[Skywalker]

Misnomer, on 09 October 2015 - 09:45 PM, said:

It amazes me that people don't care what's beyond their own front gate..."I'm on 40k a year, plus bonuses, and have a lovely company car; what do I care about those on zero hours contracts, unemployed or disabled"....

There are numerous things to consider when voting. It’s not just about ‘what is best for me’. If I voted solely on that purpose I wouldn’t be voting Conservative!!

[Misnomer]

Skywalker, on 09 October 2015 - 10:03 PM, said:

There are numerous things to consider when voting. It’s not just about ‘what is best for me’. If I voted solely on that purpose I wouldn’t be voting Conservative!!

I think you should have replied to Chris Snell's post, rather than mine...but, whilst we are here, what were the reasons you voted Tory then...if it wasn't for selfish reasons?

This post has been edited by Misnomer: 10 October 2015 - 04:30 PM

[Zeus]

Misnomer, on 10 October 2015 - 04:09 PM, said:

I think you should have replied to Chris Snell's post, rather than mine...but, whilst we are here, what were the reasons you voted Tory then...if it wasn't for selfish reasons?

I'd have a guess at innate pessimism to be as good a reason as any.

[Search & Destroy]

Misnomer, on 10 October 2015 - 04:09 PM, said:

I think you should have replied to Chris Snell's post, rather than mine...but, whilst we are here, what were the reasons you voted Tory then...if it wasn't for selfish reasons?

Immigration, economy?

[fishini]

Search and Destroy, on 11 October 2015 - 05:05 PM, said:

Immigration, economy?

Well that worked out well. Immigration up, wages down, working conditions worse, food banks up, homeless up, NHS waiting times up, police, fire and ambulance services cuts. Almost forgot tax cuts for the richest 1%

[Misnomer]

fishini, on 11 October 2015 - 05:21 PM, said:

Well that worked out well. Immigration up, wages down, working conditions worse, food banks up, homeless up, NHS waiting times up, police, fire and ambulance services cuts. Almost forgot tax cuts for the richest 1%

You forgot to add the increased national debt lol

[fishini]

Misnomer, on 11 October 2015 - 05:40 PM, said:

You forgot to add the increased national debt lol

All pain that some have suffered for no gain. As is always the case under the tory scumbags. Pleased to see another of the thatcher era has met his maker, still a good many to go though. Good times ahead for me, I'll cheer the passing of every one of them

This post has been edited by fishini: 11 October 2015 - 06:21 PM

[Ernie Ernie Ernie]

Misnomer, on 09 October 2015 - 09:45 PM, said:

Yet, 'working people' on very low incomes, zero hours contracts, and those who have no job security or worker's rights.......are to have their tax credits virtually wiped out.

It amazes me that people don't care what's beyond their own front gate..."I'm on 40k a year, plus bonuses, and have a lovely company car; what do I care about those on zero hours contracts, unemployed or disabled"....

Did anyone chance upon the report about the amount of emergency ambulances sent to Sports Direct over the last two years, due to the fact, those on 12 week, zero hours contracts, who couldn't take any time off work or they would be sacked...continued to workeven through severe illness? Yeah, thanks for making the lives of these people even worse, Tory **** e r s...

I thought the introduction of universal credit would make working families better off?

[Misnomer]

Ernie Ernie Ernie, on 11 October 2015 - 07:02 PM, said:

I thought the introduction of universal credit would make working families better off?

Essentially, the idea is that working people are encouraged to work even more. For example: a person working 16 hours a week, minimum wage, receiving tax credits to support their family, is encouraged to seek further hours of employment (their credits are being cut to encourage/facilitate this). However, here is the funny part; once they find further hours of employment (obviously more income), their housing benefit/council tax benefit is reduced; effectively, anything more they earn through further hours employment is not put in their pocket and used to plug the reduction in tax credits, it merely reduces the amount of benefit they receive. The emphasis is placed on the employee to seek more hours (given the state of zero hours contracts, this is hardly feasible; or, will be feasible for a very short amount of time), and the employers to offer more hours......either way, those that can't find further hours of work will be significantly worse off through tax credit reduction (even some Tories acknowledged this and were against it). It's absolutely disgusting and yet another attack on the poor, whilst rich bstards are given tax breaks, no action is taken against the bankers, and no banker's levy is introduced.

