Challenger1978 said:deynaskaz said:Its a good idea on the face of it but does anyone believe that us the tax payers will feel any benefit from it.They say they will save 2 billion how much would they save if they stopped wasting money within government. How much would they save stopping endless investigations to find out who was to blame when accidents happen and systems break down just to come out with quotes like " we need to make sure this will never happen again" . This government don't give a fook about the working man,any fool can come up with popular policies that wont work to deflect criticism from the cocked up policies that already exist.
Give me 30p of a litre of petrol that will help me, get some jobs out there for the young people and get the insurance companies to stop charging 4k for a years insurance. Conservative policies are knee jerk and wont support this countries recovery,the problem is neither will labours so can i suggest we just start a fooking revolution.
Power to the people brother I've got my pitch fork ready and my burning torch.
SWP's back said:I've explained before that most car insurance underwriters make around 4-8% profit on car insurance and many actually lose money on that side of it but have it as a loss leader for your custom.deynaskaz said:get the insurance companies to stop charging 4k for a years insurance.
If you want insurers to reduce prices then we need to get rid of "no win no fee" personal injury ambulance chasers. They and our increasingly litigious scoiety are the reason your premiums are so high.
intheknow! said:The irony of the people who support and lionise Thatcher, is that they are the ones who moan most about welfare and demand endless crackdowns on 'welfare lifestyles'. Yet it was their beloved Thatcher who created these 'welfare lifestyles'. In the 70's 'welfarism' was not an issue, working class people (men in particular), on the whole, had easy access jobs that allowed them to support and provide for a family. Yes sometimes these Industries were subsidised by the state but people had gainful employment and communities were strong. Dole existed but there was no Incapacity or the myriad of benefits there are now.
In the 80's Thatchers economic policy was based on the de-Industrialisation of Britain and to move us to a free market economy based largely on services and finance. This meant the destruction of the very jobs that working class communities (again mainly men) were sustained on. Interestingly Germany took the opposite view and decided to stick with manufacturing but through Government investment and crucially subsidy moved to a more high quality and high tech economy.
As this strategy was set in motion the inevitable happened, mass unemployment in Northern England, Scotland, Wales (Industrial areas). In order to massage the unemployment figures, Incapacity/the sick was created as well as Income support and the Dole was retained for Job Seekers. It was Thatcher's Government that created welfare as we now know it. If you look at the most deprived areas in England, Scotland and Wales where there is now inter-generational unemployment, you will see these are the very people and communities destroyed by Thatcher's deindustrialisation policy.
Unemployment was an intentional policy of Thatcher's. The Conservatives believe unemployment is a 'price worth paying' (quoting Norman Lamont). That is why it was her Government that created the welfare system her supporters now demonize. For Tories and their supporters in Big business a certain level of unemployment is a good thing. If you have 10 jobs and 10 workers, the power is with the worker, they can demand good wages etc but if you have 10 jobs and 100 workers, the power is with the employers. A large Labour or expanded Labour market with high unemployment means a cheaper, more compliant, fearful workforce.
Mikecini said:David Cameron said he wanted to stop those who were working from feeling resentment towards people on benefits.
Fucking lying ****. This is how the twats have repeatedly gotten into number 10.
How can they focus on it? They can't make insurers demand lower premiums as they are already losing money on the whole and it's a private industry.deynaskaz said:I agree SWP so why don't the government focus on this then the the 18 to 25 year olds might have a chance to improve there lives and become more independent .
yeah probably the best so far.stonerblue said:intheknow! said:The irony of the people who support and lionise Thatcher, is that they are the ones who moan most about welfare and demand endless crackdowns on 'welfare lifestyles'. Yet it was their beloved Thatcher who created these 'welfare lifestyles'. In the 70's 'welfarism' was not an issue, working class people (men in particular), on the whole, had easy access jobs that allowed them to support and provide for a family. Yes sometimes these Industries were subsidised by the state but people had gainful employment and communities were strong. Dole existed but there was no Incapacity or the myriad of benefits there are now.
In the 80's Thatchers economic policy was based on the de-Industrialisation of Britain and to move us to a free market economy based largely on services and finance. This meant the destruction of the very jobs that working class communities (again mainly men) were sustained on. Interestingly Germany took the opposite view and decided to stick with manufacturing but through Government investment and crucially subsidy moved to a more high quality and high tech economy.
