FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Reform our welfare system so it pays to work.

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

It took this long to work that one out David? You so made me laugh.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

Oh come on, be fair, he's only had Two and a half years to come to that conclusion.....he's fast is Dave.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Thing is, there needs to be jobs.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

And they need to be paid. Wow, what a revelation.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Rabid Macaroon

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iddlesbroughmaleMan
over a year ago

middlesbrough

Thing is needs to be jobs out there first

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Regulate rents so that landlords cannot charge the astronomical rents they do. Increase pay at the bottom end of the scale so that no one earns less than £8 an hour. The system we have whereby landlords where we live for example charge on average £650 for a one bedroomed flat and the major employers are the retail and hospitality sectors paying the minimum wage is crazy. These workers all have to get assistance from the State to pay their rent and end up with less than a hundred pounds a week to live on after working forty hours, and the State gives billions of pounds to greedy landlords. So called social housing doesn't improve their lot greatly because now they have to pay 80% of the market value.

Cap the rents people have to pay and increase pay at the bottom of the scale to £8 per hour.That way people won't need assistance from the State to pay their rents and will have a decent living for their forty hours of drudgery.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Regulate rents so that landlords cannot charge the astronomical rents they do. Increase pay at the bottom end of the scale so that no one earns less than £8 an hour. The system we have whereby landlords where we live for example charge on average £650 for a one bedroomed flat and the major employers are the retail and hospitality sectors paying the minimum wage is crazy. These workers all have to get assistance from the State to pay their rent and end up with less than a hundred pounds a week to live on after working forty hours, and the State gives billions of pounds to greedy landlords. So called social housing doesn't improve their lot greatly because now they have to pay 80% of the market value.

Cap the rents people have to pay and increase pay at the bottom of the scale to £8 per hour.That way people won't need assistance from the State to pay their rents and will have a decent living for their forty hours of drudgery.

Hit nail on the head.

I was made redundant almost a month ago and after spending a large chunk of my life in the hospitallity sector I am now being told I am too experienced and overqualified to re-enter it. Not a problem as I want to enter the youth sector anyway only problem being the most relevant experience I have of that field is from 5 years ago and no supporting qualifications. I would happily volunteer but risk loosing any benefits that would come my way which I have still recieved 0 as there is a backlog.

I live in hostel accomadation as I (even when working) could not afford the absurd rent in Bristol and now housing are trying to tell me im not entitled to HB as I don't live in permanant accomadation. Grrrrrrrr rant over

"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

An up to date 'Fair Rents Act' would be a good start, the problem is the big players in the private rental market are wealthy people, and this Tory led government is hardly going to punish their hardcore voters.

Regarding the minimum wage, and I already pay around £1.40 an hour higher than the minimum wage, is that in the present climate it would force many small businesses over the edge.

If you implimented an £8 minimum wage rate you would simply add hundreds of thousands onto the unemployment numbers and defeat the object.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *aveandkate35Couple
over a year ago

telford


"Regulate rents so that landlords cannot charge the astronomical rents they do.

"

Unfortunately it comes down to supply and demand - the only reason they are charging what they do is because either they can - ie people will pay it, or, they need to, to cover their outgoings.

Ta

D

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *imply_SensualMan
over a year ago

warrington

I agree the Tories have been slow to respond to the need for welfare reforms. But surely Labour have to accept a lot of the blame for the position we are in. I dont mean the absurd amount of borrowing they did, but that they fostered a culture whereby it was too easy to survive on benefits and made is less attractive to go out to work. Yes, there are plenty of people out there who NEED the benefits but there are others who simply do not want to pay their way in society. E.g. they will lose tax credits and not receive free childcare - tough shit, people who do work have to pay for everything, their own houses, their own childcare etc etc. Just because the state has supported some people along the way, does not mean it is a divine right to receive the support for the rest of their lives.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Regulate rents so that landlords cannot charge the astronomical rents they do. "

Property prices for rental accommodation are influenced by their rental value. If the rental price is capped/regulated the property becomes unattractive for landlords to purchase.