This post has been edited by Misnomer: 11 October 2015 - 07:26 PM

[Ernie Ernie Ernie]

Misnomer, on 11 October 2015 - 07:23 PM, said:

Essentially, the idea is that working people are encouraged to work even more. For example: a person working 16 hours a week, minimum wage, receiving tax credits to support their family, is encouraged to seek further hours of employment (their credits are being cut to encourage/facilitate this). However, here is the funny part; once they find further hours of employment (obviously more income), their housing benefit/council tax benefit is reduced; effectively, anything more they earn through further hours employment is not put in their pocket and used to plug the reduction in tax credits, it merely reduces the amount of benefit they receive. The emphasis is placed on the employee to seek more hours (given the state of zero hours contracts, this is hardly feasible; or, will be feasible for a very short amount of time), and the employers to offer more hours......either way, those that can't find further hours of work will be significantly worse off through tax credit reduction (even some Tories acknowledged this and were against it). It's absolutely disgusting.

That would be the case with the current working tax credit system, you get more hours you lose benefits, council/housing benefit etc? The point I'm trying to ask is that under universal credit those losses would be less under the two systems and you would get to keep more?

[Wooden Spoon]

Misnomer, on 11 October 2015 - 07:23 PM, said:

Essentially, the idea is that working people are encouraged to work even more. For example: a person working 16 hours a week, minimum wage, receiving tax credits to support their family, is encouraged to seek further hours of employment (their credits are being cut to encourage/facilitate this). However, here is the funny part; once they find further hours of employment (obviously more income), their housing benefit/council tax benefit is reduced; effectively, anything more they earn through further hours employment is not put in their pocket and used to plug the reduction in tax credits, it merely reduces the amount of benefit they receive. The emphasis is placed on the employee to seek more hours (given the state of zero hours contracts, this is hardly feasible; or, will be feasible for a very short amount of time), and the employers to offer more hours......either way, those that can't find further hours of work will be significantly worse off through tax credit reduction (even some Tories acknowledged this and were against it). It's absolutely disgusting and yet another attack on the poor, whilst rich bstards are given tax breaks, no action is taken against the bankers, and no banker's levy is introduced.

The tax credit system is flawed.Take a bar or cafe in London. They will charge full London prices for thier wares, and pay minimum wages to staff, creaming off extra profits while tax payers and local authorities subsidise the living wage for these people.

[fishini]

Ernie Ernie Ernie, on 11 October 2015 - 07:02 PM, said:

I thought the introduction of universal credit would make working families better off?

I'll ask you a simple question EEE. Where in history have the tory barstewards ever made the working class better off? and the richest worse off?

[Ernie Ernie Ernie]

fishini, on 11 October 2015 - 08:07 PM, said:

I'll ask you a simple question EEE. Where in history have the tory barstewards ever made the working class better off? and the richest worse off?

I'm not a Tory fish never voted for em in my life just asking the question from what I understand the situation to be. Tbh though fish I agree with folk working for what they get and I suspect that's how they got a lot of votes as folk fed up with the spongers. Sadly genuine people in need get tarred with the same brush as the third generation doleites

[frearsghost]

fishini, on 11 October 2015 - 08:07 PM, said:

I'll ask you a simple question EEE. Where in history have the tory barstewards ever made the working class better off? and the richest worse off?

I believe 80% of council houses in Bolsover have been bought by their tenants. For the first time in their lives people had an opportunity to become home owners, something they could never had dreamed of previously. They, and their children, would never again be dependent on paying rent to a landlord, or face eviction and, in many cases, has freed them from dependency on the Welfare State. A £5,000 pound investement has returned property worth over £100,000 and offered them security for life. More significantly, they are free from state interference in their lives.

Just out of interest I wonder how many posters on this thread have bought their council houses or have benefitted from their parents doing so.

[HistoricWarwick]

frearsghost, on 12 October 2015 - 10:10 AM, said:

I believe 80% of council houses in Bolsover have been bought by their tenants. For the first time in their lives people had an opportunity to become home owners, something they could never had dreamed of previously. They, and their children, would never again be dependent on paying rent to a landlord, or face eviction and, in many cases, has freed them from dependency on the Welfare State. A £5,000 pound investement has returned property worth over £100,000 and offered them security for life. More significantly, they are free from state interference in their lives.

Just out of interest I wonder how many posters on this thread have bought their council houses or have benefitted from their parents doing so.

My mum bought hers. I helped her.

However any political debate on this section is usually akin to trying to mix oil and water, so I am not sure to what end or gain this is suppose to lead.

[Misnomer]

frearsghost, on 12 October 2015 - 10:10 AM, said:

I believe 80% of council houses in Bolsover have been bought by their tenants. For the first time in their lives people had an opportunity to become home owners, something they could never had dreamed of previously. They, and their children, would never again be dependent on paying rent to a landlord, or face eviction and, in many cases, has freed them from dependency on the Welfare State. A £5,000 pound investement has returned property worth over £100,000 and offered them security for life. More significantly, they are free from state interference in their lives.

