mightytharg

Obviously, the MPs are are among the biggest scroungers.with their tax-payer funded buy-to-lets. Rich scroungers include land-owners that live off the farming subsidies, but not the ones who earned or inherited their money. Companies are generally neither individuals nor scroungers, so you're wrong there.

The main difference is that the people being paid to do jobs that don't add value have awarded themselves million pound gold-plated pensions.

16 hrs x 6.08 (minumum wage) * 48 weeks = £4,669.44 (+ £35,000 tax credits) This report seems to be treating the scroungers scamming for working tax credits as being poor

These figures were before the budget, the scroungers got 5.2% pay rises and half a house free. For the economy to recover, it's like saving a drowning lawyer, the government just has to take its foot off the economy's head. Cut spending by half, cut taxes by a third, open up some land to build on...Simples.

Yes there do seem to be a lot of Jewish people behind the Federal Reserve, Goldman Sachs and the US Government, the press. The people orchestrating the crisis while enriching themselves and other insiders: Bernanke is Jewish, Nancy Pelosi is (part?) Jewish, Paulson work(ed/s) for Goldman Sachs. So we should consider whether the whole thing is a big Jewish conspiracy and if so, how do we stop it without more bloodshed and higher house prices. Last time my family tried to resist this sort of thing the Rothschilds (through JP Morgan) paid troops to try and kill them all. So be careful out there.

Good to see that pay is getting fairer and hopefully I won't have to put up with all those Northern scroungers next time I'm on a tropical beach somewhere. Need to extend this to actual workers though. Why isn't the tax allowance greater in London and the Southeast so that people keep a fairer amount of their post-rent salaries?

Not at all, corporation tax is payable on profits and is the same if the money is in HSBC or in cash. Your company can withdraw the money and there is no more tax to pay (ask an accountant for details).

Not quite true. The public sector destroyed the private sector schemes with their insane greed. Does anyone have a figure on how much the public sector took from the private sector via the pensions dividends tax etc.? I think it was around 25%, but I can't find an official figure for it.

Doesn't it make you feel warm inside knowing your tax money is going in $57,000 hand-outs to the greedy liars and deadbeats who refuse to pay what they owe? Makes MPs expenses seem almost reasonable.

That is presumably because the London counsellors are decent well-meaning folk, whilst those in Birmingham are greedy scrounging left-wing scum. (I have know idea about the Councils in question, but that is what the numbers suggest)

The Chindians have tons of money, I'd try them first, then maybe the Germans and the Jews. They mostly got the money from the Americans (not sure why this is relevant). If I borrow some money and buy a ferrari. Both me and the car dealer got rich off the back of the borrowings. But only one of us is the borrower and owes the money.

Sorry, it seems to have been airbrushed from my history lessons. Some French poofter took over Holland and then the British Isles in the Seventeenth century, then handed us over to the Germans!? Surely they should have mentioned that!

I think the situation we have now, is where the borrower (the public sector) can quite easily afford to repay but chooses not to. The idea is that they can then steal from the private sector pensioners and enrich themselves even more. Since all the meetings and discussions are between public sector workers from various countries they all tend to agree that this is a good thing.

But there haven't been any cuts. The public sector just spend more and more each year. Great if we could get rid of tax credits though.

Not saying you're wrong, but what is the evidence for this? Couldn't they just cut spending and sell off some assets?

I thought Orange was in France? What has it got to do with Scotland?

Yes.

I agree with you there. Those Leicester free-loaders are likely to be using a lot more Council services than the people in one of these flats. If I've understood your point correctly...

The people in that article seem to done rather well. Borrowed £200,000 in 2007, four (rent-free) years later that debt has been inflated away by around 20%. So they are up £40,000, meanwhile houses have gotten cheaper as well, so their next step is even easier. Lucky they didn't listen to the doom-and-gloomers on here.

So, basically you want to reward all the lazy scummers by protecting their markets. Meanwhile, you would destroy the livelihoods of hard-working skillful people by opening them up to unfair competition from abroad. Let me guess, are you a Labour supporter?

So, are the sane ones the Obammunists trying to sell our grandchildren into the slavery of debt bondage?

Seems sensible to me. If more banks had ensured that their borrowers had the means to pay back their loans then we wouldn't be in this predicament. HPC siding with the greedy Landlord?! A first for this forum

Err, they got 3/5 of a vote BUT only got taxed 1/2 as much. Some people are never grateful.

But if they spend less money, then they can gradually pay back the existing debt, and the interest will reduce.

What about spending less money? That's another option that nobody seems to have considered.