Ian Duncan Smith is a total twat

[Chippy]

Well said Flash. Far more is being lost in tax evasion.

[LDB]

It's a real mess because the only way to fix the system without taking away from genuine benefit claimants is to add complicated means-testing systems which often end up costing more in administration then they save. Successive governments (especially brown) have tried to make the benefits system "fair" and all its done is lead to the over-complicated mess we have today.

[northbank123]

There is so much more money being lost by tax avoidance measures but it's a bit of a fantasy to claim that anywhere near the majority of it can actually be claimed in the future. These companies pay millions of pounds to accountants/tax consultants and it's not as easy as actually saying "ah well you should actually be paying X so we'll have that instead". There are also some potential consequences to forcing businesses away, although as I see it companies like Starbucks etc will set up here regardless and don't offer that much benefit if they aren't actually paying anything.

But while it's hardly fair to hear stories about these massive multinational companies paying 1% or even no tax when the rate should be 24% for them it's also not realistic to pull some figure out of the air about money supposedly lost to tax avoidance and tax evasion and say we should be recovering that. It's one of the most difficult (and expensive) savings to make.

Wherever they make cuts people will cry. Criminal legal aid funding had to be cut really, people of some means were automatically qualifying and the added kicker is that people will then often elect for trial even if they know they're guilty. As for the fact that certain personal injury claims (albeit against the NHS) could still be funded by legal aid is a complete disgrace given that if you have a strong case then you will be able to fund your case on a 'no-win, no-fee basis' through a completely reputable firm of solicitors. Yet you then get human rights nuts complaining about the lack of justice etc.

[safcftm]

Oooh, I might be agreeing with LDB on a political type thread! Told you I'm far from a leftie
Personally, if rent and bills were paid, I reckon I could live on £53 a week. I'd need to get rid of Sky, stop going to matches ( ), stop going for pints and stop buying DVDs etc but, well, all of these things are luxuries. I get them now and I enjoy them but I work for them, if I wasn't working I shouldn't expect someone who is to pay for me to have Sky etc, I should be wanting to go out and get a job so I could get them back.

Food isn't too much, I go to Sainsbury's which isn't the cheapest (pretty middle of the road) and often they have 4 x indian/ chinese meals for a tenner type offers - buying ready meals isn't even the cheapest way to do it and that would see me have my main meals for a week for about £20, even without an offer you can easily do it for £35. Add a couple of quid a day for a lunch and we're at £49, couple bottles of milk and some cereal for breakfast and you're pretty much at your £53 but like I say you could easily cook for yourself and reduce that substantially to allow you maybe £10 or £15 to go out for a few pints during the week. Its not exactly a great standard of living but fuck it, you're not working for it so be happy the basics are covered, that you can live, and go and get a job. Bit trickier if you had a kid to feed out of it as well like but still possible.

For me a problem is that the minimum wage is so low that many people are almost as well off by not getting a job. If you work full time on minimum wage you're only getting £250 a week and need to pay your bills out of it, people claiming enough benefits can easily end up with just about as much (or more) for sitting on their arse churning out kids.

As for the bedroom tax, well I agree in principle that if you're in a 3 bedroom house and your kids leave you should move to a one bedroom house and let a more needy family get the 3 bedroom. You aren't entitled to keep one house all your life unless you work and fucking buy the thing, if you want a Council house then you take whichever one they give you in my opinion and having a largish house for one person seems like a waste of resources. But then I bought my house so maybe I'm biased, don't have much time for council tenants (my work deals with them a lot and they piss me off with their "demands", always saying they don't want this or that done even though they don't own the property so should have very little say)

[DB10GOONER]

Cooking for yourself is far cheaper (and WAY more nutritious) in the long run. Buy a big old giant bag of Basmati rice from an Asian market, buy the spices and herbs and a half decent Indian cook book and you have the basic ingredients for a lot of various Indian meals for weeks.

Similarly, replace rice with pasta, change a few herbs and you got Italian.

Bit more effort obviously in cooking for yourself but alot cheaper long term.

[northbank123]

Cooking for yourself is far cheaper (and WAY more nutritious) in the long run. Buy a big old giant bag of Basmati rice from an Asian market, buy the spices and herbs and a half decent Indian cook book and you have the basic ingredients for a lot of various Indian meals for weeks.

Similarly, replace rice with pasta, change a few herbs and you got Italian.

Bit more effort obviously in cooking for yourself but alot cheaper long term.

If you've got fuck all else to do all day no real excuse

Me and the missus eat extremely well (and nutritiously) for around £35-40 (combined) a week. We each spend an hour or two cooking a few times a week. It's not even like you have to live off shit, with a bit of effort you can save yourself a lot of money by learning where to shop.

[ThomasMitchell]

At last a politician with the desire to tackle the burgeoning welfare state. Ian Duncan Smith is one of the few politicians making a meaningful and positive difference to his department. He is not prepared to simply accept that the state should continue to support those who choose not to support themselves.

