£30,000 per annum income.

[Calaen]

By "struggling to maintain a decent income" I meant "periodically being unable to get any work".

Im with Throd on this there may not be jobs available in the area you want to work but there is sure as hell gonna be a job somewhere that you could take that would be better than not working.

I was brought up by a single mother, she often worked 2-3 jobs at certain points of my child hood to make sure we could live as best we could.

Since leaving school and home in 1994 I have always had a job, I didnt always like what I did but it was necessary to generate the money to allow me to feed myself. There just seem to be a large amount of people who dont actually want a job regardless of the fact there only getting £40 a week on the dole. This annoys me more than anything.

 

[throdgrain]

Lets face it, life can be hard All Im saying is that before there were quite often no jobs at all, now at least there are some. Which must be an improvement.
From personal experience , I was unemployed twice under the tories in the eighties, and since 1990 Ive been continually employed.
:relief:

 

[Will]

A lot of you are arguing free-market solutions to these problems "i.e. if they can't afford to live, then they won't". In other words, policies I associate with the Tories.

It was about 25 years ago that Mrs Thatcher stated "There is no such thing as society", and went to work making this statement come true. The children of that generation are now the parents of this generation, and yet you think further removal of the support mechanisms of society will solve the problem?

 

[Louster]

Calaen, I'm talking about my father. The only way he can realistically earn enough money to support our family is through his areas of expertise, and as I say, within those areas he's, every now and then, found himself with zero work available. My mother has always been busy enough with myself and my sister - it hasn't exactly been easy for her; I was diagnosed with coeliacs about 3 years ago, and before then (and for quite a while after) I'd been basically unwell all the time, and totally dependent on her. There's no way she could have worked, and my dad was doing his best, but still unable to always actually provide.

It's not so bad now, given that I've pretty much gained independence and am no longer so much of a burden, but fuck, in the past we've had some really shitty times.

Edit: oh, yes. I just remembered - I found out not long ago that the start of most of our financial troubles began when a company who owed my dad £30k for work he'd done went into liquidation. What luck.

 

[Damini]

They get £150/week.
Minimum wage is £120/week for 16-17 yo, £164/week for 18-21 yo, £194/week for older workers (assumes 40 hour work week). And it's increasing in september. It's not really better to sponge. However it is a lot easier to sponge which probably attracts a lot of people do doing it.

So they get £30 more than minimum wage each week for their age group, aren't taxed on that income, don't have to pay rent, or a mortgage... Do they need to pay for gas, electric, water, council tax? Are they also getting milk vouchers? I genuinely don't know, but I have a suspicion that they might get help with many of these things.

Anyone know?

 

[Will]

They would receive child benefit if they were working too, which I would think has been included in the sums. And seven people in a three bedroom flat isn't breaking the bank on housing benefit. I think they will get a rebate on council tax, but they have to pay for other services.

 

[Damini]

I just don't get it. I've known far too many girls that have got pregnant to get their own home and live off benefits, so I know its not just media hysteria, but I just see so many cons out weighing the pros. But then I fear pregnancy because I worry it will feel like tape worm, and have a recurring nightmare about going away on holiday and leaving the baby at home, so maybe my lack of broodiness plays a part too.

 

[Wij]

You've watched Eraserhead then ?


*not-impregnate-Lou*

 

[leggy]

Call centres don't pay enough to support a partner and a family. I struggle to maintain a decent drug habit working in one.

And I don't think they will be around for ever. Outsourcing is pretty much inevitable.

Sorry Will you misunderstand me. It was a sarcastic comment aimed at throd

I don't believe that you can earn enough as a call centre agent to support a child (with one wage)

 

[Tom]

It was about 25 years ago that Mrs Thatcher stated "There is no such thing as society"

"I think we've been through a period where too many people have been given to understand that if they have a problem, it's the government's job to cope with it. 'I have a problem, I'll get a grant.' 'I'm homeless, the government must house me.' They're casting their problem on society. And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It's our duty to look after ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbour. People have got the entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations. There's no such thing as entitlement, unless someone has first met an obligation."

Sounds different when quoted in context, doesn't it?

 

[Will]

Not really. Its pretty much says that the welfare state is evil, and homeless people will stay homeless. It sums up the opposite view of how society should operate from the one I hold myself.

