OOOOOOOOOOhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh (see, we can all go OTT), sorry for having an opinion about your opinion.

That's the way debates and discussion and free speech work.

As the average family gets ca. GBP 22,000 spent on them per annum by the State (per Robertson's programme on BBC 2 tonight) then I don't think anyone should complain.

Quote ="Mintball"If that's down to the recession alone, then why isn't it impacting on those at the very top too? I have access to Google – here's another search: 'falling Uk wages 30 years'. There's plenty. www.google.co.uk/search?client=s ... -gaU_Ny7Dg'" Taking the first hit, from the TUC: Quote Those higher up the income scale have enjoyed a more rapid rise n living standards than those in the bottom 60 per cent of the income distribution, while the super-rich have secured themselves a personal wealth boom on a scale not seen since the end of the nineteenth century.'" Some people have benefited more than others. [url=http://www.channel4.com/news/wages-at-standstill-over-last-30-yearsThe third result[/url shows that incomes have risen but sadly does not correlate that with the rise in the cost of living. Again, yes, income inequality has increased (I've never disputed that), but where is the evidence to backup up the claim that "everyone apart from those at the very top, have seen their incomes fall against the rising cost of living over the last 30 years"?

Quote ="Mintball"If that's down to the recession alone, then why isn't it impacting on those at the very top too? I have access to Google – here's another search: 'falling Uk wages 30 years'. There's plenty. www.google.co.uk/search?client=s ... -gaU_Ny7Dg'" Taking the first hit, from the TUC: Quote Those higher up the income scale have enjoyed a more rapid rise n living standards than those in the bottom 60 per cent of the income distribution, while the super-rich have secured themselves a personal wealth boom on a scale not seen since the end of the nineteenth century.'" Some people have benefited more than others. [url=http://www.channel4.com/news/wages-at-standstill-over-last-30-yearsThe third result[/url shows that incomes have risen but sadly does not correlate that with the rise in the cost of living. Again, yes, income inequality has increased (I've never disputed that), but where is the evidence to backup up the claim that "everyone apart from those at the very top, have seen their incomes fall against the rising cost of living over the last 30 years"?

And you'd find many here who would agree with that.

Part of the issue is the cost of housing, reduce that and you'd reduce a great deal of the need for wage rises and reduce the welfare bill too.

www.hrmagazine.co.uk/hro/news/10 ... west-world www.financialadvice.co.uk/news/h ... iving.html We know that the cost of housing has risen to crackpot levels – £125,000K for a basic, one-bed flat if you're a 'key worker' now in Hackney, for instance. How many 'key workers' earn over £41K per annum? Let alone how many non-key workers can afford double that for a one-bed flat. We know that people now have to pay tuition fees where once they didn't. We know that domestic utility bills are going through the roof. We know that many (in England at least) have to pay for prescriptions where once they didn't. We know that dental and eye care cost far more than they used to. We know that the cost of transport has risen massively. These are not luxuries. These are basics. And incomes would have had to have risen a lot to have kept pace. BTW SBR – perhaps you could find something to show just how pay has risen to mitigate all these rising costs? [url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1358161/The-rising-cost-living-revealed-How-young-need-twice-salary-match-parents-lifestyle.html'How young need twice salary of their parents to match the lifestyle'.[/url

www.hrmagazine.co.uk/hro/news/10 ... west-world www.financialadvice.co.uk/news/h ... iving.html We know that the cost of housing has risen to crackpot levels – £125,000K for a basic, one-bed flat if you're a 'key worker' now in Hackney, for instance. How many 'key workers' earn over £41K per annum? Let alone how many non-key workers can afford double that for a one-bed flat. We know that people now have to pay tuition fees where once they didn't. We know that domestic utility bills are going through the roof. We know that many (in England at least) have to pay for prescriptions where once they didn't. We know that dental and eye care cost far more than they used to. We know that the cost of transport has risen massively. These are not luxuries. These are basics. And incomes would have had to have risen a lot to have kept pace. BTW SBR – perhaps you could find something to show just how pay has risen to mitigate all these rising costs? [url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1358161/The-rising-cost-living-revealed-How-young-need-twice-salary-match-parents-lifestyle.html'How young need twice salary of their parents to match the lifestyle'.[/url

Lots of people have been able to ride out and offset these effects because they pay low interest rates on their mortgages, but after a few years of this that lower mortgage has been factored in and got used to. No money has been set aside probably.
If the interest rates go up to double current rates and little else changes, then the faeces will hit the fan.

Oh, this is good – another tax evader who begged the government to cut services is closing shops rather than creating the jobs that he (and others) promised to create in order to provide work for those made unemployed. www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15867924

Oh, this is good – another tax evader who begged the government to cut services is closing shops rather than creating the jobs that he (and others) promised to create in order to provide work for those made unemployed. www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15867924

Quote ="Mintball"Oh, this is good – another tax evader who begged the government to cut services is closing shops rather than creating the jobs that he (and others) promised to create in order to provide work for those made unemployed. www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15867924'" I think Cam and Ozzie have forgotten their ridiculous diagnosis that the public sector was squeezing-out the private sector and I'd guess they are hoping that we've forgotten their prognosis that the private sector would provide jobs for those being sacked in the public sector. It ain't happening is it?

Quote ="Mintball"Oh, this is good – another tax evader who begged the government to cut services is closing shops rather than creating the jobs that he (and others) promised to create in order to provide work for those made unemployed. www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15867924'" I think Cam and Ozzie have forgotten their ridiculous diagnosis that the public sector was squeezing-out the private sector and I'd guess they are hoping that we've forgotten their prognosis that the private sector would provide jobs for those being sacked in the public sector. It ain't happening is it?