As this strategy was set in motion the inevitable happened, mass unemployment in Northern England, Scotland, Wales (Industrial areas). In order to massage the unemployment figures, Incapacity/the sick was created as well as Income support and the Dole was retained for Job Seekers. It was Thatcher's Government that created welfare as we now know it. If you look at the most deprived areas in England, Scotland and Wales where there is now inter-generational unemployment, you will see these are the very people and communities destroyed by Thatcher's deindustrialisation policy.
Unemployment was an intentional policy of Thatcher's. The Conservatives believe unemployment is a 'price worth paying' (quoting Norman Lamont). That is why it was her Government that created the welfare system her supporters now demonize. For Tories and their supporters in Big business a certain level of unemployment is a good thing. If you have 10 jobs and 10 workers, the power is with the worker, they can demand good wages etc but if you have 10 jobs and 100 workers, the power is with the employers. A large Labour or expanded Labour market with high unemployment means a cheaper, more compliant, fearful workforce.
good stuff
SWP's back said:I've explained before that most car insurance underwriters make around 4-8% profit on car insurance and many actually lose money on that side of it but have it as a loss leader for your custom.deynaskaz said:get the insurance companies to stop charging 4k for a years insurance.
If you want insurers to reduce prices then we need to get rid of "no win no fee" personal injury ambulance chasers. They and our increasingly litigious scoiety are the reason your premiums are so high.
Damocles said:malg said:As with the Jimmy Carr Tax Avoidance thread the other day, this forum has more people who profess to being 'left' in political terms, but don't half appear to be 'right' minded....just saying.
A large percentage of the country is Libertarian and doesn't know it.
SWP's back said:How can they focus on it? They can't make insurers demand lower premiums as they are already losing money on the whole and it's a private industry.deynaskaz said:I agree SWP so why don't the government focus on this then the the 18 to 25 year olds might have a chance to improve there lives and become more independent .
I'd do away with our claims nature though. But fuck knows how we can do that and if it would even be possible. It's down to the courts that award the silly amounts all the time.
Yes and no.stonerblue said:SWP's back said:I've explained before that most car insurance underwriters make around 4-8% profit on car insurance and many actually lose money on that side of it but have it as a loss leader for your custom.deynaskaz said:get the insurance companies to stop charging 4k for a years insurance.
If you want insurers to reduce prices then we need to get rid of "no win no fee" personal injury ambulance chasers. They and our increasingly litigious scoiety are the reason your premiums are so high.
The same no win no fee shysters that get your details off the insurance companies before sending you a text/letter/call telling you you're 'entitled' to £3000 for that accident you didnt have. Them?
Yes, because the youngest drivers are more likely to have an accident.deynaskaz said:SWP's back said:How can they focus on it? They can't make insurers demand lower premiums as they are already losing money on the whole and it's a private industry.deynaskaz said:I agree SWP so why don't the government focus on this then the the 18 to 25 year olds might have a chance to improve there lives and become more independent .
I'd do away with our claims nature though. But fuck knows how we can do that and if it would even be possible. It's down to the courts that award the silly amounts all the time.
Well they could bring in legislation that would stop the no win no fee culture,they could try to influence the insurance companies to say only implement the higher insurance if said person made a claim,keep premiums low and make them affordable but if you claim your premium will be adjusted.My point is they do fook all to help i am not an expert but when i talk to people my own age we all pretty much have the same views.
SWP's back said:Yes and no.stonerblue said:SWP's back said:I've explained before that most car insurance underwriters make around 4-8% profit on car insurance and many actually lose money on that side of it but have it as a loss leader for your custom.
If you want insurers to reduce prices then we need to get rid of "no win no fee" personal injury ambulance chasers. They and our increasingly litigious scoiety are the reason your premiums are so high.
The same no win no fee shysters that get your details off the insurance companies before sending you a text/letter/call telling you you're 'entitled' to £3000 for that accident you didnt have. Them?
The same lawyers that text and call you yes, but I am unaware that they get your number off insurers. My mate works for one in Manchester (the call centre, he's not a lawyer) and they buy the mobile phone number leads by the hundreds of thousands from anywhere that you may have written it down (online competition entry, amazon, argos etc etc).
Do you have some information that states that these bollocks "You're entitled to £3000" texts come as a result of your insurers selling your details? It's just I get about 6 of these texts a week and I always check the box that requests no marketing from the insurers or their affiliates.