BENEFITS hmmmm

[cashman]

Has far as i'm concerned Margaret P, what yeh do is 100% in line with my views on this subject. Yer certainly entitled to n opinion, those that say not are mindless cretins in my book,

[cmonstanley]

I see the Tories have brought back the benefits issue to deflect from the tax evasion 1 resignation already do not underestimate the ed

[DaveinGermany]

Originally Posted by cmonstanley

I see the Tories have brought back the benefits issue to deflect from the tax evasion 1 resignation already do not underestimate the ed

Ay up! So you got your visa renewed then?

[Less]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

If you vote then your voice doesn't necessarily get heard (though it may get heard it is often disregarded), politicians do what their party tells them to do. This is not always in line with what is best for those who elected the MP.

MP's seem to treat their electorate with ill disguised contempt. Our own MP falls into this category as he believes that we are not educated enough to make relevant decisions regarding political issues that concern us.

Yes, they all follow the party line, or get thrown out, ignored, abused by their party, whichever party they align themselves to should be a guide to folk then come second to why they are voted in, they are voted in to serve the people NOT the party.

[cmonstanley]

Been on the campaign trail anybody but the snp separatists sky and the rest of the hedge fund news say the snp will win 50 seats no chance 19 at most tactical voting to keep them out is happening

[Alan Varrechia]

If the cap fits!

[Margaret Pilkington]

Are those two on benefits then?

[Less]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

Are those two on benefits then?

Yes, the worst kind, M.P.'s wages!

[Accyexplorer]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

Are those two on benefits then?

Of course they are ,
The story seems like no brainer until you consider drug rehabilitation services are inadequate to deal with folk trying to enter voluntarily. Make it compulsory and folk will be waiting years.
Take away a addicts benefits and that means they'll be stealing more than usual.

[Margaret Pilkington]

no they aren't on benefits.....they do not have to justify their expenses, they do not have to go before a medical board to be assessed, they do not have to attend job centre.meetings.
They both have what is loosely termed employment...they are employed by us.......and their job is to manage the country.
They are paid very well for this employment, but the terms and conditions mean that their contracts come up for renewal periodically.
Come May 7th......it might be different...but they still won't be on benefits because during their political lives they will have made lots of(lucrative) contacts which will act as a buffer against whatever happens.
No politician leaves office, poor. Ever!

[Accyexplorer]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

no they aren't on benefits.....they do not have to justify their expenses, they do not have to go before a medical board to be assessed, they do not have to attend job centre.meetings.
They both have what is loosely termed employment...they are employed by us.......and their job is to manage the country.
They are paid very well for this employment, but the terms and conditions mean that their contracts come up for renewal periodically.
Come May 7th......it might be different...but they still won't be on benefits because during their political lives they will have made lots of(lucrative) contacts which will act as a buffer against whatever happens.
No politician leaves office, poor. Ever!

I guess it comes down to how you define benefits ,on top of their wages, they claim for anything from stationary to loo roll to hotels (expenses) and these things that I class as 'benefits'.....

.....Mark 4.25.

[Margaret Pilkington]

But they are not reliant on benefits and really have no understanding of those who are on benefits.
Your definition of benefits in this instance(and context) is skewed.
Politicians can well afford those items you cite, but they choose to boost their earned income(?) with expenses....They are allowed to do this.

[Accyexplorer]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

But they are not reliant on benefits and really have no understanding of those who are on benefits.
Your definition of benefits in this instance(and context) is skewed.
Politicians can well afford those items you cite, but they choose to boost their earned income(?) with expenses....They are allowed to do this.

They are 'allowed' to do a lot of things,it doesn't make them anymore justified (in my eyes).They should be means tested

Do you think wealthy pensioners should be able to claim winter heating allowance?

[Margaret Pilkington]

Nowhere did I say it was justified.
There are many unequal situations in life.......the tax avoidance issue which has been bandied about recently is one of them... Red Ed says if elected he will remedy this situation, but parties (all of them) have known about the tax deals being done....all of them chose to ignore the loopholes so they are to blame.
They chose not to do anything(all of them) because they all use these tax avoidance schemes themselves.
How many of the working population have the opportunity to fudge their tax bills? Not many, as the taxman gets his bit first.

Benefits should never be a way of life.......they should be a helping hand in difficult times, but not something that people can be on forever and a day.

You seem to be under the impression that the benefits that pensioners receive are free....they are not.
Wealthy pensioners will still be paying tax(and some of those wealthy pensioners are asset rich but cash poor...their main wealth being tied up in property).......so it is their entitlement.
I am not wealthy by any stretch of the imagination, but I still have to pay tax on my pension....so do you think that I should not be able to use my bus pass?
My bus pass is not free......I pay into the system and have done since 1962 when I got my first pay packet.
I have (over the years)contributed to the wealth of this country....there are many who claim benefits who have contributed nothing, but see it as their right to get money from those who have contributed.

[Accyexplorer]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

Nowhere did I say it was justified.

You seem to be under the impression that the benefits that pensioners receive are free....they are not.
Wealthy pensioners will still be paying tax(and some of those wealthy pensioners are asset rich but cash poor...their main wealth being tied up in property).......so it is their entitlement.
I am not wealthy by any stretch of the imagination, but I still have to pay tax on my pension....so do you think that I should not be able to use my bus pass?
My bus pass is not free......I pay into the system and have done since 1962 when I got my first pay packet.
I have (over the years)contributed to the wealth of this country....there are many who claim benefits who have contributed nothing, but see it as their right to get money from those who have contributed.

I think that when the bankers stop paying themselves massive bonuses,the "one per cent" (and I) pay their fair share of tax, maybe it wouldn't be necessary to give up your payments/entitlements or bring using your bus pass into the equation