It would be hard if not impossible to police though

 

The best thing to help low paid workers is to increase tax allowances to take more and more of them out of tax altogether, maybe over a 3 year period increase the amount you earn before paying tax to £10k or something, that ensures the lowest paid workers don't pay tax at all and it would help encourage those that would rather be on the dole than take a low paid job to work as opposed to be on welfare

 

It would be hard if not impossible to police though

 

The best thing to help low paid workers is to increase tax allowances to take more and more of them out of tax altogether, maybe over a 3 year period increase the amount you earn before paying tax to £10k or something, that ensures the lowest paid workers don't pay tax at all and it would help encourage those that would rather be on the dole than take a low paid job to work as opposed to be on welfare

 

We used to have the 10p tax rate for low-paid workers mate, and then we couldn't afford it.... Hmmmm, I wonder if we could still have afforded it if rich tax-dodgers and corps such as Tesco HAD paid their fair share into the system..... -_-

 

It's all very well to go on about "layabout chavs" cheating the dole (which I agree is wrong), but people like you always seem to excuse the rich who dodge taxes and the likes of Tesco cooking their books and putting profits in offshore accounts, which is surely equally as wrong, and is just another form of cheating the system...

 

Well, what the hell do YOU suggest she do then, you've had me and several other people on this thread point out the fact that the kids would hardly be any better off if they were in Local Authority care, so what's your big idea......?

 

Labour and Tory Govts have both made the claim that they are there to aid and to help hard-working families... Well, time for them to put words into action and fukkin' well PROVE IT.... <_<

 

So you dont know what she should do in other words?

 

She didnt have to have 10 children did she?

And governments always promise crap all the time without following through. I thought you would have realised that

So you dont know what she should do in other words?

 

She didnt have to have 10 children did she?

 

Seems to me what she's doing now is the best thing to do in the circumstances, if she really didn't care or fight for the best for her kids, then you could accuse her of neglect and then you'd have grounds to say the local authorities should intervene, that is simply not the case here...

 

It's all very simple for people like you to criticise and say what people should or shouldn't do, but it's obvious to me that this is a hard working family who need a leg up as opposed to lazy chav fukkers who scrounge off the state for a living... I have no problems supporting people such as this, but chavs on the other hand..... The irony is, if her bloke just gave up his work, and went "on the sick", the fukkin' council would likely spring into action and give them everything they ask for.... <_<

 

I repeat - The Tories and Labour have claimed to be there to help people such as this who are working hard and doing the right thing, so they need to put words into action....

 

And governments always promise crap all the time without following through. I thought you would have realised that

 

Which is why all Party Election Manifestos should be made legally binding.... :rolleyes:

 

At the very least it would make the b'astards actually think twice before making promises they cant or wont deliver....

It would be hard if not impossible to police though

HMRC can easily find out how much is paid out in benefits to employees of Tesco. All they then need to do is send them a bill for 90% of that cost.

Which is why all Party Election Manifestos should be made legally binding.... :rolleyes:

 

At the very least it would make the b'astards actually think twice before making promises they cant or wont deliver....

That's just not practical is it? How would that work when (as now) no one party has an overall majority? What if circumstances change so that a manifesto commitment is no longer practical?

 

All that would happen is that party manifestos will contain vague statements such as "We will aim to..." etc.

That's just not practical is it? How would that work when (as now) no one party has an overall majority? What if circumstances change so that a manifesto commitment is no longer practical?

 

All that would happen is that party manifestos will contain vague statements such as "We will aim to..." etc.

 

At least that would be a little bit more honest and wouldn't be making a promise they have no intention of keeping... As things stand now, the impression that most people have of politicians is that they're born liars... Which is why you never seem to get much more than a 50% turn out at elections... And you constantly hear them banging on all the time about "we're going to help hard working families, blah, blah, blah...", whether it's election manifestos or when they're actually in power, they say lots, but deliver very little....

 

 

Anyway, it wasn't my idea to make Manifestos legally binding, it was Mark Thomas' :P :P I just happen to agree with him....

We used to have the 10p tax rate for low-paid workers mate, and then we couldn't afford it.... Hmmmm, I wonder if we could still have afforded it if rich tax-dodgers and corps such as Tesco HAD paid their fair share into the system..... -_-

 

It's all very well to go on about "layabout chavs" cheating the dole (which I agree is wrong), but people like you always seem to excuse the rich who dodge taxes and the likes of Tesco cooking their books and putting profits in offshore accounts, which is surely equally as wrong, and is just another form of cheating the system...

 

I have no issue at all with the ordinary benefit claimant, those that want to work should be helped and supported likewise those that have genuine medical conditions that make work difficult or impossible, no issue with them whatsoever

 

I do have an issue with those that are claiming and not looking for and not interested in working, those that fake illnesses or medical conditions to claim benefits they are not entitled to, those that claim and do work on the side, my issue is with the scroungers and fraudsters not the genuine claimants.

 

I don't excuse the ones who dodge taxes, if there is any evidence of tax fraud like with Lester Piggott they should be locked up but the rich are not breaking the law exploiting and taking advantage of loopholes, should the law be changed ? should the loopholes be banned ? I would not have any complaints if that happened, would support that but atm what they are doing is perfectly legal which is why I have less issue with them than I do benefit fraudsters and professional scroungers who are effectively thieving.

I have no issue at all with the ordinary benefit claimant, those that want to work should be helped and supported likewise those that have genuine medical conditions that make work difficult or impossible, no issue with them whatsoever

 

I do have an issue with those that are claiming and not looking for and not interested in working, those that fake illnesses or medical conditions to claim benefits they are not entitled to, those that claim and do work on the side, my issue is with the scroungers and fraudsters not the genuine claimants.

 

I don't excuse the ones who dodge taxes, if there is any evidence of tax fraud like with Lester Piggott they should be locked up but the rich are not breaking the law exploiting and taking advantage of loopholes, should the law be changed ? should the loopholes be banned ? I would not have any complaints if that happened, would support that but atm what they are doing is perfectly legal which is why I have less issue with them than I do benefit fraudsters and professional scroungers who are effectively thieving.

 

You've just proved my point though, that the system is stacked against the poor and in favour of the rich and the corporate... Their exploitation of the system is "above board" and Govts look the other way and allow it to happen, but the poor's isn't, and the Govt hammers them for it.... That's my whole issue with this, and yeah, I do think the likes of Tesco are thieving even if the "law" (which again, favours the rich rather than the poor) doesn't class it as such, because someone has to make up the shortfall, and it's always, ALWAYS, the working poor..... <_<

 

But do you seriously think Tesco or anyone else will do that ? They will instead put the squeeze on their suppliers and harass farmers to reduce their margins and also put up prices on other products to make up the extra cost of meeting the wage increases which in turn puts up inflation which in turn affects us all.

 

Tescos is not a charity it is there to make a profit and pay dividends to it's shareholders, if they pay extra £2 an hour to their low paid employees they will make the same profit as like I said they will simply put up prices

Again, this is the exact same thing that was said about the introduction of the minimum wage. None of it happened.

So you dont know what she should do in other words?

 

She didnt have to have 10 children did she?

She had six children, and had to take on four from a new partner. Again, do you propose basically being an unfit parent and putting the four extras into Local Authority Care? Either way this woman couldn't win.