Iain Duncan Smith: Iain Duncan Smith to live on £53 a week.

[Bald Bouncer]

unfortunately some people are born with gifts that pay more than others, some are smarter, some are talented musicians, some are talented sportsmen. Now you can't swap out a top footballer with Al from the local corner shop and expect the same results but you can swap Al with most people in the country and get the same results, because of this the salary is lower that's life that's the way it is - no point bitching and moaning about it that's not going to get anyone anywhere. Yes you can try get all the people less well off to club together and bring down people with more to your level but it's not going to boost them up any more reminds me a little of:



but substituting each of those for say "millionaires" then "people on over 100k" then "middle class" and so on... A lot of this seems to be the green eyed monster at work or people with some sort of financial guilt syndrome (like survivors guilt but for having had a better chance in life/have more money etc).

Yes all very interesting but that wasn't what you said I will remind you:

Originally Posted by blacksheep
No, money tends to gravitate to people who plan and work hard whilst not squandering what they can't afford

The bit about substituting each of those for say "millionairs" makes no sense at all when are they actually coming for them? they have had tax cuts while everyone else has been made to pay, the government has only ever paid lip service to introducing something that actually makes millionaires join the 'all in it together club' and you could easily consider the people doing the 'coming' are the millionaires considering at least 26 of the cabinet are in that club along most or all of the Tory, Lib Dem and Labour front benches benefiting from the tax cut.

The finger pointing, cuts and media propaganda is all aimed at the poorest and most vulnerable in society not the people who caused this in the first place.

[blacksheep]

Yes all very interesting but that wasn't what you said I will remind you:

Yes and with the exception of a very small number of "careers" you still need to work hard to get to the top of your game.

The bit about substituting each of those for say "millionairs" makes no sense at all when are they actually coming for them?

What I am saying is all the rich folk/banker bashing seems great at first - lets tax the hell out of them, then the next people on the list are a little closer to home, then a little more and then all of a sudden you're the rich person that's being targeted.

[hoponbaby]

The bit about substituting each of those for say "millionairs" makes no sense at all when are they actually coming for them? they have had tax cuts while everyone else has been made to pay, the government has only ever paid lip service to introducing something that actually makes millionaires join the 'all in it together club' and you could easily consider the people doing the 'coming' are the millionaires considering at least 26 of the cabinet are in that club along most or all of the Tory, Lib Dem and Labour front benches benefiting from the tax cut.

The finger pointing, cuts and media propaganda is all aimed at the poorest and most vulnerable in society not the people who caused this in the first place.

Tax paid by someone on £1m £435k - 43% of earnings (taking the 45% tax bracket in to account, not the 50% applicable for 11/12 & 12/13 tax years)
Tax paid by someone on £8k £Nil - 0% of earnings, negative when you bring the benefits in to it

Sounds pretty much all in it together to me or should they be taxed £992000 to bring them to the same level? What is a FAIR amount??

As the tax cut only affects people with earnings in excess of £150k just because someone is a millionaire (paper or otherwise) it doesn't mean they benefit. A standard MP earns £65K so unless they have significant other earnings then they don't. This Daily Mail article lists 18 earning over £100k from external sources.

The finger pointing, cuts and media propaganda is all aimed at the poorest and most vulnerable in society not the people who caused this in the first place.

Who actually caused it? A millionaire or billionaire for that matter may have had no more fault than a part time cleaner.

Are the banks totally at fault for irresposnsible lending or is it the people that applied for mortgages that they couldn't afford on houses that weren't worth what they were paying? Should the estate agents who valued these houses also be held to account?

Even Fred the Shred was being praised for the takeover of ABN Amro (which ultimately screwed RBS) when he got the deal at the expense of Barclays who were also bidding for it

[Bald Bouncer]

Yes and with the exception of a very small number of "careers" you still need to work hard to get to the top of your game.

Of course but you are missing the point working hard does not guarantee you get to the top of your career as you are aware there are far more factors involved, guy sweeping the road outside might work his nuts off every day and still be in the same job in 20 years due to him having a low learning capability, not having social skills or being able to articulate. The implication/suggestion of what you said was very clear and also compounded by the added 'squandering what they can't afford' why are you now trying to get away from it?

