cells Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Great. But isnt there practically the same amount of child poverty as there was 10 years ago. Isnt life expectancy practically the same, and infant mortality, and so on. Factors of output dont always direct respond to factors of intput. perhaps because we haven’t removed to welfare state that things are as good today as 10 years ago regarding the bits you said just stop and think for a moment what would happen if welfare was cut. it would be a terrible world. think the slums of India!! do you really want slums to pop up everywhere? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 (edited) No, i've no reason to commit suicide. Your solution seems to be to one that increases the problem. How so, we could just have a few more taxes and give to the poor who wont be so poor then? Think of robin hood, who doesn’t like robin hood? Edited June 27, 2009 by cells Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Sadman Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 perhaps because we haven’t removed to welfare state that things are as good today as 10 years ago regarding the bits you saidjust stop and think for a moment what would happen if welfare was cut. it would be a terrible world. think the slums of India!! do you really want slums to pop up everywhere? There are slums everywhere. The streets be cleaner than in the 60/70/80s, but the same problems remain behind closed doors. Unemployment, alcoholism, broken families, domestic violence. Dont buy labours pretty pictures. It hasnt gone away, its just been conveniently hidden from sight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huw Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 And the recent BNP MEPS? Ask me again when they form a government in Westminster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Parry Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 How so, we could just have a few more taxes and give to the poor who wont be so poor then?Think of robin hood, who doesn’t like robin hood? So it's simply a matter of 'giving' people money? Where does that money come from? How? What does it represent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 There are slums everywhere. The streets be cleaner than in the 60/70/80s, but the same problems remain behind closed doors. Unemployment, alcoholism, broken families, domestic violence. Dont buy labours pretty pictures. It hasnt gone away, its just been conveniently hidden from sight. would you rather have the following or pay some tax? Have some compassion, the boy don’t even got wheels on his bike!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 So it's simply a matter of 'giving' people money? yes, dont you ever contribute to charity? Where does that money come from? How? through tax What does it represent? kindness to your fellow man parry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HPC001 Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 (edited) would you rather have the following or pay some tax?Have some compassion, the boy don’t even got wheels on his bike!! Too bad the money is never distributed fairly. A few people get £130k, a some get £2k a year, many get little or nothing. If it was actually shared out as £8k to everyone regardless of status, we'd all be able to afford the basics (although I suspect that rents would increase). Edited June 27, 2009 by HPC001 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Sadman Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 would you rather have the following or pay some tax?Have some compassion, the boy don’t even got wheels on his bike!! You are Polly Toynbee and i claim my 160bn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Too bad the money is never distributed fairly. A few people get �130k, a some get �2k a year, many get little or nothing.If it was actually shared out as �8k to everyone regardless of status, we'd all be able to afford the basics (although I suspect that rents would increase). Giving it to everyone would be silly, like Robin Hood stealing from the sheriff to give it back to him. Would make a boring episode don’t you think? You should only give it to the poor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Bart' Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Edit: Why won't my wink work? That has happened to me too. No idea why but if fixed itself after a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 You are Polly Toynbee and i claim my 160bn. So you want people to die from poverty and the return of work houses? Very sad just pay tax and most people are happy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Parry Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 yes, dont you ever contribute to charity?through tax kindness to your fellow man parry Yes have given most of mine to poor people in poor countries, leaving me poor by the way. Last 14 years of solid work has been given away to people who needed it. I made sure it went on the right things though. I've actually taken people out of poverty. Broken cycles of poverty, so please, don't start to fvcking lecture me about charity and kindness to my fellow man. I wonder what you've actually done for your fellow man? Remember our chat the other day about sustainable delopment and where money (which is a representation of resource, human ingenuity and effort, or at least should be) should be put to good use. The emotive pictures you have used above remind me of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HPC001 Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 (edited) Giving it to everyone would be silly, like Robin Hood stealing from the sheriff to give it back to him. Would make a boring episode don’t you think?You should only give it to the poor That would break things. The higher earners would just leave. Assuming a fixed percentage, there would be a break even point among workers where they neither gain or lose from the NIT (pay in £8k, get £8k back). Above that point they'd start paying in on a net basis. Keep in mind here that people doing nothing would still get £8k, which isn't what happens now. @Parry - You sound like a sensible man, what would you say about a geuninely talented, hardworking person who had nothing to start with and has been refused help when losing his\her job in the current screw-up? Do you think stabilising the roof over their head would be a good start? Edited June 27, 2009 by HPC001 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Yes have given most of mine to poor people in poor countries, leaving me poor by the way. Last 14 years of solid work has been given away to people who needed it. I made sure it went on the right things though. I've actually taken people out of poverty. Broken cycles of poverty, so please, don't start to fvcking lecture me about charity and kindness to my fellow man. I wonder what you've actually done for your fellow man? Remember our chat the other day about sustainable delopment and where money (which is a representation of resource, human ingenuity and effort, or at least should be) should be put to good use. The emotive pictures you have used above remind me of that. Good work parry, but there are greedy people who want to give nothing and would rather see poverty and all that goes with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 The higher earners would just leave. Were would they go? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Sadman Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 So you want people to die from poverty and the return of work houses?Very sad just pay tax and most people are happy Those were my exact words. In fact, are you Caroline Flint? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garry AKA Pod Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 How so, we could just have a few more taxes and give to the poor who wont be so poor then?Think of robin hood, who doesn’t like robin hood? Taxes on who? Those that are working yet take home less than some families that are completely benefit dependent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Taxes on who? Everybody who can afford to give a bit which is most people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Parry Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Good work parry, but there are greedy people who want to give nothing and would rather see poverty and all that goes with it. Genuine thanks and sorry I had a rant at you there. I like to give, see the sig. But I don't like to give for, 1. War. 2. People who, in a first world country, during a massive boom, would sooner live off my hard work and watch daytime TV than get a job. Works bl00dy good fun and it's where you meet your mates. 3. Bloated government schemes involving predatory consultants and God knows what, which benefit no one. 4. Bailouts of the rich and divisive banking industry. Sorry, real bee in bonnet about this. That's why I'd love to see 100% of my efforts go on sustainable development so everyone can have an adequate standard of living. This prosperity would also likely reduce the birth rate? Cheers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Sadman Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Seeings as its silly season in here, and all people are equal, why dont we just increase the welfare budget to £1500b or so - cells is right, a person with no access to high speed broadband in mumbai is no less a person than his counterpart in peckham. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HPC001 Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Were would they go? A tax haven (several miniscule states come to mind, like Monaco, or maybe an Atlantic island) or a country with lower taxes (Czech Republic). Part of the problem is that the government taxes everything so much that it discourages business ventures that would employ more people, or makes it attractive to have a black market with cash-in-hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garry AKA Pod Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Everybody who can afford to give a bit which is most people. If there were people living in shanty towns eating mud pies in this country then you might have a point. To throw up pictures of starving kids in Africa does not justify your argument about the workers of this country paying more taxes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Plus all you crying about too much tax, have you not considered that the state gives you cash benefits too For example, middle class family earning 5x average wage. They buy a house in 1950 for £10k. They sell that house 2007 for £800k That is £790k profit Where do you think that came from? It was the state when you think of it The poor don’t have that benefit, they get less but more often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Storm Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 You should only give it to the poor If you give to the poor and starving you make more poor and starving. So by good intention you create more pain and suffering than if you had done nothing, Ethiopia being a good example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.