Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2024 16:23:02 GMT
If you are going to talk shit and pluck figures out of the air without any evidence, when I have posted a link to the government's own source for the actual figures, fake news borne of ignorance and malice is obviously more important to you than facts. Do you not understand that UC rolls most benefits into one? The main exceptions being Council Tax Benefit, which only poorer pensioners get paid in full, and PIP which is not means tested at all but is a disability payment based on the severity of any disability. The millionaire in a wheelchair will get exactly the same as the pauper in a wheelchair. Besides, no group sponges more off the working man than you pensioners, most of whom are already better off than the people you sponge off. You fucking entitled hypocrite!!! And do you really think the poor should be requited to pay £12k rents out of £8k incomes or stupid shit like that? Are you really so arithmetically stupid? Or are you really such an evil and malicious little cunt that you think the poor should all be starving on the streets without homes as in Kolkata or something. You really are a walking, talking advocate for the desirability of taxing you so heavily that you fuck off somewhere else. People like you are very persuasive when it comes to showcasing your inherent evil. You are the best argument I have seen for voting Labour all week, lol My post with full evidence , as now stated for a third time was a c&p directly from the linked gov.uk . Figures as per April 2024. Perhaps you have reading comprehension issues or like many lefties think that if you shout loud enough or insult crudely enough another lefty might listen to your disingenuous ramblings ? You think I'm a pensioner too ? More unevidenced lefty ramblings . Funny that because my post took figures directly from a government site too. And unlike you I actually posted a link to it so that you and others could see it for yourself. Your reluctance to do the same is rather telling at this point. Because I have looked in vain back over the past four pages in search of your supposed link, and found nothing. You being a pensioner was just an assumption, by the way, based upon the frequently observed fact that most of the mean-spirited right wing loons full of hate around here tend to be. You may well not be a pensioner - yet, anyway. But you are clearly a mean spirited right wing loon full of hate, so an easy mistake for me to make.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2024 16:37:24 GMT
Hunt scrapped the Truss budget that worried the markets, regained a portion of stability and international confidence, then introduced his budget in a totally different environment... Nothing economically had changed since Truss budget and Hunt budget, interest rates are still sky high, inflation was still as high when Hunt did his budget, granted it's come down a bit, but not enough for the BoE to lower interest rates, so to me there was no 'totally different environment' ... The markets were spooked but not sure it was Truss budget that triggered it. Yeah, we went through it earlier, but the Left lie through their teeth. A short term in power is all that's required to expose them. TSM seems to be looking forward to it. Fuck the sheeple.
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jun 3, 2024 16:40:09 GMT
My post with full evidence , as now stated for a third time was a c&p directly from the linked gov.uk . Figures as per April 2024. Perhaps you have reading comprehension issues or like many lefties think that if you shout loud enough or insult crudely enough another lefty might listen to your disingenuous ramblings ? You think I'm a pensioner too ? More unevidenced lefty ramblings . Funny that because my post took figures directly from a government site too. And unlike you I actually posted a link to it so that you and others could see it for yourself. Your reluctance to do the same is rather telling at this point. Because I have looked in vain back over the past four pages in search of your supposed link, and found nothing. You being a pensioner was just an assumption, by the way, based upon the frequently observed fact that most of the mean-spirited right wing loons full of hate around here tend to be. You may well not be a pensioner - yet, anyway. But you are clearly a mean spirited right wing loon full of hate, so an easy mistake for me to make. Ratcliff gave the figures for the Benefit Cap from the government website. www.gov.uk/benefit-cap/benefit-cap-amounts
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2024 16:55:46 GMT
Funny that because my post took figures directly from a government site too. And unlike you I actually posted a link to it so that you and others could see it for yourself. Your reluctance to do the same is rather telling at this point. Because I have looked in vain back over the past four pages in search of your supposed link, and found nothing. You being a pensioner was just an assumption, by the way, based upon the frequently observed fact that most of the mean-spirited right wing loons full of hate around here tend to be. You may well not be a pensioner - yet, anyway. But you are clearly a mean spirited right wing loon full of hate, so an easy mistake for me to make. Ratcliff gave the figures for the Benefit Cap from the government website. www.gov.uk/benefit-cap/benefit-cap-amountsThanks for the link. At least I now know what he was sourcing. But clearly a cap is a limit on maximum entitlement and in no way a minimum entitlement as he was trying to imply. And most of the payments to people who reach that limit tend to be in the form of rental payments to their landlords, and is a product of high rents charged by landlords which is the root cause of that problem. What he has done is look at the maximum theoretical possible and assumed that all claimants are claiming up to that level, supposing their access to a variety of benefits he imagines exist but cannot or does not name. And that the entire sum is being trousered by the claimant. His whole intent was dishonest, trying to imagine that the typical out of work single person gets over £1400 a month in handouts. To those of us who actually know about such realities on the ground that is maliciously dishonest and that fact is blatantly obvious to anyone in touch with the struggling millions, as his sort rarely are.