What I am saying is all the rich folk/banker bashing seems great at first - lets tax the hell out of them, then the next people on the list are a little closer to home, then a little more and then all of a sudden you're the rich person that's being targeted.

Sticks and stones as Liberace once said he was 'Crying All the Way to the Bank' again I remind you while everyone else has had cuts and wage freezes they have had tax cuts and increase wealth and corporation tax cuts, they are not being targeted they have had tax cuts of over 40% in the last 30 years.

[Over Carl]

as I say, it's for subsistence living (food/bills etc), I was under the impression that you could claim for travel and clothing for interviews?

In theory yes - there is a discretionary fund available of around £400 for each jobseeker. You need proof of the interview in writing in advance and you need to get the claim authorised in advance. However they won't give you cash - you need to spend yourself then this eventually gets reimbursed. You also need to consent to DWP checking up with your employer that it is a bona fide job opportunity, and that you have turned up and made a satisfactory effort.

So - if you get a phone call asking you to come in tomorrow this scheme is no use.
If the invitation for interview is sent via email this may be refused - original in post is preferred.
If your adviser refuses to see you until your next booked appointment this is useless.
If you haven't got the cash it's useless. Would you be claiming if you did have the cash?
Then lets remember it's at the discretion of the advisor. I've heard of numerous people being refused, never heard of anyone who has actually successfully claimed it.
Finally - if by some miracle you do manage to pull it off, you will probably have no chance at the interview - I know if I was an employer and DWP started asking loads of funny questions about a particular applicant I would probably pick someone else.

So I suppose nit picking, you are correct - IDS shouldn't be expect to live on just £53 a week. Each time he needs to travel or needs clothing for work, he should also be offered assistance up to a low predetermined limit that in practice is nearly impossible or counter productive to receive.

Now lets move to banker bashing.

Loads of professionals earn high salaries. In some situations I can understand. However, the bankers made their gains by exploiting capitalism. If we hadn't interfered and let capitalism play it's course, most of these bankers would have no jobs and their industry would have been reduced to ruins. Every person in this country has suffered and continues to, in order to prop up these failures. If we were all given bonds or shares in the banks that would be one thing. If the government took dividends on the shares with a long term view to use this income to reduce taxation that would also be acceptable.

Can you please explain to me how it is acceptable that in the good times, people get screwed by finanical organisations so they can make profit, yet in the bad times everyone's money is stolen* to prop up the same banks who have been fleecing them from day one?

*Ok, yes we haven't had any money technically stolen. However if you consider the devaluation of our currency (weren't we promised this wouldn't happen before QE?), interest rates and inflation - we are taking a hit as bad as the much talked about aborted haircut in Cyprus every 18 months or so. Only difference is instead of seeing numbers vanish from our bank accounts, the money we pull out is gradually becoming worthless instead. Same shit at the end.

[WotTheFook]

@ blacksheep - So, you are saying that people get high wages for having particular skills. What do David Cameron and George Osborne (along with a lot of MPs) get their stupidly high salaries for? Do they get them for having remarkably good bullshitting and bluffing skills?

[Over Carl]

Forgot about another scenario - you get the advisor from hell at the jobcentre who suspects you are trying to play the system.

Get ready to attend the job centre up to 3 times a week (random times, often at very short notice) with no extra payments for travel.

Then if you are really unlucky, you will have to bring in supporting evidence for each activity on your jobsearch form. Here's one person's breakdown of what he had to pay weekly to prove to the jobcentre he actually was applying for jobs:

50 Envelopes = £2.99
A4 Paper 250 sheets = £6.00
50 First Class Stamps = £30.00
Printer Ink = £20.00
News Papers = £10.00

Total of £68.00 pw, leaving the person with £3pw to pay for everything except housing. Ok, we could knock off the stamps and papers, but this means you need pc and broadband. Also could shave the ink cost but we are all IT geeks who know not to buy Lexmarks. Unfortunately not everyone else is as clued up as us.

In my last period of unemployment I had to go through that for a month - fortunately I had previously stockpiled things like printer paper and toners when I was employed.

Just thought of something else - in that scenario what do you do if your printer packs up?

[Mr.James]

Ridiculous... The guy that challenged IDS to live on 53 quid a week gets three times that amount himself.


________________
Sent via Tapatalk

[Bald Bouncer]

Ridiculous... The guy that challenged IDS to live on 53 quid a week gets three times that amount himself.

