Question Time

BayernMan said:
Click to expand...


I cannot repeat often enough to these R/W grifters who in reality do sweet FA for a living I am done with work - I did 43 years - against some of my gut feelings I followed their ideology and I am no retired and can cope for now thanks. So fuck off - I will wipe arses, pick fruit and shovel shit but only in a gang with Oakeshitt and R-M etc - they can fuck off - on several sides they are reaping what they have sown be it buy your own home, pay into a pension and so on. As ever the wankers can't accept that and scream at the moon - the sooner youngsters realise none of these cunts have their best ideals at hand the better it will be
 
bluethrunthru said:
anybody who works for an employer who has their wages made up by the tax payer works for a benefits scrounger - the Govt and the press will never tell you that but its a fact thats decades old. If your business model does not include paying your employee's enough to live on then its a broken model and you should go broke regardless of who you are.

Click to expand...

Councils should go broke? And hospitals? And care homes?
 
Vic said:
Councils should go broke? And hospitals? And care homes?
Click to expand...
Well maybe if we weren't subsidizing Tesco's wage bill, we might have the money to pay the people who work in care homes a proper wage. Although it's worth mentioning that a lot of care homes are privately owned anyway, so we're subsidizing their profits too.
 
bluethrunthru said:
anybody who works for an employer who has their wages made up by the tax payer works for a benefits scrounger - the Govt and the press will never tell you that but its a fact thats decades old. If your business model does not include paying your employee's enough to live on then its a broken model and you should go broke regardless of who you are.

Click to expand...


I fully agree with you on this. The tax payer is propping up the likes of Tesco who post billions in profits. All supermarkets undoubtedly pay the same. It’s a disgrace. “Work should pay”, but firms should “pay their workers”, let’s worry about that before we start running headlines about docking claimants.
 
I'm With Stupid said:
Well maybe if we weren't subsidizing Tesco's wage bill, we might have the money to pay the people who work in care homes a proper wage. Although it's worth mentioning that a lot of care homes are privately owned anyway, so we're subsidizing their profits too.
Click to expand...
Are we subsidising Tesco's wage bill for staff working full time or just those working part time?
Genuine question as I've seen lots of comments regarding us "subsidising supermarkets" but never seen a breakdown of which employees receive the benefits.
If someone is working full time (say 40 hours a week) and still needs benefits then either the minimum wage or their lifestyles should be questioned. - I'm guessing that in most cases the minimum wage is too low, but the media might be more interested in lifestyles.
 
East Level 2 said:
Are we subsidising Tesco's wage bill for staff working full time or just those working part time?
Genuine question as I've seen lots of comments regarding us "subsidising supermarkets" but never seen a breakdown of which employees receive the benefits.
If someone is working full time (say 40 hours a week) and still needs benefits then either the minimum wage or their lifestyles should be questioned. - I'm guessing that in most cases the minimum wage is too low, but the media might be more interested in lifestyles.
Click to expand...
If the minimum wage is just over a tenner an hour, then 40 hours equals £400-450 a week.

So £1900 a month.

That is fine for a single person, cost of rent aside.

For a single parent, it’s probably not enough due to ridiculous child care costs etc.
 
There are always wheels within wheels, the government subsidies low paid work, that money is pasted back into the economy, and once everyone has taken a cut lots of it ends up back in the exchequer, I don’t like it and I would prefer for business to make less profit and pay more

Incidentally the circular money go round applies to all public spending, lots of the capital costs the government gets back through general taxation, I mean we all have to eat and put fuel in the car
 
It isn't straightforward, but generally, if you want to boost the economy quickly the best way is to give more money to the low-paid and benefit claimants. These people have what is called a high propensity to spend. That is they spend almost every penny they receive and that money goes to businesses and circulates in the economy. Some of it gets back to the state as tax. Yes, not least through duties on alcohol, tobacco and petrol.

Give money to the rich, especially the uber-rich, and they will spend little if any of it. Instead, they will 'invest' it, often in tax avoidance schemes. This means the government gets little back if anything at all. There might, ideally, be a long-term benefit to companies via increased investment but it is not guaranteed and is in any case long-term. In the long term, we are all dead.
 
The Future’s Blue! said:
Who’s that crazy lady with the false hair and lack of?
Click to expand...

Lack of ???

Of the women:
One is Fiona Bruce.
One is Esther McVey (minister without portfolio)
One is Zoe Lyons, a comedian
One is Layla Moran, the LibDem foreign affairs spokesperson. Hasn't said anything yet.

I've ruled out that you were talking about Andrew Neil.
 
MillionMilesAway said:
Lack of ???

Of the women:
One is Fiona Bruce.
One is Esther McVey (minister without portfolio)
One is Zoe Lyons, a comedian
One is Layla Moran, the LibDem foreign affairs spokesperson. Hasn't said anything yet.

I've ruled out that you were talking about Andrew Neil.
Click to expand...
Common sense?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top