Stuart Dickson Posted August 7, 2013 Report Share Posted August 7, 2013 Oh dear god you're off again We'll all be living in caves again before the end of the decade if you have your way. Mind you, the security business will do a roaring trade protecting the handful of rich people from the 62 million starving people roaming the streets looking for food in bins. We can only guess how those 62 million poverty stricken individuals would buy all the stuff needed to support the economy. A family of four would have a tax free household income of £24,000 per annum BEFORE anyone goes out to work and you think they'd be starving? You must be getting a shitload of money on your benefits.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted August 7, 2013 Report Share Posted August 7, 2013 A family of four would have a tax free household income of £24,000 per annum BEFORE anyone goes out to work and you think they'd be starving? You must be getting a shitload of money on your benefits.... FFS, here we go again. I'll bite as I'm bored today. Family of 4 = 2 kids. Out of your £24k you've just spend more than 1/2 educating the 2 kids. Lets hope there are no "major" healthcare issues for this family of 4 - major includes little things like scans, scopes and overnight stays in hospital. These run into thousands rather quickly, - christ a broken arm would set you back 4 figures. Obviously in the studick utopia nobody gets serious ongoing long term expensive conditions like cancer. Lets also hope both parents are earning a decent wedge to pay for the essentials like food and fuel - oh wait you're also scrapping the NMW so we've got a race to the bottom wage wise. DOH! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted August 7, 2013 Report Share Posted August 7, 2013 FFS, here we go again. I'll bite as I'm bored today. Family of 4 = 2 kids. Out of your £24k you've just spend more than 1/2 educating the 2 kids. Lets hope there are no "major" healthcare issues for this family of 4 - major includes little things like scans, scopes and overnight stays in hospital. These run into thousands rather quickly, - christ a broken arm would set you back 4 figures. Obviously in the studick utopia nobody gets serious ongoing long term expensive conditions like cancer. Lets also hope both parents are earning a decent wedge to pay for the essentials like food and fuel - oh wait you're also scrapping the NMW so we've got a race to the bottom wage wise. DOH! You are only paying out money for education if the kids are of school age. For the first five years of their lives you'd be able to build up a tidy little slush fund of £30,000 from that child alone. I still don't get how you and Oaksoft can imagine that gaining control of your own money is a race to the bottom. Even in your scenario a family with two kids at school would be starting off with far more household income - tax free - than they have ever had at any point in history. They would also have far more disposable income and the best part of course is the country would be slashing the number of public sector leaches bleeding the economy dry. We'd even be able to pay off a huge part of the national debt and massively reduce interest payments thanks to the sell off of public sector assets like schools and hospitals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddiecat Posted August 7, 2013 Report Share Posted August 7, 2013 That is Statutory Sick Pay which I believe to be an entitlement to anyone who is not being paid whilst off work. I think Gordon may have meant that he doesn't get a wage when off sick... which is the case in many employers nowadays. If I expand a bit further on my own use of zero hours contracts and how I believe they have their place if not abused (and sadly they are open to abuse)... ... I manage a daycare centre for people with dementia... continuity and familiar faces are important in this field. Initially we had a pool of sessional workers all on zero hour contracts. This was because our biggest "customer" was the local Council... when they had cash in their budget they would be referring like crazy... but when the budgets dried up they would refer nobody. Equally, we could have 100 hours of homecare one week and none the following week as people had gone into respite. Despite the risk, my Management Committee were actually very forward thinking for a voluntary organisation, and put the core team on fixed contracts. This was a massive risk as we had fixed expenditure and no guaranteed income! However... ... I have practically NO staff turnover now and have continuity for my Service Users. I also provide placements to the local college and aside from that, volunteer opportunities. When a placement has come to a conclusion, if the student has been of a standard I deem good enough and there is an opportunity within my team, I will offer a zero hours contract. If I have annual leave of sickness and need cover, I can call on someone who is familiar with my centre, the requirements, and most importantly for me, the people they will be caring for. If they are not available, I ask someone else... no harm done... but if it suits them, they get extra cash and I get continuity of service. My ground rules are that anybody on a zero hours contract attends staff meetings and is paid for doing so... they get holiday pay automatically based on the hours worked and regardless