Benefit Claimants Forced To Contribute To Their Council Tax

[TGR]

Like I said without seeing the figures there must be some significant financial benefits for the council. How can you be frittering something a way if it brings in so much business. to test my theory out try and book your self a room in Manchester for that weekend. I took the Mrs to the Hilton on our 2nd aniversary (she was pregnant on our first).

I can tell you were only lucky to get cancellation when I'd being trying for 6 months to get in. You can bet you bottom dollar that every hotel in Manchester is exactly the same.

A good point and well made.
However, it is hardly an 'essential service' is it?
Leisure, communal, recreation - yes.
Genuinely essential? Never.

It may not be essential but its a no brainer if it brings in more income than it costs to fund it.

More income for who?
Hotels, shops, cafes & restaurants etc? How do the people of Manchester get or gain any upside from that?
Ask the people on benefits how they would prefer the tax payers money to be spent - funding the Manchester Pride and the like or contributing to their council tax payments? I think you may find that they think that one is a 'no brainer'

 

[stonerblue]

No but have experienced the amounts foster parents CAN get in certain circumstances.

The letter is a hoax

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=Sebastian+J.+Ciancino+-+Urologist,+&meta=

On a BNP website apparently


http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2012/02...ologist-in-two-places-with-two-names-at-once/

Great work fella, thanks.

Lets hope W12 has the balls to apologise for posting such unadultereated shit

I did ask her when she posted it where it came from. Got no reply yet but didn't expect one.
Thinly veiled racist bollox.

 

[Manc in London]

Rather than ask benefit claimants to pay, I would rather see them carry out voluntary work that benefits the community.

 

[Mike D]

A good point and well made.
However, it is hardly an 'essential service' is it?
Leisure, communal, recreation - yes.
Genuinely essential? Never.

It may not be essential but its a no brainer if it brings in more income than it costs to fund it.

More income for who?
Hotels, shops, cafes & restaurants etc? How do the people of Manchester get or gain any upside from that?
Ask the people on benefits how they would prefer the tax payers money to be spent - funding the Manchester Pride and the like or contributing to their council tax payments? I think you may find that they think that one is a 'no brainer'

do

FFS TGR we are part of a mulicultural society, can you imagine the Nottinghill Carnival splitting itself into social class, race or sexual gender. The event is one the biggest festivals in the world its like the gay/ lesbian olympic's (maybe a bit smaller) but every year.

So TGR don your pink cowboy hat embrace it Manchester is milking it.

Then there's businesses that pay there business tax which is a lot more than council tax.

 

[Bill Walker]

mate of mine in Stalybridge is 54, hasnt worked since about 30, he says its not worth him going to work as he'd only make about 30 quid a week so he does the odd bit of labouring for cash (like 1 day a week) and lives on benefits, spends most arvo's in the Stop & Rest

so its kinda like the Government encouraged him to 'retire' at 30

thats gotta be wrong, if the tories are changing that culture, theyre doing the right thing

 

[DT King of all Geordies]

I worked at an office where the pay rises were conducted by the bosses and one of my chums was a boss who revealed the following. Rises tended to be quite high when the good times were here but the admin staff never really got great ones. When they got to the the receptionists they gave them £500 quid each. One boss, Mark, said that he thought that Bev should get a £100 more as she was better in the job than Mary. Both were good at what they did but Bev was just better. Another boss, Jeff, piped up and said that he did not see why they should give away another £100 and proposed that Mary only get £400 and this is what they did. The bosses would take home about £250k.

This is what the govt are trying to do. They want people to look down instead of up. When they say that people on benefits get as much as someone who works we should be asking why the working man gets paid so little.