Just out of interest I wonder how many posters on this thread have bought their council houses or have benefitted from their parents doing so.

Not me. However, local authorities got the cash from the sales of council housing but were then not allowed to spend it on building new social housing.....on the orders of Thatcher; it was used to subsidise their budgets. So, yeah, great plan....

[Wooden Spoon]

frearsghost said:

1444644637[/url]' post='1152369']
I believe 80% of council houses in Bolsover have been bought by their tenants. For the first time in their lives people had an opportunity to become home owners, something they could never had dreamed of previously. They, and their children, would never again be dependent on paying rent to a landlord, or face eviction and, in many cases, has freed them from dependency on the Welfare State. A £5,000 pound investement has returned property worth over £100,000 and offered them security for life. More significantly, they are free from state interference in their lives.

Just out of interest I wonder how many posters on this thread have bought their council houses or have benefitted from their parents doing so.

What a load of rubbish.
You are more likely to be evicted as a mortgage payer if you fall behind with payments, are out of work etc, than as a tenant.
Security for life? Yeah, and then in old age your house is sold to pay for care homes.
A huge number of those houses are owned by landlords renting to the DSS tenants and costing the council more in rent than their own stock
It was a bribe, a con, to fool working people into thinking they somehow had wealth and were now upwardly moving into the Middle England groups, to make people hostages to banks and mortgages and make them fearfull of unemployment. To break the social bonds

[frearsghost]

a kick in the balls, on 12 October 2015 - 03:26 PM, said:

What a load of rubbish.
You are more likely to be evicted as a mortgage payer if you fall behind with payments, are out of work etc, than as a tenant.
Security for life? Yeah, and then in old age your house is sold to pay for care homes.
A huge number of those houses are owned by landlords renting to the DSS tenants and costing the council more in rent than their own stock
It was a bribe, a con, to fool working people into thinking they somehow had wealth and were now upwardly moving into the Middle England groups, to make people hostages to banks and mortgages and make them fearfull of unemployment. To break the social bonds

It's not rubbish at all.

There are negative aspects to most economic transactions. They are not a 'con,' they are a fact of life.' We are all subject to economic downturns and unforseen individual circumstances. These things are not a reason not to enter financial contracts, whether it be a house or a piece of furniture. Life is a gamble and we all make economic decisions, whether we are rich or not, fully aware of the pitfalls. I was always aware that I could have lost my home in an instant but I wasn't paralysed with fear about not proceeding. When I was a kid, people were just as fearful of unemployment and not being able to pay their rent as people are paying their mortgage today.

The truth is there are hundreds of thousands of satisfied customers who would disagree with you and whose life and prospects have been enhanced by owning their own property. I'm delighted that most Bolsover people do and the majority seem to be doing quite nicely. Take a stroll up St Lawrence Ave and see the neat and tidy well maintained houses and gardens that exudes the pride of their owners.

The fact that some may have to pay for care fees from the proceeds of a sale, that some of these houses have been re-possessed - very few in Bolsover I would suggest; they were too cheap - has nothing whatsover to do with the basic principle of home ownership. Neither has the fact that they could sell them to whoever they liked after a period of time. These are separate issues.

You then lose me. That this is a social 'conspiracy' to break bonds - whatever that means - and talk of 'hostages' to banks is to enter the realms of fantasy using the language of class war.

That's me done on this topic. I'll leave it to the comrades to tidy up.

This post has been edited by frearsghost: 12 October 2015 - 07:10 PM

[fishini]

Tories caring for the poor, disadvantaged and disabled? LOL. Lets not forget the bitches 1983 care in the community policy. You know the one where the mentally ill were living in institutions under the NHS where they could live safely prior to 1983 then the bitch decided to close them all and literally threw 10's of 1000's of mentally disabled people onto the streets with no support or housing for them, with disastrous results. Yeah they really are the caring party. Lets also not forget the poll tax, that helped the poor too as did the 300% increase in VAT. Looking back they have done so much for the poor of this country I feel humble at the mere mention of them. Evil every single one of them.

[calvin plummers socks]

fishini, on 12 October 2015 - 06:34 PM, said:

Tories caring for the poor, disadvantaged and disabled? LOL. Lets not forget the bitches 1983 care in the community policy. You know the one where the mentally ill were living in institutions under the NHS where they could live safely prior to 1983 then the bitch decided to close them all and literally threw 10's of 1000's of mentally disabled people onto the streets with no support or housing for them, with disastrous results. Yeah they really are the caring party. Lets also not forget the poll tax, that helped the poor too as did the 300% increase in VAT. Looking back they have done so much for the poor of this country I feel humble at the mere mention of them. Evil every single one of them.

Sending our troops to a ridiculous war in '82 only to treat them like sh17 on their return