of whether they have worked 12 consecutive weeks... and they know that they are a valued part of my team. They get offered every training opportunity that other staff do and are paid to attend training, and get supervision too, frequency based on hours worked. I make every effort to be fair to them, and in return get a lot of loyalty. I currently have two staff on zero hours contracts... one ex-student, and one person who volunteers but I felt I wanted to be able to offer a wage to if I specifically asked her to come in and work because I needed her. I know that many employers abuse the use of zero hour contracts... but hopefully this has shown a good example of them being used in a very positive way. SSP is payable only from employers but you do not have the right to be paid SSP, there are conditions, like you must have earned over £109 per week and also have worked for your employer for 8 weeks,there are more and you can check on www.gov.uk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howard Hughes in BlueSuedeShoes Posted August 7, 2013 Report Share Posted August 7, 2013 sick pay is £86.70 per week, if you are not being paid sick pay you can apply for employment support allowance from the DWP Does a wee guy from Inverclyde then turn up at your house informing he's got a "job" for you....? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted August 7, 2013 Report Share Posted August 7, 2013 (edited) A family of four would have a tax free household income of £24,000 per annum BEFORE anyone goes out to work and you think they'd be starving? You must be getting a shitload of money on your benefits.... That £24,000 is not supposed to be for food. It's meant to be for education, health etc. as you've repeatedly said. What'll make them starve will be working for the 40p per hour wages that you'd have them on so rich people can buy bigger Mercs. Unless you come up with some more interesting stuff I'll probably bail from this discussion cos you're just trolling now for the sake of it. Edited August 7, 2013 by oaksoft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted August 7, 2013 Report Share Posted August 7, 2013 (edited) You are only paying out money for education if the kids are of school age. For the first five years of their lives you'd be able to build up a tidy little slush fund of £30,000 from that child alone. I still don't get how you and Oaksoft can imagine that gaining control of your own money is a race to the bottom. Even in your scenario a family with two kids at school would be starting off with far more household income - tax free - than they have ever had at any point in history. They would also have far more disposable income and the best part of course is the country would be slashing the number of public sector leaches bleeding the economy dry. We'd even be able to pay off a huge part of the national debt and massively reduce interest payments thanks to the sell off of public sector assets like schools and hospitals. Eh? You are planning to give people £30,000 to people who don't need it to the extent that they can physically save it? Why not turn water into wine as well? As I said earlier, that £30,000 won't be enough money to pay for the full time security guards needed to protect your fridge from millions of starving looters which your NMW removal would cause. The race to the bottom stuff has nothing to do with your fantasy ideas on this windfall. The race to the bottom is about wages. Why are you deliberately mixing this up other than to troll? Edited August 7, 2013 by oaksoft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted August 7, 2013 Report Share Posted August 7, 2013 You are only paying out money for education if the kids are of school age. For the first five years of their lives you'd be able to build up a tidy little slush fund of £30,000 from that child alone. So pre school child care and nursery education will be free then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted August 7, 2013 Report Share Posted August 7, 2013 So pre school child care and nursery education will be free then Is it free now? They would have extra money no matter how you look at it Tony and the country would be much better off with a vastly reduced national debt, and a reduced deficit because the interest payments would be greatly reduced. Scrap National Minimum wage and everyone would be able to supplement their UK resident UK citizen dividend by doing a bit of work and if they use zero hour contracts then they'll be able to pick and choose when they want to accept a shift. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted August 7, 2013 Report Share Posted August 7, 2013 That £24,000 is not supposed to be for food. It's meant to be for education, health etc. as you've repeatedly said. What'll make them starve will be working for the 40p per hour wages that you'd have them on so rich people can buy bigger Mercs. Unless you come up with some more interesting stuff I'll probably bail from this discussion cos you're just trolling now for the sake of it. I know you are work shy and plan to stay in education for most of your life, but most people eventually leave school at which point you wouldn't have to pay for education any more. It would be your money to spend as you wish. Just think what damage you could do at Matalan buying all those imported cheap clothes you like produced