I'd favour a system whereby rental prices for properties in an area populated by the local workforce should be set according to the wage bracket of the person living in a given property. Obviously, higher earners will want a better home and his/her wage bracket will make such properties affordable even though they may be situated in the same area as lower earner properties.

There's your regulation, set by how much a person earns, not by a blanket cap applied to landlords.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It took this long to work that one out David? You so made me laugh. "

David Cameron was never going to explain the whole system the govt have devised in detail himself in a breif interview/statement. He needed a soundbite to explain the gist of it and now it will be picked apart by commentators and analysts (and Labour I guess) to understand and/or criticise it.

Would it have been better to do or say nothing, like the previous govt?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

lets be honest the present lot and previous govenments have all failed over the past 30 to 40 yrs to properly sort the welfare system out..

people have been shuffled about from one mickey mouse scheme whilst unemployed to allow the jobless figures to say this or that..

same with people who are 'carers'..

a culture of sit on ones arse and do nothing to develop whereby generations see this as their chosen path through life..

yes the system needs major reform but as usual they are hitting some of the most deserving people who live daily with issue's most of us are fortunate not to have..

the current scandal with a private company making millions in profit and they are not doing a competent job by most reasonable folks standards is disgusting..

have a publicy funded not for profit system, yes there will also be mistakes etc but to have our taxes which could be better used in any time going into someones pocket as a dividend is wrong..

plain and simple..

and its not a 'blue, red or green' issue..

wont say yellow cos they're fecked..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I love politicians that state the obvious. Now lets see if he can put it into action or if its all talk.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

Unfortunately the present government chose the easy route, and targetted the group of people who were on benefits that were seen as the 'soft target'....the Disabled.

Instead of getting a grip with those who are known to be able to work they went for those who may not be in such a position, so the 'Bottom Feeders' have been left relatively untouched...at the expense of the disabled.

All a bit cowardly in my book.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Had the Bank of England spent its QE on building affordable housing.

The unemployment figures would be much healthier, the housing shortage would have vanished and the country would not have wasted vast sums of money making Bankers rich.

Plus they would have an income from the rental of said property.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It wont be long until he tries to apply some of the BNP methods to discourage johnny foriegner to think again before entering Britain and those thats here to pack up and move on.

I'll be sat under the stairs with me tin hat on if anyone wants me

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It wont be long until he tries to apply some of the BNP methods to discourage johnny foriegner to think again before entering Britain and those thats here to pack up and move on.

I'll be sat under the stairs with me tin hat on if anyone wants me "

You have room under stairs? rent it out!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


"Regulate rents so that landlords cannot charge the astronomical rents they do.

Property prices for rental accommodation are influenced by their rental value. If the rental price is capped/regulated the property becomes unattractive for landlords to purchase.

I'd favour a system whereby rental prices for properties in an area populated by the local workforce should be set according to the wage bracket of the person living in a given property. Obviously, higher earners will want a better home and his/her wage bracket will make such properties affordable even though they may be situated in the same area as lower earner properties.

There's your regulation, set by how much a person earns, not by a blanket cap applied to landlords."

How would that work? This suggestion would create ghettos. Student accommodation in the 'poor' parts of London are at £200 per week for a shared apartment. Literally across the road in the 'rcher' part of London a single apartement is £900 per week.

When people talk about the benefit scroungers living in million pound properties it is nonsense. They aren't getting the money, the landlord is. Who set the rent? The landlord. Who pays it? We do. That is the effect of supply and demand in the free market.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Can the government reform our welfare system so it pays out to the people that have been unemployed after paying NI contributions for 20 + years but are on the dole for the second time within two tax years and so are not allowed JSA?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It wont be long until he tries to apply some of the BNP methods to discourage johnny foriegner to think again before entering Britain and those thats here to pack up and move on.

I'll be sat under the stairs with me tin hat on if anyone wants me

You have room under stairs? rent it out!"

And get taxed on it? Not feckin likely!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


" ..........

If you implimented an £8 minimum wage rate you would simply add hundreds of thousands onto the unemployment numbers and defeat the object."

People said the National Minimum Wage would do that. It didn't.