Why did he claim he could do it? if not why is it 'Ridiculous', if someone said to me they walk on water would it be ridiculous of me to challenge them to do it if I couldn't or haden't claimed to myself?

[Mr.James]

Why did he claim he could do it? if not why is it 'Ridiculous', if someone said to me they walk on water would it be ridiculous of me to challenge them to do it if I couldn't or haden't claimed to myself?

The guy may as well have challenged him to live on a pound a week, or a million pound a week. Both are as irrelevant as the imaginary 53 quid a week figure.

IDS has said he can because he's done it in the past. Nothing more than that.

If someone said to you they'd taken a bullet in a shop robbery would you ask them to take another to prove it?


________________
Sent via Tapatalk

[Bald Bouncer]

The guy may as well have challenged him to live on a pound a week, or a million pound a week. Both are as irrelevant as the imaginary 53 quid a week figure.

IDS has said he can because he's done it in the past. Nothing more than that.

Sorry you didn't answer my question why is it 'Ridiculous'? IDS said he could live on £53 a week and you say he done it before (not sure if that's his claim but he never said that at the time) that's bullshit for a start because even if he had survived on £53 a week it would have been so long ago it would be the equivalent of £153 a week.

If someone said to you they'd taken a bullet in a shop robbery would you ask them to take another to prove it?

Is this something to do with this thread or just some sort of obscure question?

If it's a question and in some way related to this as an analogy it's one of the worst I have ever seen, if someone makes a claim it is reasonable for someone to ask them to prove that claim, it was not a claim involving being shot and even by that analogy I would ask to see the wound/scar should I doubt what they are saying.

Edit: Could you post a link to IDS saying he has done it in the past please as I can't seem to find that quote.

[Fearless]

As Stated before the people who are willing to work now face such problems as this:-
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...p-8501329.html
and to make it worse we have a mass influx of Romanians and Bulgarians now, the country is already way too full.

There is talk also this week of scrapping the minimum wage.

I also believe with the new Universal credits/Bedroom tax and having to pay council tax even if you are on benefits, everything in costs is going up (except the rate of benefits), we are likely to see more riots (like the ones last year), an increase in crime and real poverty in the UK.

[Over Carl]

I wanted to say it myself but have been to scared to do so after seeing the reactions when shit came to shove.

I've lost count of how many times I've read on this board recently that we could/should/must revolt, etc. However the last time the country came anything close to this about a year and a half ago I remember being the general public as well as a lot of df members weren't too happy.

[Mr.James]

Sorry you didn't answer my question why is it 'Ridiculous'? IDS said he could live on £53 a week and you say he done it before (not sure if that's his claim but he never said that at the time) that's bullshit for a start because even if he had survived on £53 a week it would have been so long ago it would be the equivalent of £153 a week.

It's ridiculous how crazy it's blown out of all proportion. Some guy pretended he had to live on a third of what he was actually receiving and challenged IDS about it. IDS has done it in the past so said yeah it's possible from personal experience.

Is this something to do with this thread or just some sort of obscure question?

If it's a question and in some way related to this as an analogy it's one of the worst I have ever seen, if someone makes a claim it is reasonable for someone to ask them to prove that claim, it was not a claim involving being shot and even by that analogy I would ask to see the wound/scar should I doubt what they are saying.

Exactly, you wouldn't ask them to take a bullet again, you'd ask for proof. So why are people signing a petition to get him to do it again?

Edit: Could you post a link to

IDS saying he has done it in the past please as I can't seem to find that quote.

It was a TV interview I seen on BBC News so no idea if there's link on the net. Starting there's prob your best bet. He's done it a number of times apparently.


________________
Sent via Tapatalk

[Bald Bouncer]

It's ridiculous how crazy it's blown out of all proportion. Some guy pretended he had to live on a third of what he was actually receiving and challenged IDS about it. IDS has done it in the past so said yeah it's possible from personal experience.

Exactly, you wouldn't ask them to take a bullet again, you'd ask for proof. So why are people signing a petition to get him to do it again?

It was a TV interview I seen on BBC News so no idea if there's link on the net. Starting there's prob your best bet. He's done it a number of times apparently.