[Top Londoner]

At last a politician with the desire to tackle the burgeoning welfare state. Ian Duncan Smith is one of the few politicians making a meaningful and positive difference to his department. He is not prepared to simply accept that the state should continue to support those who choose not to support themselves.

Seriously mate? Facepalm.


So what? Are all of the unemployed choosing not to support themselves then?
You need to get out a little bit more.

[ThomasMitchell]

At last a politician with the desire to tackle the burgeoning welfare state. Ian Duncan Smith is one of the few politicians making a meaningful and positive difference to his department. He is not prepared to simply accept that the state should continue to support those who choose not to support themselves.

Seriously mate? Facepalm.


So what? Are all of the unemployed choosing not to support themselves then?
You need to get out a little bit more.

I didn't realise that all the unemployed are losing their benefits. Is that what is being claimed now? The reality is there are large numbers of people who have been subsidised for years by Governments of all persuasions. This has created a culture of dependency, so much so that a whole generation has been brought up to believe that the state is there to bail them out (or in many cases not even bail them out but simply to molly-coddle them throughout life). We allow that to continue at our peril. As for me getting out more, that's rich coming from someone who trawls Youtube for clips to abuse dead people.

[Top Londoner]

At last a politician with the desire to tackle the burgeoning welfare state. Ian Duncan Smith is one of the few politicians making a meaningful and positive difference to his department. He is not prepared to simply accept that the state should continue to support those who choose not to support themselves.

Seriously mate? Facepalm.


So what? Are all of the unemployed choosing not to support themselves then?
You need to get out a little bit more.

I didn't realise that all the unemployed are losing their benefits. Is that what is being claimed now? The reality is there are large numbers of people who have been subsidised for years by Governments of all persuasions. This has created a culture of dependency, so much so that a whole generation has been brought up to believe that the state is there to bail them out (or in many cases not even bail them out but simply to molly-coddle them throughout life). We allow that to continue at our peril. As for me getting out more, that's rich coming from someone who trawls Youtube for clips to abuse dead people.

No, it is not being claimed, that all unemployed are losing their benefits now however, if there are not the jobs for people to take, then what alternative is there for those people. IDS is making it impossible for people to live on benefits, but the flip side is, that people cannot live on a minimum wage at 16-20 hours per week either.
Not a whole generation of unemployed people believe that the state owe them a living and it is an insult to presume that.
BTW, the you tube clips were not trawled for but, my online porn collection was.

[ThomasMitchell]

At last a politician with the desire to tackle the burgeoning welfare state. Ian Duncan Smith is one of the few politicians making a meaningful and positive difference to his department. He is not prepared to simply accept that the state should continue to support those who choose not to support themselves.

Seriously mate? Facepalm.


So what? Are all of the unemployed choosing not to support themselves then?
You need to get out a little bit more.

I didn't realise that all the unemployed are losing their benefits. Is that what is being claimed now? The reality is there are large numbers of people who have been subsidised for years by Governments of all persuasions. This has created a culture of dependency, so much so that a whole generation has been brought up to believe that the state is there to bail them out (or in many cases not even bail them out but simply to molly-coddle them throughout life). We allow that to continue at our peril. As for me getting out more, that's rich coming from someone who trawls Youtube for clips to abuse dead people.

No, it is not being claimed, that all unemployed are losing their benefits now however, if there are not the jobs for people to take, then what alternative is there for those people. IDS is making it impossible for people to live on benefits, but the flip side is, that people cannot live on a minimum wage at 16-20 hours per week either.
Not a whole generation of unemployed people believe that the state owe them a living and it is an insult to presume that.
BTW, the you tube clips were not trawled for but, my online porn collection was.

Porn sends you blind and socialism keeps you poor. So reject both. Instead, join the re-birth of the Thatcher revolution and you will live a happy and fulfilled life. Of course the modern day Arsenal is very similar to Britain before Thatcher. Run by people who believe their role is to manage decline rather than achieve success. Wenger's socialist state rewards the truly average as richly as it does the truly exceptional - and look where that has got us. Diaby, Rosicky, Santos, Arshavin, Gervinho are the social dependents of Arsenal bleeding us dry, crushing enterprise and ensuring continued failure. Socialism fails wherever it is peddled. Ian Duncan Smith for manager!

[Top Londoner]

The love of money is the root of all evil.

Repent and be saved TM, REPENT.



Porn won't blind me, the wanking off to it will.

Now, I am shortly flying off to Australia, paid for by the lovely and huge profit I made from buying my ex council home in Notting Hill. Thanks to Mr Cameron moving out that way, I made squillions.



Still, I am a socialist at heart though.

[OneBardGooner]

IDS is STILL a TWAT.

[ThomasMitchell]

Another intelligent contribution from you. You should stick to making up stories about miners.

[the playing mantis]

ids is also a scum fan