Quote ="Mintball"Oh, this is good – another tax evader who begged the government to cut services is closing shops rather than creating the jobs that he (and others) promised to create in order to provide work for those made unemployed. www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15867924'" Highlighting the fact that actually, there is no such thing as an "expert" in economics, its all theory and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. "You must cut services, get rid of civil servants" came the call "OK" came the answer "Oh, hang on, they've stopped spending money" "Now what do you want us to do ?" "Don't know, I'm just trying to save my a[irs[/ie at the next shareholders meeting"

Quote ="Mintball"Oh, this is good – another tax evader who begged the government to cut services is closing shops rather than creating the jobs that he (and others) promised to create in order to provide work for those made unemployed. www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15867924'" Highlighting the fact that actually, there is no such thing as an "expert" in economics, its all theory and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. "You must cut services, get rid of civil servants" came the call "OK" came the answer "Oh, hang on, they've stopped spending money" "Now what do you want us to do ?" "Don't know, I'm just trying to save my a[irs[/ie at the next shareholders meeting"

Nope.



I think that's a pretty good summing up. Still, they're only screwing around with other people's lives.

Quote ="Mintball"Oh, this is good – another tax evader who begged the government to cut services is closing shops rather than creating the jobs that he (and others) promised to create in order to provide work for those made unemployed. www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15867924'" I may be wrong here, but wasn't Green's "recommendation" to the government more to do with improving goverment procurement and making more efficient use of its supply chains, rather than cutting services or jobs?

Quote ="Mintball"Oh, this is good – another tax evader who begged the government to cut services is closing shops rather than creating the jobs that he (and others) promised to create in order to provide work for those made unemployed. www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15867924'" I may be wrong here, but wasn't Green's "recommendation" to the government more to do with improving goverment procurement and making more efficient use of its supply chains, rather than cutting services or jobs?

I don't think anyone here is in any doubts about my thoughts on neo-liberalism, but in the short term, if you want to grow an economy that is massively based on consumerism, then to reduce the amount of people who can be active consumers is economic illiteracy.

Therein lies the problem. We should have an economy that is based on production (like Germany) and not consumerism. When girls and young women give "shopping" as a "hobby" on their CVs you know we're in a mess - morally, spiritually and economically. If austerity brings about a shift in values then it may well be worth it.

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh i see what youve done there. Very clever (well not really) just a simple yes no question is the benefit system fair and working.

It'll be easier to stop an iceberg than it would getting my clan to take up a new hobby.

I'm sure it will bring a warm glow to the heart of those in fuel poverty this winter, knowing that it'll all be worth it for the betterment of society as a whole.

You're right. It wasn't very clever of you to whinge and whine about being "sorry to have an opinion". Nobody has said you can't have an opinion.

Thus you appear to be whinging that anyone else has an opinion too – or more specifically, that anyone else can have an opinion about your opinion.

Well tough. If you don't like it, don't post your opinions on a public forum, because once you do that, other people are allowed to voice their opinions on yours, in exactly the same way that you are allowed to express your opinions on other people's opinions.

In your opinion, that is.

So after all that pi55 and wind you still couldnt bring yourself to answer the question.

I'll answer your question for you by giving you my opinion on the subject.

No, it is not right that someone on benefits should be earning more than someone who is working full-time but the solution is not to cut the benefits of those who cannot work full-time. Those on benefits should be given enough support to enable them to live adequately, those working full-time should be able to earn enough to live comfortably, as a minimum.

Now I have a question for you: Are you from Wakefield by any chance?

I'd hate to upset you by offering an opinion on your opinion.

But since you insist, I shall repeat things that you presumably missed earlier.

If companies such as Tesco need a job doing, they can afford to pay someone to do it. They can afford to employ someone. This would be a boost to the economy. Indeed, companies such as Tesco actually promised to create lots of jobs so that all the people who are being thrown out of work for no fault of their own would have new ones to go to.

Having people stack shelves for a few weeks, at the taxpayers' expense, is not fulfilling that promise - especially when there is no chance of a job at the end of it, but a new person on the same deal.

If someone is made redundant, through no fault of their own, why do you appear to think that they should give Tesco free labour that you and I subsidise? Do you assume that, having been made redundant, they suddenly become workshy and need this 'experience'?

The economy will not grow because Tesco - or any firm - is able to take advantage of free labour.

It will grow with the creation of real jobs.

So if a job needs doing, then a job should be made available. And if a company cannot - seriously - afford a full and decent wage for the job, then possibly there needs to be a rethink on in-work benefits making sure that the person who takes up the job can actually live. Just as there needs to be serious thought given to the issues of seasonal and short-term contract work.

And what Coddy said.

And to answer yours no i dont live in Wakefield, and I fail to see why my opinion of this situation is effected from where i live, this is not endemic of one particular area but is happening up and down the entire length and bredth of the country just a point from your post, not 1 person on benefits EARNS their money and thats my point, i am not suggesting they arent given help but, they should EARN their money, get them repairing roads with council gangs, even give them a scraper and clean the chewing gum off the streets, get them doing anything but for the community for the public that provides their living, if they dont like it, THEN they can wave bye bye to free money. or do what others do and get a job.

I agree with Mintball here - taxpayers should not be subsidising private enterprise. However who is behind this - is it Tescos or is it the Government. I am sure Tesco are more than willing to pay what is required to ensure the correct levels of labour - they do employ approximately 200,000 staff.

I doubt Tescos will have gone to the Dave and said we need a host of free labour more likely Dave saying we have an issue can you help. Do Tescos actually need these people or are the just finding them something to do to help this government?

Where I do disagree with Mintball is this we as taxpayers - I bet Tesco pays significantly more into the taxation pot in corporation tax and employer NI that 99.9% of all businesses in the UK - Tescos are every bit as much a tax payer as Mintball.