I picture that as a very bleak future, where there is no safety net in place to pick people up when they fall down, and very little room for social mobility.

 

[throdgrain]

Sorry Will you misunderstand me. It was a sarcastic comment aimed at throd

I don't believe that you can earn enough as a call centre agent to support a child (with one wage)

Which is just a typical grim comment from you mate. Truth is, people do that every bloody day.
People work in filling stations, and nursing homes, and fuck knows what else, and support a child, or two, or three.
Perhaps they dont in the "Ive just left university and I got me sights set on xxx" world, but out here in the real world mate people do this stuff all the time.
Just amazing aint it? :/

And yeah Will, thats what the welfare state is for. To support people who are trying and working. I earnt , in a very bad year, £29850 last year. i have 2 kids, which apparently entitles me to £40 a month for some benefit or other. I beleive in our system wholeheartedly. I really dont believe in people abusing it though.

 

[Embattle]

I have no problem with safety nets but you have to be careful its not full up with people who shouldn't be there meaning it can't take any more people or those people eventually cause it to break. I personally approve of the idea of the welfare system we have, however there is a tendency that many people will move in the opposite direction when they perceive that little is being done to tackle what they consider as abuse of such a system. We see such reactions in how people deal with, for example, the asylum situation where a lack of visible action by the main parties is making people rather hardheaded and in some cases it causes them to stupidly vote for some of the far right parties.

 

[Ch3tan]

Thatcher really is mis-represented by that quote. Showing your helping yourself before expecting the government to step in really isnt saying the welfare state is evil.

 

[leggy]

Which is just a typical grim comment from you mate

Hey it was just a joke. Not my problem if you take yourself (and your clan) too fucking seriously now is it?

 

[throdgrain]

Lol just a joke? So whats the comment about the clan then? Sorry I dont understand??

 

[Danya]

Not really. Its pretty much says that the welfare state is evil, and homeless people will stay homeless. It sums up the opposite view of how society should operate from the one I hold myself.

I picture that as a very bleak future, where there is no safety net in place to pick people up when they fall down, and very little room for social mobility.

Hey pretty much no welfare state works for America...

 

[Will]

Having no welfare state works if you have money. American society is much more obviously divided into the haves and the havenots.

 

[DaGaffer]

Having no welfare state works if you have money. American society is much more obviously divided into the haves and the havenots.

Economics and demographics will destroy the welfare state model as we know it, both here and in Western Europe. We've just hit a UK population of 60m this week, but more importantly we've also passed the point where there are more pensioners than children. Unless we expect a minority in work to support a majority out of work, then we're fucked basically, and yet you have this split-personality government that knows this, and is making noises about forced 'self-help' for pensions etc. and yet at exactly the same time tries to make the population more reliant on the state for their needs.

You've got a huge, and growing underclass that expects state handouts as a right, not a priviledge, an ageing population no longer contributing to the economy, and of the population that is working, the state is now the largest single employer (and this too, is growing), which of course means the (decreasing) minority that is working in the private sector is under a triple burden. The only likely outcome is that 20-30 years from now, the whole edifice will come tumbling down (just about the time I expect to retire )

Ironically, the one thing that could save us (a large, young, influx of tax-paying immigrants) is the last thing most of the population want.

 

[Calaen]

very true Gaffer very true

 

[throdgrain]

Although I agree with Will mostly, except for the abuse of the welfare state, Da gaffer (stupid name sorry ) makes some valid points.

 

[maxi]

I just don't get it. I've known far too many girls that have got pregnant to get their own home and live off benefits, so I know its not just media hysteria, but I just see so many cons out weighing the pros. But then I fear pregnancy because I worry it will feel like tape worm, and have a recurring nightmare about going away on holiday and leaving the baby at home, so maybe my lack of broodiness plays a part too.

I don't believe for a second that many of these cases are as calculated as you suggest, some are. no doubt, but it's always been the way of Children = Income amongst the poorest families. Never the less, pregnant young girls do not have trhe benefit of a wider social view....and as children(usually poorly educated, too) utterly lacking in any self-awareness. Ask yourself the question 'what age do humans stop believing the world revolves around themselves?' and depending on your level of cynicism/misanthropy you may well say "never!" or at best "when they reach the maturity of adulthood" (never!).