Can't really argue if you can't back things up with facts, everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

You are totally missing the point it was the arrogance of the claim and the reaction was not ridiculous, the question was not ridiculous for the reasons I have already pointed out you came back with a crazy analogy involving deliberate personal injury when proof would be easy to obtain unlike in this case.

I don't think for one second most of the nearly half a million people who signed this believe there would be the slightest possibility of him even considering doing it, the point was while MP's dip into the public troff increasing claims way and above inflation for things like curtains costing more than a small car and any sort of cuts or caps to this are not even mentioned, a high percentage of them avoid paying tax or use loopholes to swerve it as with the capital gains tax it's right to give him and them a wake up call.

We pay these people's wages so asking them to prove the claims they make is absolutely right not ridiculous

[Rick Sanchez]

Its on YouTube

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

[Fearless]

Another thing that gets me mad is stuff like this
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-Congo.html?fb

£180million of our tax money

[Bald Bouncer]

Another thing that gets me mad is stuff like this
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-Congo.html?fb

£180million of our tax money

Well really a different subject but I do agree (without real knowledge of in depth details) it seems crazy to be borrowing money up to your eyes in debt only to give it away to other countries, as an analogy if I was up to my eye's in debt and borrowing money and a friend came to me and said can you lend me or even give me some cash my reply would be I would love to help you out but can't as I am in the shit myself sorry.

[DavidF]

As Stated before the people who are willing to work now face such problems as this:-
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...p-8501329.html
and to make it worse we have a mass influx of Romanians and Bulgarians now, the country is already way too full.

There is talk also this week of scrapping the minimum wage.

I also believe with the new Universal credits/Bedroom tax and having to pay council tax even if you are on benefits, everything in costs is going up (except the rate of benefits), we are likely to see more riots (like the ones last year), an increase in crime and real poverty in the UK.

I wanted to say it myself but have been to scared to do so after seeing the reactions when shit came to shove.

I've lost count of how many times I've read on this board recently that we could/should/must revolt, etc. However the last time the country came anything close to this about a year and a half ago I remember being the general public as well as a lot of df members weren't too happy.

Sometimes I love a good debate about politics. Sometimes I revel in presenting facts and figures. Bus sometimes I do get jaded by what seems as if I am repeating myself and talking in a different language. The working classes are being attacked on all fronts. Just last week we now see that their is now 7 classes in the UK. Nobody really seems to click that about 5 of these "new" classes are bloody well working class. Divide and conquer in it's finest hour imho. It is little wonder that people are pissed off. Lets look at it -
1. People on poor wages are pissed off at people who are not working
2. People hunting for work are pissed off at the people on poor wages who are calling them scroungers ect
3. People on middle incomes are pissed off at paying too much tax and they blame the low earners/workless (why should we pay for them to have xyz)
4. Disabled an sick are pissed at all the above and being vilified at every turn.
5. The young are pissed off at lack of prospects and receive little or no respect/sympathy from hardly anyone
6. The minorities are pissed off that they are being blamed as the problem by many
The list is endless. The only ones not pissed off are the top 5-10% of earners (you will find a lot of them in the house of commons btw ......yeah yeah we know they only earn <100k but add to that their vested intrests ect they don't do bloody bad)
Then we hear about multi nationals paying little or no tax ffs.
We are working class and we bloody well need a voice...a new party would be great. If not then yeah I believe tensions will keep rising and rising....cut the police force a bit more too that should round things off nicely. I feel tension in the air and not before bloody time either.

[Mr.James]

Can't really argue if you can't back things up with facts, everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

You are totally missing the point it was the arrogance of the claim and the reaction was not ridiculous, the question was not ridiculous for the reasons I have already pointed out you came back with a crazy analogy involving deliberate personal injury when proof would be easy to obtain unlike in this case.

I don't think for one second most of the nearly half a million people who signed this believe there would be the slightest possibility of him even considering doing it, the point was while MP's dip into the public troff increasing claims way and above inflation for things like curtains costing more than a small car and any sort of cuts or caps to this are not even mentioned, a high percentage of them avoid paying tax or use loopholes to swerve it as with the capital gains tax it's right to give him and them a wake up call.

We pay these people's wages so asking them to prove the claims they make is absolutely right not ridiculous

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...sons-Left.html


________________
Sent via Tapatalk