World unemployment
- 22 January 2013 19:19211560doubt if these figures are strictly accurate what with the black economy in some countries and no out of work benefits in others.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/jan/22/ilo-unemployment-numbers-rise-2013 - 22 January 2013 19:27211563The real figures are always twice as high, Howard.
That said, we in Britain employ most of them, on a rotating basis.
Chanters, Drums and Drones Potty Time http://youtu.be/99fMqpjnXYA
Rule Britannia!
Kent First http://youtu.be/04F3mAP3fV4 Keep banging on http://youtu.be/qYCU_SKmkGQ - 28 January 2013 10:37212510Belgium's economy is really suffering, the latest blow is the closure of the Ford plant in Genk with the loss of 4000 direct jobs. To counter all this the Belgium government is actually reducing benefits let alone reducing the amount of annual increase. One local official has said that if you can afford beer,cigarettes,tobacco, drugs,tv or own a mobile phone then you don't need benefits. guess he won't be to popular.
- 28 January 2013 11:00212512i believe that the chap was known locally as barry van der williams.
- 28 January 2013 11:16212515He is right though Ken.
- 28 January 2013 11:30212517Of course he's right, walk past the 8 Bells at 10.00 any morning, blokes drinking and smoking and talking on mobile phones. They clearly don't have jobs, they're sticking two fingers up at the rest of us.
- 28 January 2013 12:46212522Sources of government revenue, 2012-13 forecasts*
[Revenue (£bn) / Percentage of total receipts.]
Value Added Tax-102.0 /17.2
Fuel duties- 27.3/ 4.6
Tobacco duties- 9.8/ 1.7
Alcohol duties- 10.6/ 1.8
Betting and gaming duties- 1.7/ 0.3
Vehicle excise duty- 5.9/ 1.0
Air passenger duty- 2.9 /0.5
Insurance premium tax-2.9/ 0.5
Not to over complicate things: The above sums to nearly 28% of the tax take, with no discounting for the unemployed. There is little point in going through the whole range of business tax receipts as Breweries, Distillers, various SMEs and many other businesses would lose revenue through the disbarment of those in receipt of any benefits from the purchase of any commodity accruing tax liabilities. Not to mention the concomitant shortfall in Income tax (25.5%) and National Insurance (17.9%).
Wherever there is fun to be had fun shall be had.
As with the plonkers of Belgium, and their fans over here, nothing that they say or do is focussed upon growth. What grips them and what drives their enthusiasm for scapegoating the poor, is the dread that what they accrued during the era of shameless greed, ironically known as the Gordon Brown years, may have to be risked to get the World Economy returned to rude health. If there is one thing sure to get the haves hopping mad is having one foot in the grave.
*http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn09.pdIgnorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing. - 28 January 2013 12:57212525No one would 'disbar' them from purchasing any commodity Tom. But why should taxpayers money pay for their alcohol, cigarettes and mobile phones? If they could not afford these on benefits maybe they will be incentived to actually sort themselves out and get a job.
- 28 January 2013 12:59212527still no mention of the sky sports package.
- 28 January 2013 13:38212532Life is a package deal Barry, as we all know. There are two things within the package one can be certain of;Death and Taxes.
Why does tax surprise you?
I know that even the meanest and lowest form of potential employee has the gumption to know that the pay-rate quoted to him falls way short of describing the money he shall take home at the end of the week, yet this come as a surprise to you.
In any case, and this is a severe body blow to you, yet I mean it kindly. With the shift of taxation away from direct to indirect tax, we:you, me and they are all taxpayers. You are no longer the mighty Atlas, supporting and financing the world all on your lonesome. Poor people, that have the temerity to survive in the modern world, pay their share too.
We are neither of us University men Barry, but very many of those that speak as you do and are of approximately our age are highly (and freely) educated. It was the generosity of taxpayers that made that possible. Are you advocating that the unemployed forsake their ciggies and enjoy a free tertiary education?
Where is the incentive to the Landlord, the corner shop, the utility company etc. for them to accept a mere portion of the wage you would have these folk take home?
And finally, something for everybody to ponder...
http://www.economist.com/node/21562195Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing. - Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
28 January 2013 15:38212538barry,thats biased you have 2 out of 3 of them.if its all right for you to have a tv and some beers in the fridge or over the bar at blakes etc,why cant those poor sods have the same.and dont give me the burden on the tax payer jargon,they pay tax as well on there beer and fags. - 28 January 2013 15:46212539Brian. #11.
It's simple, really. Barry has a job and the majority of the people being referred to in this thread don't. That's straightforward capitalism and explains why Barry can have a TV and as much booze and fags as he can afford, although I daresay his priorities lie beyond such limited horizons. Why you believe those on benefits should be entitled to all and sundry is quite beyond me - I'd like much more than I can afford, but don't see why others should subsidise my ambitions.True friends stab you in the front. - 28 January 2013 15:47212540It is all right for me Brian because I work and do not depend on the state to pay for my alcohol, mobile etc.
If those of working age are fit to work want these things then they should have to work for them. As I said, they might have the incentive to get a job, if so.
I am perfectly happy to have a safety net for people but they can do without their ciggies and booze until they get into work. Yes Howard - Sky Sports and every other unnecessary luxury as well. - Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
28 January 2013 15:55212541andy/barry,your probably right in thinking that way,but as being they are paying taxes,ie tobacco duty,beer duty and vat on other things. - 28 January 2013 15:58212542Brian, using your logic we should give them twice as much dole just so we collect more tax
- 28 January 2013 16:34212546It certainly is a very strange logic.
- 28 January 2013 16:44212548David #15
That is just what Barry says, time and again. Only he would resort to his Thesaurus to replace the word 'dole'.Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing. - Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,888
28 January 2013 17:08212550Brian, I can understand what you mean but it is the working or in my case retired tax payer that is funding the beer, fags and other non essentials that are being bought often instead of healthy food and heat.-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
------------------------------------------------------------------- - 28 January 2013 17:09212551Have you taken up smoking then Barry?
- Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
28 January 2013 17:19212552dont think so tony.