People said the National Living Wage would do that. There's no sign that it has.

There's been a Glasgow Living Wage for a number of years. There's a website listing the firms which support this initiative. A number of Glaswegians actively choose to support the companies which pay the Glasgow Living Wage.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


" ..........

If you implimented an £8 minimum wage rate you would simply add hundreds of thousands onto the unemployment numbers and defeat the object.

People said the National Minimum Wage would do that. It didn't.

People said the National Living Wage would do that. There's no sign that it has.

There's been a Glasgow Living Wage for a number of years. There's a website listing the firms which support this initiative. A number of Glaswegians actively choose to support the companies which pay the Glasgow Living Wage."

You failed to post my whole quote, I'm not talking about large companies here, I'm talking about small independent companies....who would indeed struggle to increase their hourly rate by almost Two Pounds.

I live in the real world, the one where I actually employ people and would like another couple of workers but cannot afford to employ them so am holding back.

And the introduction of the minimum wage did have a massive impact on the hotel and hospitality trades, many thousands of jobs WERE lost, and many more thousands of jobs WOULD be lost if there was a 33% rise in the minimum wage.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I agree the Tories have been slow to respond to the need for welfare reforms. But surely Labour have to accept a lot of the blame for the position we are in. I dont mean the absurd amount of borrowing they did, but that they fostered a culture whereby it was too easy to survive on benefits and made is less attractive to go out to work. Yes, there are plenty of people out there who NEED the benefits but there are others who simply do not want to pay their way in society. E.g. they will lose tax credits and not receive free childcare - tough shit, people who do work have to pay for everything, their own houses, their own childcare etc etc. Just because the state has supported some people along the way, does not mean it is a divine right to receive the support for the rest of their lives."

Why would somebody on the dole need childcare? Nobody receives free childcare. I'm a working single mother and get tax credits but in no way is my childcare free and it kills during the school holidays!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Crazy idea, will never catch on. There are too many feckless in this country who would rather do naff all and take their state handout

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Crazy idea, will never catch on. There are too many feckless in this country who would rather do naff all and take their state handout"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Unfortunately the present government chose the easy route, and targetted the group of people who were on benefits that were seen as the 'soft target'....the Disabled.

Instead of getting a grip with those who are known to be able to work they went for those who may not be in such a position, so the 'Bottom Feeders' have been left relatively untouched...at the expense of the disabled.

All a bit cowardly in my book."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *he Happy ManMan
over a year ago

Merseyside

What he needs to do is force companies to pay people a decent wage. The minimum wage is a joke.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Reform our welfare system so it pays to work." This should have been considered when the system was first introduced a long time ago. There should be a cap on child benefit ie number of children & income. Educate children for 37 hours a week with only five weeks holiday a year (or pay for hours worked) like the rest of the country.

Bring back a fair days pay for a fair days work, some old values did work!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *B9 QueenWoman
over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge

I am always astonished by the attitude to those on benefits, particularly in the media. Yes, undoubtedly, there are those playing the system, but they are not screwing the system the way tax dodging big businesses are to the tune of billions in lost revenue, and who have been doing for a very long time.

What could we achieve at the lowest end of the scale with that money? It's a disgrace that wealthy, powerful businesses are also supported by the welfare state. They pay so little, keep employees on low hours so the state has to top it up with benefits just so people can feed their families. And then they get to pay little or no tax just so their shareholders can have am even bigger slice of the pie. It also means they have an unfair competitive edge over smaller businesses who are being forced to the wall more and more creating more unemployment and greater strain on the benefits system.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rightonsteveMan
over a year ago

Brighton - even Hove!

"Reform our welfare system so it pays to work"....it's not rocket science.

And now the Eton Mess have decided that market forces, so beloved of the CONservatives, isn't working on energy prices either.....Ho Hum....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


""Reform our welfare system so it pays to work"....it's not rocket science.

And now the Eton Mess have decided that market forces, so beloved of the CONservatives, isn't working on energy prices either.....Ho Hum...."

The energy companies seem to think that market forces don't apply to them and inflict rises above inflation every year yet they don't drop prices when wholesale gas prices drop.