What I'm saying is: yes we know the pitfalls, we know it's not the ideal way to go about things but we're on the outside looking and some of us are without the faintest of ideas how other social groups/classes live and operate.

and that's really far more simplistic that I would have liked, but 1) i'm lazy 2) i'm busy 3) it's complcated philosophy innit, and there's books on this stuff.

 

[Will]

Although I agree with Will mostly, except for the abuse of the welfare state, Da gaffer (stupid name sorry ) makes some valid points.

Dagaffer isn't arguing the opposite point to myself though. I've mentioned before that we need higher levels of immigration, especially in Scotland.

Closing tax loopholes for the stupidly rich would also help with the shortfalls of the welfare state. Personally, I'd like to see a flat rate tax for everyone with no loopholes at all. Which strangely enough is a very "free market" view on taxation, while I see it as a very socialist system. If everyone paid, for example, 20% income tax, including big businesses, I think things would be both simpler and fairer.

 

[maxi]

Dagaffer isn't arguing the opposite point to myself though. I've mentioned before that we need higher levels of immigration, especially in Scotland.

Closing tax loopholes for the stupidly rich would also help with the shortfalls of the welfare state.

Yeah. Well. Yeah Mostly, but you'd never see a thread such Entitled '2.4mil per annum income' containing such hate filled posts as this here thread, would you?

 

[Deadmanwalking]

If everyone paid, for example, 20% income tax, including big businesses, I think things would be both simpler and fairer.

What?

A pint of milk costs the same, if you earn 100k+ or 15k-. So having the same income tax level for all earning brackets is flawed. Someone earning 15k still has to pay for food/water etc etc the same as someone on 100k+.

The difference is the person on 100k+ will most likelt live in a bigger/nicer house, pay more for organic meat, special food etc etc. However the essentials of needing food, place to sleep, clothes etc are the same.

20% of 100k in tax would mean they would have 80k to faff around with. And lets say a percentage of that would go on the basics. Now 20% of 15k leaves barely enough, if any at all for the basics, let alone all the rest.

 

[maxi]

tax the rich! and the blind! and the crippled!

 

[Deadmanwalking]

To be quite honest if you wanted a new tax system, do away with income tax completely.

Crank VAT up, and other indirect taxes.

Income tax you have no choice with, it is automagically paid before you even see your earnings. VAT et al, allows at least some choice. Varying levels of tax would allow people to choose, where their cash goes.

So what you earn is what you take home. But then spending that money is your choice. Lower levels on certain items deemed as essentials, and higher on luxuries and pretty useless things.

Therefor, you can choose to pay high levels of tax on things you want, (Booze, fags, designer clothes, DVDs etc etc) and little or no tax on things such as, Bread (Yes Mr.smartarse i know it isn't taxed atm), bog roll, school uniforms, etc etc etc.

 

[Will]

I think you totally misunderstand my point. I think the rich should pay more tax, hence my mentioning of how socialist it is. The rich need the support of society, and they can afford to pay for it. So tax the bastards.

 

[DaGaffer]

To be quite honest if you wanted a new tax system, do away with income tax completely.

Crank VAT up, and other indirect taxes.

Income tax you have no choice with, it is automagically paid before you even see your earnings. VAT et al, allows at least some choice. Varying levels of tax would allow people to choose, where their cash goes.

So what you earn is what you take home. But then spending that money is your choice. Lower levels on certain items deemed as essentials, and higher on luxuries and pretty useless things.

Therefor, you can choose to pay high levels of tax on things you want, (Booze, fags, designer clothes, DVDs etc etc) and little or no tax on things such as, Bread (Yes Mr.smartarse i know it isn't taxed atm), bog roll, school uniforms, etc etc etc.

Nice theory, but unfortunately, we live in, like, the World. High indirect tax is actually what England had in the 17th and 18th centuries and we were a smuggler's paradise. Imagine the same situation with added interweb.

 

[Deadmanwalking]

Nice theory, but unfortunately, we live in, like, the World. High indirect tax is actually what England had in the 17th and 18th centuries and we were a smuggler's paradise. Imagine the same situation with added interweb.

Oh i know, but that is the complete opposite of the current system to be honest. It is also flawed in countless ways. Least of them what you mentioned.

Plus the cost to calculate, set and then collect the tax would more than likely out do the amount collected. I was just simply mentioning the alternativce.

(Drug using socialist hmm )