in sweat shops by child labour in Sri Lanka with that kind of money Oaksoft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted August 8, 2013 Report Share Posted August 8, 2013 Just think what damage you could do at Matalan buying all those imported cheap clothes you like produced in sweat shops by child labour in Sri Lanka And yet you believe we should be competing on price with countries such as this knowing this is the only way it can be done. That should be a wee clue as to why countries like this are able to produce stuff so cheaply. You are essentially answering your own question. You are trolling so I'm off now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lex Posted August 8, 2013 Report Share Posted August 8, 2013 I thought Communism was dead and buried in the UK, Oaksoft would seem to suggest it's not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted August 8, 2013 Report Share Posted August 8, 2013 I thought Communism was dead and buried in the UK, Oaksoft would seem to suggest it's not. Seriously? Is that your comeback? Tell me when I'm supposed to feel hurt. I'm pretty sure it's more than communism which believes it's wrong to use forced child labour to keep the prices of Dickson's pants and socks as cheap as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lex Posted August 8, 2013 Report Share Posted August 8, 2013 Seriously? Is that your comeback? Tell me when I'm supposed to feel hurt. I'm pretty sure it's more than communism which believes it's wrong to use forced child labour to keep the prices of Dickson's pants and socks as cheap as possible. Why would i be trying to hurt you? It's only the internet man, relax, no one's trying to hurt anyone. I'm just amazed communists still exist in the UK, you're the first i've encountered in the long time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted August 8, 2013 Report Share Posted August 8, 2013 (edited) Why would i be trying to hurt you? It's only the internet man, relax, no one's trying to hurt anyone. I'm just amazed communists still exist in the UK, you're the first i've encountered in the long time. I have no problem with you posting whatever pish you like. It's noticeable from your other posts though that you absolutely don't like taking it back. Shame that. Edited August 8, 2013 by oaksoft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lex Posted August 8, 2013 Report Share Posted August 8, 2013 I have no problem with you posting whatever pish you like. It's noticeable from your other posts though that you absolutely don't like taking it back. Shame that. So you admit to being a communist? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted August 9, 2013 Report Share Posted August 9, 2013 (edited) He's a buckled bitter Bolshevik IMO - he'd nationalise everything and then refuse to buy any of our subsidised nationalised industries output because child labour in India can do it for less. Edited August 9, 2013 by Stuart Dickson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stlucifer Posted August 9, 2013 Report Share Posted August 9, 2013 (edited) Why would i be trying to hurt you? It's only the internet man, relax, no one's trying to hurt anyone. I'm just amazed communists still exist in the UK, you're the first i've encountered in the long time. So you admit to being a communist? He's a buckled bitter Bolshevik IMO - he'd nationalise everything and then refuse to buy any of our subsidised nationalised industries output because child labour in India can do it for less. Apparently so is McCarthyism. Edited August 9, 2013 by stlucifer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted August 10, 2013 Report Share Posted August 10, 2013 What a poor attempt Is it free now? They would have extra money no matter how you look at it Tony and the country would be much better off with a vastly reduced national debt, and a reduced deficit because the interest payments would be greatly reduced. Scrap National Minimum wage and everyone would be able to supplement their UK resident UK citizen dividend by doing a bit of work and if they use zero hour contracts then they'll be able to pick and choose when they want to accept a shift. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Saint Posted September 6, 2013 Report Share Posted September 6, 2013 I'm a zero hours contract and get holiday pay but no sickness pay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murray street Posted September 6, 2013 Report Share Posted September 6, 2013 I got a zero hour contract 3 years ago, its called redundancy - where your employer says fùck off we're giving you zero hours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted September 7, 2013 Report Share Posted September 7, 2013 I got a zero hour contract 3 years ago, its called redundancy - where your employer says fùck off we're giving you zero hours. Was that before or after he saw your posting record on this forum? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murray street Posted September 7, 2013 Report Share Posted September 7, 2013 Was that before or after he saw your posting record on this forum? Oaksoft the resident forum mouthpiece, I am not worthy. Am I on your radar because I think Danny Lennon is a useless cùnt? Or do you just open your trap and let your belly rumble? Its a countdown conundrum 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.