They need to be heavily regulated so that consumers are offered the best possible deal available and they also need to end the multiple tarrifs whose sole purpose seems to be to place confusion in the minds of their customers.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *orseydaveMan
over a year ago

Norwich NR5

I advertised a barmaid job 2 weeks ago, 121 applicants for one simple £9 an hr job !!

Of those 121, 73 were either polish,lithuanian or portugese. Of the remaining 48, 26 were blokes, (crumpet sells beer, not spotty faced barmen) so im left with about 22 english women, 7 had a child at school and couldnt do weekends, evenings or nights,of the remaining 15, 9 didnt have a reference, 2 didnt look too hot, 2 didnt like my house rule of no mobile phones whilst working and im giving a trial to 2.

Whats the answer, its too easy to say ban immigrants etc, though i do think we have too many, they do offer a culural contrast which in most cases is good for Uk Ltd - The biggest reason of our economic downfall is the under 30's have no work ethics, they want everything for nothing.

Of the 26 blokes, 5 came along and said they didnt want the job, but could i sign a letter saying they would need a suit for the job then the dole would give them a £100 grant !!!!!!! Fuck Off !

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I find it truly amazing when the govt put forward positive moves to help the consumer that opponents of the government try to put a negative spin on it.

Can people be clear on whether they want the energy companies to have free reign over pricing and be able to offer multiple tarrifs that confuse the hell out of even the best economists, or do they want a transparent pricing structure and regulation?

Or do non-Conservative supporters want the general public to continue being ripped off so that it undermines the government and gives Labour a chance (albeit an ultra-thin one) of maybe winning the next general election? Is that the true motive for condemning positive govt policies?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

well tony blair sorted the system so families on a low income was still much better off by working by bringing in work tax crdits.. so whats new now?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


""Reform our welfare system so it pays to work"....it's not rocket science.

And now the Eton Mess have decided that market forces, so beloved of the CONservatives, isn't working on energy prices either.....Ho Hum...."

I work in the market end of the energy industry. The changes the government makes will affect every single one of us and will see an increase in everyones bills. Energy suppliers are seen as baddies, but most only make about £15-20 per household per year profit. Most of the revenue is going back in to prop up a decayed distribution and generation system.

Next time you look at your bill, thank Labour that 25% of it is made up of taxes to prop up the scots power distribution and wind farms... and over the next few years that will get worse because of green commitments Labour signed up to, without investing in future technologies

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

England should have closed its gates and not let way too many people in! Too many people in a place with hardly any jobs= stupidity

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ovCpl40sCouple
over a year ago

coventry

All this political talk of this party did this and that party did that.

Let's not forget that whichever political party is in power the "civil servants" in whitehall remain the same and ultimately it its they who control the budgets of government departments.

This is why no political party has ever been able to keep its

election promises because they aren't allowed to as out will cost too much or upset too many etc etc

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

2 of them didnt look to hot haha i need to get to your bar my local is just barmen. As far as a eastern european serving behind a bar i think id lose all faith in the great british bars. But on a serious note im a qualified plasterer from newcastle left school at 16 did my nvqs worked till i was 21 for someone then started on my own. This lasted 5years because work got so bad as the job center put people on the dole on 1 week plastering courses, which is a joke as if you can learn any trade in a week. Now i see jobs advertised in the jobcenter for plastering £8 an hour, then when i go on line and look at the same job for the same company 8 years ago £11 so now the companys are even taking the piss out of the working man as they know we have to take what we can in this current climate. All in all theres only one winner and thats the rich

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


""Reform our welfare system so it pays to work"....it's not rocket science.

And now the Eton Mess have decided that market forces, so beloved of the CONservatives, isn't working on energy prices either.....Ho Hum....

I work in the market end of the energy industry. The changes the government makes will affect every single one of us and will see an increase in everyones bills. Energy suppliers are seen as baddies, but most only make about £15-20 per household per year profit. Most of the revenue is going back in to prop up a decayed distribution and generation system.

