on "workfare" and placed in the shop she had her 4 hours per week contract.
Add the hours she was working between her contracted (paid) hours and her workfare (unpaid) hours & dividing it into her total weekly income and she was getting about £2.20 per hour.
Can you justify this?



Though the 100 people getting the £35,000 per annum will be spending most of that in the local economy, paying VAT on their purchases, keeping shops and suppliers open and employing staff and keeping the chain moving, whereas the CEO would be more likely to have it hidden in an offshore account, or buying a bigger villa abroad, with little if any further gain to the regional economy (& that's before getting into the discussion of is it better to help one person massively or many people moderately).

How many lower paid workers send their expendable income overseas back home to their family?

 

[Ancient Citizen]

I work in recruitment and the market is ridiculous.

There are more jobs than people in a lot of industries and if you cannot get a job in today's climate, then you've really fucked up.

And what is the reason the market is ridiculous, ie; jobs galore? Why has the pound risen on the day an election
was called, is it the prospect of a Labour landslide? Why have millions of welfare claimants now started work, could it
be that the measures taken have made them do so? Why do the polls suggest a massive Tory win, seeing as everyone knows that
the Conservatives are horrible uncaring twats, and by association, so are everyone who votes for them?
It's a puzzle, for sure.