Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
You're not in the productive sector yourself Barry.
"breach of contract" Ha!!
Barry, I bet you've never worked at the minimum-wage end of things.
It simply cannot be a cock-up when there is no immediate promise of redress.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Ah but I am in the private sector Tom and always have. In fact I dam productive through my role in advising individuals and businesses of all types. I run a profitable business, not one that will ever make me rich but it does give me a decent income into the 40p level. This year I am paying £17k in tax, incidentally, far too much. So yes, I am very productive at different levels.
How little you know about me Tom. I have also worked on a low wage too, I left school at 15 and never did do any exams having had a series of jobs before financial services. I do have a degree level qualification now but that was done and paid for myself while running a business.
Your hatred of the private sector comes across in your posts time and time again.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
To talk merely in terms of 'profit' is to not only legitimise bad-practise but encourage it. Going all out for greater and greater profit means; fewest employees, lowest wages, sub-standard work environment and deception of all sorts.
Patently you and your ilk realise the single down-side with slavery. That of accepting the workforce as assets.
Far better, it seems, to engineer a situation where the workforce is as pliant as slaves, but eminently expendable.
P.S.
It is obvious to me that I am only ascribed 'hatred' because of your 'love' of money Barry.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Tom - there it goes again. You really do not understand businesses or business people expressing a bigotry that would get you ostracised if used against someone of a different race. It is you who fail to understand the dynamics of business and people 'of my ilk'.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
There was this I posted yesterday...
"On 26 April 2007, a fire occurred at a New Look branch in Oxford Street, London. The subsequent investigation revealed an extensive catalogue of failings relating to fire safety precautions and measures. The company subsequently pleaded guilty to criminal charges and on 25 November 2009, was fined a total of £400,000 with £136,052 costs.[5]
In 2010, the fines were upheld by the Court of Appeal.[6]"
Is this (New Look) not a company after your own heart Barry?
There is very little in this wide world quite so 'dynamic' as fire.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
Please please, please, BarryW, tell me how these cuts to the below list equates with your ideals?
To respite care services.
To home-based care services.
Social care to elderly and vulnerable patients.
The list is endless.
The Association of Directors of Adult Social Services (Adass) showed that in the past two years social care budgets had lost £1.89bn in funding, at a time when pressure from rising numbers of older and disabled adults continues to grow at 3% per year.
What the hell does this have to do with creating wealth, that in turn will be "the best way to help people, get the pain over as quickly as possible"?
Please don't reply with "its Gordon's fault" or "we need more cuts" or any other political clap-trap, try answering on moral grounds.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
On moral grounds...GaryC - the moral basis is clear, we have to get the economy right and make sure that it is on a sustainable path.
You can argue for or against any cut, I personally am against cuts to the Armed Forces, but at the end of the day cuts have to be made. The specifics you refer to will be KCC cuts not government ones. Not nice perhaps but the is no easy or painless way out of the mess Labour's incompetence caused. I just wish they would cut more and deeper to get it over more quickly.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
No answer then, just the same old.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Face the economic facts Gary, they do not change.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
The fact was: The fate of the nation was placed in the hands of greedy, money-grubbing bean-counters and good-news-nicks.
The fact is: The struggle is joined by these same people to drive home to the populace that the fault lies with the populace; they (we!) voted for the wrong party and were foolhardy enough to be taken-in by the weasel words of the Westminster Village and the City and that we need to get back to those 'good-old-days' ASAP.
The fact is: We were sucked in and blown out, better then (we are told) to become suckers anew!
We've raised our own Gulliver on steroids, and my how he has grown. We 'must' now starve ourselves to feed him; for we are told, and re-told and told again that He is the new godhead.
[Lowering the top-rate of tax was said to be the answer, creating more and more cash to give to the banks was the answer, throwing people out of their homes is the answer, denying the jobless work unless they do it for nothing is said to be the answer, but...does anyone remember the question?]
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 715- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 2,438
Tom I salute you
Audere est facere.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Ditto.
The reality of the cost of benefit fraud never `taints` the political rhetoric,Osborne demonstrates this
rhetoric,which is repeated by a few on this forum ( ie they have sky dishes,smoke,drunk,do not work ) which turns everyone
who claims benefit as a cheat and rogue.
The true cost of benefit fraud is £ 1 billion....that is 1 point 1 % of the people who claim benefit.
This is significantly lower than the reality of Tax Avoidance cost which is £ 7,000,000,000.and is never `Tainted`with being a
number one ``crime``,it is even admired by `some`.
Both travesties,benefit fraud and Tax Avoidance`should be stamped out.
PS.Flat rate Tax is the ``fairest`` form of Taxation system available.
It would be a constant rate of collection from all individuals.corporations and would `reduce` the Tax Havens and
`loopholes`for those that make larger income amounts.
It is not thought that this government have any intention of introducing this Taxation system as it would be resisted by the
Rich.
The flat rate of tax is used by many countries and has been around for donkey`s years.....for some to claim it was their idea
is incorrect and rather childish...
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
Tom.
As it is.
Only the blind can't see, other's simply dont want to.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
I think it's a fair comment, if we realy do believe in the theme of 'we are all in this together'.
If that is the case mr cameron should be slating the people who tax avoid the total cost to us all of £7 billion.
unfortunatly mr cameron has chosen to just concentrate on those that are already struggling for survival.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
BarryW.
"The specifics you refer to will be KCC cuts not government ones."
You don't really believe that do you?
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Those are KCC responsibilities, not central government and it is KCC who decide on where to cut their budget. The cuts are necessary and you will only have credibility if you can come up with equivalent alternatives.
Anyone can moan and complain and there are always reasons why this and that should not be cut but cuts have to be made.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Are we surprised we have to keep saying to the defender of the defenceless that the government in the name of ``Pickles`
starve the Local Authorities of funds then blame them for where the cuts are made.
It is as always illogical propaganda that is beginning to be found out by Joe Public.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
What are your alternative cuts then Reg?
Make it sensible and viable though.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
BarryW.
Many people on here have given you alternative cuts. You just choose to ignore them and their posts.
Ignore
To be ignorant of or not acquainted with.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
GaryC - what alternative cuts? I have seen none, none that is that can possibly help fill the massive black hole.