Next time you look at your bill, thank Labour that 25% of it is made up of taxes to prop up the scots power distribution and wind farms... and over the next few years that will get worse because of green commitments Labour signed up to, without investing in future technologies "

Ofgem estimates for the Big 6 show profit margins for this year at £90 per customer.

These companies need to go on a charm offensive with the consumer and show us where they buy their gas & electricity, at what price, and more importantly, when they bought it. Energy commodities are bought on the futures market at a fixed price and sold on retail a year later. To simplify it let's say EDF bought gas at 0.05p p/kwh a year ago, they must now make sure that when they sell it it is sold at a higher price than 0.05p, if the current price of gas moves against them and they have to buy in at a price higher than 0.05p then the gas they bought a year ago at the lower price only serves to offset the loss they are going to make on the newer gas they've bought at a higher price, unless they raise prices and maintain profit levels.

Where this model goes against them is when the wholesale price of gas/electricity moves in their favour and falls. They then enter into a win/win situation where they are selling last year's gas/elec at a profit and the gas/elec they buy this year will be sold at an even higher profit as retail price rises come into play - often by considerably more than the prevailing rate of inflation.

The energy providers in the UK need to realise that we *know* they need to make a profit, but we need to know how they achieve it. We may accept their prices easier if we know why we're paying it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Could we also close the tax loopholes that the big companies ouze through.

If the government spent as much energy doing that as they do to cutting benifits that might help !!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Of the 26 blokes, 5 came along and said they didnt want the job, but could i sign a letter saying they would need a suit for the job then the dole would give them a £100 grant !!!!!!! Fuck Off !"

I hope it occurred to you to make a note of their names and contact the JSA people to inform them of their attempted corruption.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *kin BohnerMan
over a year ago

derby


"It took this long to work that one out David? You so made me laugh. "

If I remember correctly... Liebour said more or less the same thing when they were in power! The empty words of politicians know no political boundaries...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


""Reform our welfare system so it pays to work"....it's not rocket science.

And now the Eton Mess have decided that market forces, so beloved of the CONservatives, isn't working on energy prices either.....Ho Hum....

I work in the market end of the energy industry. The changes the government makes will affect every single one of us and will see an increase in everyones bills. Energy suppliers are seen as baddies, but most only make about £15-20 per household per year profit. Most of the revenue is going back in to prop up a decayed distribution and generation system.

Next time you look at your bill, thank Labour that 25% of it is made up of taxes to prop up the scots power distribution and wind farms... and over the next few years that will get worse because of green commitments Labour signed up to, without investing in future technologies

Ofgem estimates for the Big 6 show profit margins for this year at £90 per customer.

These companies need to go on a charm offensive with the consumer and show us where they buy their gas & electricity, at what price, and more importantly, when they bought it. Energy commodities are bought on the futures market at a fixed price and sold on retail a year later. To simplify it let's say EDF bought gas at 0.05p p/kwh a year ago, they must now make sure that when they sell it it is sold at a higher price than 0.05p, if the current price of gas moves against them and they have to buy in at a price higher than 0.05p then the gas they bought a year ago at the lower price only serves to offset the loss they are going to make on the newer gas they've bought at a higher price, unless they raise prices and maintain profit levels.

Where this model goes against them is when the wholesale price of gas/electricity moves in their favour and falls. They then enter into a win/win situation where they are selling last year's gas/elec at a profit and the gas/elec they buy this year will be sold at an even higher profit as retail price rises come into play - often by considerably more than the prevailing rate of inflation.

The energy providers in the UK need to realise that we *know* they need to make a profit, but we need to know how they achieve it. We may accept their prices easier if we know why we're paying it."

OFGEM are wrong mate.

The rest of what you wrote is kinda correct, but too simplistic. At the end of the day there are thousands of variables that contribute towards price. So gas could fall off but an oil refinery in the states blow up and everything is off kilter.

I personally would like to see no more investment in green wind/solar farms. Get rhetorical nuclear power plants built, so we have a sustainable low cost energy going forward. It would also be nice to be able to turn the lights on in 2015 and unless the government pulls its finger out, we won't be able to!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

* the... not rhetorical.. bloody phone

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top