Forum menu
bigblackshed - Member
...It's not about left v right. It's about wrong v human.
Well said. It's as simple as that.
I don't think the taxpayer should be subsidising the supermarkets, this is a perfect example of how the demise of small shops has cost the tax payer. However people are short sighted, they just see the cost saving to them of paying less for goods without understanding the low cost comes at the expense of staff and suppliers which ultimately has to be paid by the state. it is however true that a lot of that subsidy comes from someone else, ie "the rich"
I agree
I think this was one of the inevitable results of tax credits (as, arguably, increased rents were an inevitable result of underwriting rent with housing benefit) trouble is that to withdraw them now would result in significant price rises on basic items to cover wage increases, which would inevitably hit the poor hardest - not an easy position to get out of Im afraid 🙁
Ernie Lynch, just calm down.
What I bizarre comment. It's you who's ranting about [i]"an out of control welfare state"[/i] and the [i]"current ultra- capitalist society that we have presently"[/i]
And demanding that we get [i]"the underclass back in line, with compulsory work schemes"[/i] and [i]"housing single mums with extended family (even if it is a squash)"[/i].
I'm sure that if you had a tub in front of you you would be thumping it.
You sound like a right tub-thumper if ever there was one 🙂
ernie_lynch - Member
Have you any idea how silly that sort of comment sounds ?
I guess not.
No but there is a lot to live down to. Fortunately, I have a good role model. Cheers.
Junkyard, why is housing single mums within existing family so headshakingly awful ?
(partially) because it hands their accommodation security over to the father. If he stays - mother and child have somewhere to live. If he leaves, they've got to pack and get out, and hope that the parents can help out. They have no control. It'd go down a treat in Saudi Arabia but we don't want that kind of stuff in the UK.
We really need to stop seeing single mothers - who are, by definition, the ones who stuck around to look after the child - as people who need punishing. It's absent fathers who need a kicking.
(partially) because it hands their accommodation security over to the father. If he stays - mother and child have somewhere to live. If he leaves, they've got to pack and get out, and hope that the parents can help out.
I don't think anyone has ever suggested that as an option, only that for a 'single girl living at home with family and not currently in priority need' (very low down on the housing list) getting pregnant does not automatically endow 'priority need' (near the top of the housing list) (there may obviously be other factors involved which may lead to it though)
HOUSE on the right wing myths
From Generations on benefits and we have getting pregnant to get a house
You can prove anything with facts though
doris5000 - Member
...We really need to stop seeing single mothers - who are, by definition, the ones who stuck around to look after the child - as people who need punishing. It's absent fathers who need a kicking.
You're right.
The best contraception is when young guys get to realise the costs of supporting a child. 🙂
Housing crisis has been created by the bribery/sale of council housing , a thatcherite policy that was short sighted , useful in the sense that it created a whole pool of home'owners' who had a one off bargain, giving the illusion that they had joined the property owning classes , rather than a long term debt.
I am working on a building site , so called self employed-a tax fiddle essentially , promoted by the state , to keep the industry casual, its a major problem that us trade unionists have been fighting for as long as i csan remember , not much has changed essentially .
The employer subs the work out to many sub contractors, who then use us , all cuts of the cake , you see the big cars turning up , with some beady eyed suit scuttling around, out of his comfort zone, they all have fancy titles , with salaries and bonuses to go, yet the job does not require any input from these people , in truth , they are superfluous to it, yet there is a whole stratum of them , in all industries ---living very well off our backs .......
The undemonised parasite class .......
The undemonised parasite class .......
No, they're called "hard working families" now. 🙄
Funny how no one ever mentions technology as destroying jobs for the poorly educated. Spreadsheets can do what used to take a team of clarks. You can run some factors with very few people but a lot of robots. The guys looking after the robots do okay, but there is no longer a job for a bloke putting in a screw. Likewise supermarkets, think how the self service tills are saving cost and putting people out of work. But you can't stop progress. Personally I think tech will put more money into the hands of the educated and take from the less.
technology has enabled capitalism to adapt and 'prosper' -but the fruits are not shared.....i agree dragon , technology could liberate us all from menial and mundane tasks, but only if it is for the benefit of all --not a possibility under a system that can only survive through expoitation --i'm an optimist , though, and i'm sure that eventually humans will truimph, the alternative is destruction ....