tax credits take 9

wanderlust wrote:As to whether or not we should abandon the Welfare State and have e.g. an American-style insurance based system instead is another debate altogether.

Go and wash your mouth out for even bringing that up.

I know you're not directly advocating it, but Whittam will pounce on that and say what a great idea it is and then I will have to get involved (even though Whittam just talks shit for the sake of being "controversial" and I know it's all bollocks) and I don't want to have to do that.

Breadman wrote:

wanderlust wrote:As to whether or not we should abandon the Welfare State and have e.g. an American-style insurance based system instead is another debate altogether.

Go and wash your mouth out for even bringing that up.

I know you're not directly advocating it, but Whittam will pounce on that and say what a great idea it is and then I will have to get involved (even though Whittam just talks shit for the sake of being "controversial" and I know it's all bollocks) and I don't want to have to do that.

Sorry Bread but that's what underpins Whittam's comments so I thought we might as well spit it out instead of dancing around it to see if anyone notices.

wanderlust wrote:Overpopulation will be the end of humanity and that day got a lot nearer when the Chinese abandoned their one child policy last month. Only in the decadent west do we consider having children a right rather than a privilege.

I could not agree more.

At a time when the country, and indeed the world, is overpopulated we should be making it harder for people to have two, three or four kids.

It's all very well the liberals like 1874 jumping on the human rights bandwagon, but unless we do something now future generations will be facing the apocalypse.

It won't matter because ISIS will already have killed us all in our beds, apparently, so I wouldn't worry.

Cutting tax credits won't effect the birth rate. 

If you really gave a shit about saving the world long term why are you voting for the Tories?

I don't really get the logic of the tax credits and sometimes wonder if the market should regulate itself rather than have government interference.

What is the point in taxing one person to use that money to subsidise another persons income simply to work for a employer paying a poor wage?

How are you ever going to break that cycle as there is no incentive for the employer ever to increase the wages he pays (and thereby increase his costs/reduce his profits).

If on the other hand tax credits are not paid and people will not work for the wage on offer, then the employer WILL have to increase the wages he pays otherwise the work does not get done.


But wait, that is far to simple.

If local people wont work for those wages, then others might.  It may be a regional thing - Norman Tebbits 'get on your bike, or EU wide, the east Europeans coming for better paid jobs than they have at home.

So the Government then gets higher unemployment (and thus still paying benefits) at home, whilst having increased immigration into the country.

The employer still is paying low wages (maximising his profits), people (the Poles, etc) are in jobs and thus paying tax into the system and those who would only work for tax credits are still on roughly the same benefits but this time not working at all.

Everybody sorts of wins, the employers cost has not gone up, the new foreign workforce is paying into the economy via taxation and spending wages in this country and those who perhaps didn't want to work in the first place aren't and still receiving money to stay at home.

Ok, immigration is an issue but no more than it is already.

The thing is though the government says it wants better control of immigration and reduces government spending on welfare - neither of which it will if it didn't try to do something or other about tax credits.

All in all it is a bit of a mess with no clear way out imo.

bwfc1874 wrote:Cutting tax credits won't effect the birth rate. 

Not in the short term perhaps, but eventually people will realise that having kids leads to poverty if you haven't got a job.

You're dreaming if you think people don't get pregnant just for the child benefit/child tax credits.

So you're pissed up one night, and a fit bird says ' give it to me you hunk' and have sex without a welly on (or), what do you do at two o'clock in the morning?

I'm just nipping out to get a comdom'
The government has to pay for lust, and if a kid pops out nine months later, the kid should be entitled to benefits.

It's not the kids fault, there are just not enough johnny machine's knocking around.

I blame the government.

scottjames30 wrote:So you're pissed up one night, and a fit bird says ' give it to me you hunk' and have sex without a welly on (or), what do you do at two o'clock in the morning?

I'm just nipping out to get a comdom'
The government has to pay for lust, and if a kid pops out nine months later, the kid should be entitled to benefits.

It's not the kids fault, there are just not enough johnny machine's knocking around.

I blame the government.

You've just lifted that verbatim, from the UKIP Election Manifesto, haven't you?

'Give it to me you hunk'.

Natasha Whittam wrote:You're dreaming if you think people don't get pregnant just for the child benefit/child tax credits.

You're dodging the question, if you're so concerned about the long term why vote Tory?

bwfc1874 wrote:

You're dodging the question, if you're so concerned about the long term why vote Tory?

I hate all politicians regardless of which party they represent.

At the last election it was a case of choosing the best of a bad bunch. And after the last time Labour were in charge I couldn't possibly vote for them - they took us to war and fucked the economy.

And when it comes down to it I think the Tories are better with the finances than any of the alternatives.

I actually think they've made a mistake reversing this decision though. Sometimes you have to make unpopular decisions for the greater good.

But lets give the refugees billions and send billions abroad, great idea.

scottjames30 wrote:But lets give the refugees billions and send billions abroad, great idea.

I agree, how can we give more when we are supposedly in debt to the eyeballs.

We need to sort our own shit out first before donating more.

It's a bloody joke!

I hope that all the people who voted the CONservatives in are right pleased with themselves, tossers.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:

You're dodging the question, if you're so concerned about the long term why vote Tory?

I hate all politicians regardless of which party they represent.

At the last election it was a case of choosing the best of a bad bunch. And after the last time Labour were in charge I couldn't possibly vote for them - they took us to war and fucked the economy.

And when it comes down to it I think the Tories are better with the finances than any of the alternatives.

I actually think they've made a mistake reversing this decision though. Sometimes you have to make unpopular decisions for the greater good.

You've tried to frame the tax credit cuts as a move to curb over population, which says to me you have a lack of understanding of Osborne's ideology and how he wants to shape the country. 

I've no idea how you can vote for somebody if you don't really know what it is they're looking to achieve?

Invest in the children, they are the future of England.

bwfc1874 wrote:
I've no idea how you can vote for somebody if you don't really know what it is they're looking to achieve?

It's actually quite easy, you just go in a booth and put a cross next to a name.

karlypants wrote:

I hope that all the people who voted the CONservatives in are right pleased with themselves, tossers.

Unemployment down, economy on the up.

You do realise these are the two most important things?

Why on earth would anyone vote Labour after last time - those people are the tossers.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:
I've no idea how you can vote for somebody if you don't really know what it is they're looking to achieve?

It's actually quite easy, you just go in a booth and put a cross next to a name.

As this is all you replied to I think we can all see you don't have a clue what you're talking about on this topic.

bwfc1874 wrote:

As this is all you replied to I think we can all see you don't have a clue what you're talking about on this topic.

I voted for them because I trusted them to sort out the financial mess left by the last Labour party.

Something they are clearly doing.

I don't like them, but if Labour were running things we'd be in a position similar to Greece.

You seem to think everyone should vote Labour just because you did.