flag of convenience Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Both are as bad as each other and greedy oxygen thieves at both ends of the spectrum...meanwhile the rest of us that fall in the middle get shafted No believe me they are not. Those in the middle are/will be shafted but not by the bottom. The nature of the game being played makes for far more poorer people than anywhere near the top. The attack on welfare folk is all part of the plan to diminish it beyond recognition. Those required to make the most sacrifices are those middle down. The policy cuts borders. Reduce public spending. Cut real wages. Eliminate Social Services. Could be slogans for the next Lib election campaign, so popular apparently on this forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gbye grey sky Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I dont think they are as bad,not when it comes to monetary cost to the UK,bankers like Merril lynch,advise and dine with gvnmt ministers,yet have been fined hundreds of millions by banking regulators,but they are deemed respectable thievesThese are the same institutions that advised the gvnmt that the share price for the sell off of royal mail should be as low as £2.50 ffs! these are the same institutions that were allocated 70% of the same shares(by the gvnmt) they were advising on the sell off price,you couldn't script it! while joe public were limited to £700 i think it was,the same joe public that made royal mail what it was I agree and these crooks are deemed to be respectable and indeed feted. They even have the nerve to sit on regulatory bodies and sermonise to the rest of us. Think about it too much and get quite angry. Will go and mow the lawn now and get off soapbox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyHeart Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 So is it in Governments interests to keep the poorest, most unmotivated sector of society just where they are then? All part of their cunning plan? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali B Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 (edited) Edited September 21, 2014 by Ali B Old data Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny842003 Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 The people i see as being divided Ali,are the ones who lap up the right wing press and their focus on the unemployed "scroungers",ignoring the massive elephant in the room of tax avoidance by companies who can take loans out from arms of the same companies,and write this off in tax,its an absolute joke,legal or not But tax avoidance isn't ripping anyone off. I'm not saying it's wrong but seriously who would pay more tax than they are legally required to do so? I know I for one wouldn't. This is an issue for governments to legislate about create laws cut out loop holes and make companies pay what is reasonable. Until this is done I won't say they are ripping anyone off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyHeart Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 It's all a load of crap at the end of the day...I reckon the simpler the lifestyle and culture the happier the people....money and capitalism=greed/corruption and inequality. The human race will destroy itself through greed and selfishness The 'I'm alright Jack' culture...no-one cares enough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pablo Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 But tax avoidance isn't ripping anyone off. I'm not saying it's wrong but seriously who would pay more tax than they are legally required to do so? I know I for one wouldn't. This is an issue for governments to legislate about create laws cut out loop holes and make companies pay what is reasonable. Until this is done I won't say they are ripping anyone off. The "its legal" camp,like yourself,are just part of the reason they get away with it tho,YES,we/i know its legal,but morally its a disgrace,and i only wish there was as much public condemnation of it as there is of unemployed scroungers. Public outrage DOES bring results,as in the case of Starbucks,if there is enough public outrage,it might even bring about new legislation to at least TRY and get these loopholes closed down,apathy and acceptance never brought about change,thats my point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pablo Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Anyway,this commie socialist republican is going for some sausage on toast,all made by my comrades in the kibbutz in the back garden....tara! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali B Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 (edited) So is it in Governments interests to keep the poorest, most unmotivated sector of society just where they are then? All part of their cunning plan? Pretty much, yes. Nobody in power wants to lose it... Cynically, 100 yrs ago the poor were part of production of goods/services. That has now passed to robots and we have millions around the world who quite basically have "no purpose" anymore. Even in the industrialised developed world, unemployment is rising because the number of real jobs is falling. In production, robots and computers are more time efficient, don't get sick and take time off and don't argue back. We should be very afraid of technology. It's taking our jobs and dumbing down swathes of our youth. At a certain, ruthless and very cynical level, it would be useful to the powerful and their fawning governments, if ordinary people died or were killed off in wars. Populations fall and industrialists get fat contracts to build up destroyed cities again. They win all round, money in the bank and fewer pesky poor people to support with taxes. I'm actually quite a happy person but very realistic these days. Don't be fooled into thinking for one minute that governments run countries anymore, it's fat-cats in banks and business. Edited September 21, 2014 by Ali B Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali B Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyHeart Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 The "its legal" camp,like yourself,are just part of the reason they get away with it tho,YES,we/i know its legal,but morally its a disgrace,and i only wish there was as much public condemnation of it as there is of unemployed scroungers.Public outrage DOES bring results,as in the case of Starbucks,if there is enough public outrage,it might even bring about new legislation to at least TRY and get these loopholes closed down,apathy and acceptance never brought about change,thats my point. This is really the crux of the matter...as long as there are those without the morals to disagree with this...it will continue...and thrive... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyHeart Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Pretty much, yes. Nobody in power wants to lose it... Cynically, 100 yrs ago the poor were part of production of goods/services. That has now passed to robots and we have millions around the world who quite basically have "no purpose" anymore. Even in the industrialised developed world, unemployment is rising because the number of real jobs is falling. In production, robots and computers are more time efficient, don't get sick and take time off and don't argue back. We should be very afraid of technology. It's taking our jobs and dumbing down swathes of our youth. At a certain, ruthless and very cynical level, it would be useful to the powerful and their fawning governments, if ordinary people died or were killed off in wars. Populations fall and industrialists get fat contracts to build up destroyed cities again. They win all round, money in the bank and fewer pesky poor people to support with taxes. I'm actually quite a happy person but very realistic these days. Don't be fooled into thinking for one minute that governments run countries anymore, it's fat-cats in banks and business. I agree with some of your points but this one in particular.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 So is it in Governments interests to keep the poorest, most unmotivated sector of society just where they are then? All part of their cunning plan? Not necessary unmotivated. Anybody can be down on their luck or a victim of unforseen agendas. This includes single mothers, aged, folk past their sell by date on the job market, those inflicted by a mental illness. What is in their interests is the keep the proletariat from kicking down the door. The greatest fear of those in control is the unruly mob at the gates. As such procedures are put into motion to control and manage those in the ever growing numbers inflicted and the unwritten Social Contract that has served society well is gradually diminished. This previously kept inequality within certain limits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gbye grey sky Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Pretty much, yes. Nobody in power wants to lose it... Cynically, 100 yrs ago the poor were part of production of goods/services. That has now passed to robots and we have millions around the world who quite basically have "no purpose" anymore. Even in the industrialised developed world, unemployment is rising because the number of real jobs is falling. In production, robots and computers are more time efficient, don't get sick and take time off and don't argue back. We should be very afraid of technology. It's taking our jobs and dumbing down swathes of our youth. At a certain, ruthless and very cynical level, it would be useful to the powerful and their fawning governments, if ordinary people died or were killed off in wars. Populations fall and industrialists get fat contracts to build up destroyed cities again. They win all round, money in the bank and fewer pesky poor people to support with taxes. I'm actually quite a happy person but very realistic these days. Don't be fooled into thinking for one minute that governments run countries anymore, it's fat-cats in banks and business. Agree with most of your post but I have been working since 1977 and there are more people employed now than there were then (before computers or robots). They also take away some of the soul-destroying monotonous (dare I say robotic) tasks that the poor buggers in factories used to do. Such jobs were responsible for dumbing people down as they had to switch off their brains in order to cope with the monotony. Technology is not the enemy as long as it is harnessed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pablo Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I agree with some of your points but this one in particular.... We can all do little bits to help tho,i've had words with the manageress in Sainsburys 3 times about there being no "basket only" till available,her answer was what i expected "you can use the self service till" My reply to her was that they were basically "forcing" me to use it,or queue behind people with full trolleys,which is what i did,because if we all use the self service more often then that means they need less staff,to carry it to its logical conclusion,in yrs to come there will be banks of self service tills with a few helpers in case of anyone having problems So i told her i wont be shopping there any more,and i didn't for months,when i went back in the basket only till was open,so i carried on shopping there,now its starting again,so i will be going elsewhere. The same with my job,i always have a hod carrier if i can,even tho sometimes i would be better without one,IE in the case that the mortar is ready mixed,and theres a stacker on site to load your brick out,im far from rich,just earn a half decent wage is all,but i paid my carrier £10 an hour back in 05(plus a dropsy on a good week),i "could" have paid him £8 and pocketed the £80 difference,but you have to have principles,and £8 an hour is just wrong in my eyes,so sometimes you can make small sacrifices for the good of everyone,i still earned a decent wage,just less than i could have,but it didn't kill me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gbye grey sky Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 We can all do little bits to help tho,i've had words with the manageress in Sainsburys 3 times about there being no "basket only" till available,her answer was what i expected "you can use the self service till"My reply to her was that they were basically "forcing" me to use it,or queue behind people with full trolleys,which is what i did,because if we all use the self service more often then that means they need less staff,to carry it to its logical conclusion,in yrs to come there will be banks of self service tills with a few helpers in case of anyone having problems So i told her i wont be shopping there any more,and i didn't for months,when i went back in the basket only till was open,so i carried on shopping there,now its starting again,so i will be going elsewhere. The same with my job,i always have a hod carrier if i can,even tho sometimes i would be better without one,IE in the case that the mortar is ready mixed,and theres a stacker on site to load your brick out,im far from rich,just earn a half decent wage is all,but i paid my carrier £10 an hour back in 05(plus a dropsy on a good week),i "could" have paid him £8 and pocketed the £80 difference,but you have to have principles,and £8 an hour is just wrong in my eyes,so sometimes you can make small sacrifices for the good of everyone,i still earned a decent wage,just less than i could have,but it didn't kill me I commend your attitude 100% but trying to hold back progress is ultimately futile and the jobs you are potentially saving (or delaying the end of) are not exactly fulfilling work (even if they pay the bills at this point in time). The history of industrialisation is littered with redundant tasks and technologies, some may be mourned, others completely forgotten. The people (and nations) that thrive are the those that work with and adapt to a changing world, not those that cling on to redundant practices. I realise while typing this that it does sound like a capitalist argument. Change can be handled sensitively though for those involved, retraining etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pablo Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I commend your attitude 100% but trying to hold back progress is ultimately futile and the jobs you are potentially saving (or delaying the end of) are not exactly fulfilling work (even if they pay the bills at this point in time). The history of industrialisation is littered with redundant tasks and technologies, some may be mourned, others completely forgotten. The people (and nations) that thrive are the those that work with and adapt to a changing world, not those that cling on to redundant practices. I realise while typing this that it does sound like a capitalist argument. Change can be handled sensitively though for those involved, retraining etc. No,its a fair point,and i understand that i have no shareholders to report to as regards profits also. Its not for me to judge what is fulfilling employment or not tho,i gab to anyone,and most of the girls on the tills like their jobs,enjoy them,which is more than i can say most of the time,so if they're happy doing it,then that's fulfilling in my eyes. Personally i still think there is a place for human interaction,especially in the service industry,i've done loads of work in Fords/Jaguar Halewood,it would kill me working on a line to be fair,and i can see technology will be explored to the eighth degree in that environment,but as we are seeing with the banks,and tube stations,it is going too far for me,call me a dinosaur if you like,but when i go the bank or shops i want to talk to people Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali B Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 ... but you have to have principles,and £8 an hour is just wrong in my eyes,so sometimes you can make small sacrifices for the good of everyone,i still earned a decent wage,just less than i could have,but it didn't kill me Exactly right Pablo. And good on ya! We are the same in our family. You have to do what you can, because sometimes your 'little bit' is an enormous amount to someone else. We have boycotted that nonsense Cost-Co just opened down the road. What a monster. Who ever invented a $50 membership fee to go to an effing SHOP! And all the profits go straight out of Oz to USA! So we shop locally wherever we can. Pay a little more but it keeps the small 'locals' going. We support regularly 8 charities because I believe every wage earner has a moral obligation to help others, our kids are now the same and do fund-raisers. And that's why evading paying tax back to a country is morally wrong. It's cheating people who need support when they are down. And yes we know there are dole cheats who get publicity in the Daily Mail, but there are far more who aren't. We've brought our kids up to ask questions and not just take what you hear at face value. That's the single biggest thing - information - hunting out the truth and if you don't like what you find, write to MPs and get others informed too. We have so much information at our fingertips now there is really no excuse for apathy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pablo Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Exactly right Pablo. And good on ya! We are the same in our family. You have to do what you can, because sometimes your 'little bit' is an enormous amount to someone else. We have boycotted that nonsense Cost-Co just opened down the road. What a monster. Who ever invented a $50 membership fee to go to an effing SHOP! And all the profits go straight out of Oz to USA! So we shop locally wherever we can. Pay a little more but it keeps the small 'locals' going. We support regularly 8 charities because I believe every wage earner has a moral obligation to help others, our kids are now the same and do fund-raisers. And that's why evading paying tax back to a country is morally wrong. It's cheating people who need support when they are down. And yes we know there are dole cheats who get publicity in the Daily Mail, but there are far more who aren't. We've brought our kids up to ask questions and not just take what you hear at face value. That's the single biggest thing - information - hunting out the truth and if you don't like what you find, write to MPs and get others informed too. We have so much information at our fingertips now there is really no excuse for apathy. You set a commendable and exemplary path for your kids to follow Ali,heartening to hear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gee13 Posted September 23, 2014 Share Posted September 23, 2014 (edited) Ahhhh the true ironies in life..the rich get richer..wealth accumulation is directly correlated with un-happiness.... capitalism makes you want to think things like 'If only I had one wish Id love to win 10 $ million in lottery' ... I bet you when this happens youd be wishing that you hadnt.. Edited September 23, 2014 by gee13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest51810 Posted September 23, 2014 Share Posted September 23, 2014 Ahhhh the true ironies in life..the rich get richer..wealth accumulation is directly correlated with un-happiness.... capitalism makes you want to think things like 'If only I had one wish Id love to win 10 $ million in lottery' ... I bet you when this happens youd be wishing that you hadnt.. There was a guy on tv last night who gave all his money away. He was absolutely loaded and he started this charity or he joined it, to start helping people get transport to hospital. Didn't even tell his family till right at the last minute. He said the money didn't make him happy at all and he's never been happier since he started the charity. He said he'd encourage any rich person to do it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.