Politics Today

Hermann

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
6,241
I'm more happy to do that than have us mere mortals see our system collapse Diane.
Everyone's happy then.

But since you like numbers so much, why don't you work out how much of the estimated 1.7 billion would be lost admitting 100,000 pupils into the state school system? Then take how much is left, divide it by 100,000, then compare that to current school spending levels in England?
 

tavyred

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
10,932
I quite often have come on here and lauded Britain’s ‘jobs miracle’. With circa 5 million of our number on out of work benefits, it seems our supposedly low unemployment rate is a myth.

 

DB9

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jun 19, 2005
Messages
21,633
Location
Hampshire. Heart's in N Devon
I quite often have come on here and lauded Britain’s ‘jobs miracle’. With circa 5 million of our number on out of work benefits, it seems our supposedly low unemployment rate is a myth.

Of course it is, All Governments over the years have "Skewed" the figures to make that headline rate low, Can't remember the way they use to calculate back in the day but it was changed at various times.
 

tavyred

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
10,932
Of course it is, All Governments over the years have "Skewed" the figures to make that headline rate low, Can't remember the way they use to calculate back in the day but it was changed at various times.
….but the real story is why the conspiracy of silence on the true number of people out of work and living on benefits. It’s a staggering number and I sense it’s a stone our politicians are reluctant to turn over.
 

Grecian2K

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
30,446
Location
Red & White Forever
….but the real story is why the conspiracy of silence on the true number of people out of work and living on benefits. It’s a staggering number and I sense it’s a stone our politicians are reluctant to turn over.
But surely the biggest scandal are those increasing number of "precariat" that are IN work but still in need public support - almost totally to subsidise their avaricious employers.

You know - the "working claimants" (1.7 Million at the last count) Surely even you have to agree that is a shameful indictment of the current system which increasing favours the "1%" over the rest?

Read this and weep.

The cruellest irony is that those who do endeavour to "strive", even a few quid over the arbitrary"cut off level" end up paying an (effective) 55% "tax rate" on those added earnings. A rate that the fat cats (and their supine apologists like Jigzy) incessantly rail about as "unfair".
 

angelic upstart

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jul 8, 2004
Messages
25,994
I agree with both Tavy and G2K - The jobless total got changed at some point by the Cameron govt, they deliberately massaged the figures to look good. There's literally millions of people wasting their lives away doing nothing. In turn, they turn to other (often nefarious) things to pass the time and/or suffer from numerous mental health issues due to having too much spare time on their hands.

On way of "fixing" the issue, is to ensure workers are paid a fair wage so they can live. Another would be to ensure there's jobs in the right places where there's people available. Another would be to ensure there's decent housing for people. Above all, ensuring that children have a decent education and/or training would be a big help. Course all this costs money and govts are not willing to pay into it. It would take decades before proper results would be seen.

I could waffle on all day....
 
Last edited:

tavyred

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
10,932
But surely the biggest scandal are those increasing number of "precariat" that are IN work but still in need public support - almost totally to subsidise their avaricious employers.

You know - the "working claimants" (1.7 Million at the last count) Surely even you have to agree that is a shameful indictment of the current system which increasing favours the "1%" over the rest?

Read this and weep.

The cruellest irony is that those who do endeavour to "strive", even a few quid over the arbitrary"cut off level" end up paying an (effective) 55% "tax rate" on those added earnings. A rate that the fat cats (and their supine apologists like Jigzy) incessantly rail about as "unfair".
There is an argument that says the 40% of UC claimants that are in work are at least partly playing the game by working, I give you that.
We do however seem to have over a decade or two created a work landscape that for every person that is trapped in a benefits trap, where low paid work doesn’t pay the bills, there are also perhaps a million or so of our number who are happy to live quite often miserable but idle lives on the taxpayer.
I personally see no point in high levels of immigration if their taxes are spent on keeping our own people on benefits and leading subsistence lifestyles.
Both major parties have the ambition to create a high wage, high productivity economy, but I’m not sure they are willing to do the unpopular stuff to realise that ambition.
 

Mr Jinx

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
12,575
But surely the biggest scandal are those increasing number of "precariat" that are IN work but still in need public support - almost totally to subsidise their avaricious employers.

You know - the "working claimants" (1.7 Million at the last count) Surely even you have to agree that is a shameful indictment of the current system which increasing favours the "1%" over the rest?

Read this and weep.

The cruellest irony is that those who do endeavour to "strive", even a few quid over the arbitrary"cut off level" end up paying an (effective) 55% "tax rate" on those added earnings. A rate that the fat cats (and their supine apologists like Jigzy) incessantly rail about as "unfair".
An article from Toynbee? Lolz. Let me guess...is she outraged?

Your first point has some merit though. We're talking Gordon Brown's tax credits right?
 

Grecian2K

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
30,446
Location
Red & White Forever
An article from Toynbee? Lolz. Let me guess...is she outraged?

Your first point has some merit though. We're talking Gordon Brown's tax credits right?
No the IDS remix - Universal (Dis)Credit.

PS: I presume that you didn't actually read the article? Probably too busy fighting off the North London "Albanians" with your pitchfork.
 
Top