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Jun 3, 2024 17:36:15 GMT
My post with full evidence , as now stated for a third time was a c&p directly from the linked gov.uk . Figures as per April 2024. Perhaps you have reading comprehension issues or like many lefties think that if you shout loud enough or insult crudely enough another lefty might listen to your disingenuous ramblings ? You think I'm a pensioner too ? More unevidenced lefty ramblings . Funny that because my post took figures directly from a government site too. And unlike you I actually posted a link to it so that you and others could see it for yourself. Your reluctance to do the same is rather telling at this point. Because I have looked in vain back over the past four pages in search of your supposed link, and found nothing. You being a pensioner was just an assumption, by the way, based upon the frequently observed fact that most of the mean-spirited right wing loons full of hate around here tend to be. You may well not be a pensioner - yet, anyway. But you are clearly a mean spirited right wing loon full of hate, so an easy mistake for me to make. You didn't look very hard , but blindness to facts is a standard lefty trait I note your continued foul mouthed abuse - again a standard lefty trait
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Jun 3, 2024 17:50:17 GMT
Thanks for the link. At least I now know what he was sourcing. But clearly a cap is a limit on maximum entitlement and in no way a minimum entitlement as he was trying to imply. And most of the payments to people who reach that limit tend to be in the form of rental payments to their landlords, and is a product of high rents charged by landlords which is the root cause of that problem. What he has done is look at the maximum theoretical possible and assumed that all claimants are claiming up to that level, supposing their access to a variety of benefits he imagines exist but cannot or does not name. And that the entire sum is being trousered by the claimant. His whole intent was dishonest, trying to imagine that the typical out of work single person gets over £1400 a month in handouts. To those of us who actually know about such realities on the ground that is maliciously dishonest and that fact is blatantly obvious to anyone in touch with the struggling millions, as his sort rarely are. Only dishonesty is coming from your keyboard in your desperate foul mouthed attempt to pretend that benefits packages are subsistence level . They aren't , far from it. Normal people pay for their accommodation out of taxed income , benefits spongers get it as part of their handout income in an untaxed benefits PACKAGE but you'd rather try to pretend it's nothing to do with them . Again you try to pretend that a single handout is the norm - whereas claiming one handout opens the gate for others and the truth is its an untaxed income PACKAGE AS demonstrated a single parent with an unlabelled child can take home the untaxed equivalent of more than double the personal allowance whereas a normal non sponger would need to earn some £33000 pa to take home the sme. The benefits cap is , of course theoretical , it goes out of the window as soon as one of the household gets a trendy illness label (amongst other options)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2024 20:05:20 GMT
Thanks for the link. At least I now know what he was sourcing. But clearly a cap is a limit on maximum entitlement and in no way a minimum entitlement as he was trying to imply. And most of the payments to people who reach that limit tend to be in the form of rental payments to their landlords, and is a product of high rents charged by landlords which is the root cause of that problem. What he has done is look at the maximum theoretical possible and assumed that all claimants are claiming up to that level, supposing their access to a variety of benefits he imagines exist but cannot or does not name. And that the entire sum is being trousered by the claimant. His whole intent was dishonest, trying to imagine that the typical out of work single person gets over £1400 a month in handouts. To those of us who actually know about such realities on the ground that is maliciously dishonest and that fact is blatantly obvious to anyone in touch with the struggling millions, as his sort rarely are. Only dishonesty is coming from your keyboard in your desperate foul mouthed attempt to pretend that benefits packages are subsistence level . They aren't , far from it. Normal people pay for their accommodation out of taxed income , benefits spongers get it as part of their handout income in an untaxed benefits PACKAGE but you'd rather try to pretend it's nothing to do with them . Again you try to pretend that a single handout is the norm - whereas claiming one handout opens the gate for others and the truth is its an untaxed income PACKAGE AS demonstrated a single parent with an unlabelled child can take home the untaxed equivalent of more than double the personal allowance whereas a normal non sponger would need to earn some £33000 pa to take home the sme. The benefits cap is , of course theoretical , it goes out of the window as soon as one of the household gets a trendy illness label (amongst other options) And your obvious and striking contempt for the struggling poor is a typical trait of your ignorant sort.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2024 20:09:46 GMT
Thanks for the link. At least I now know what he was sourcing. But clearly a cap is a limit on maximum entitlement and in no way a minimum entitlement as he was trying to imply. And most of the payments to people who reach that limit tend to be in the form of rental payments to their landlords, and is a product of high rents charged by landlords which is the root cause of that problem. What he has done is look at the maximum theoretical possible and assumed that all claimants are claiming up to that level, supposing their access to a variety of benefits he imagines exist but cannot or does not name. And that the entire sum is being trousered by the claimant. His whole intent was dishonest, trying to imagine that the typical out of work single person gets over £1400 a month in handouts. To those of us who actually know about such realities on the ground that is maliciously dishonest and that fact is blatantly obvious to anyone in touch with the struggling millions, as his sort rarely are. Only dishonesty is coming from your keyboard in your desperate foul mouthed attempt to pretend that benefits packages are subsistence level . They aren't , far from it. Normal people pay for their accommodation out of taxed income , benefits spongers get it as part of their handout income in an untaxed benefits PACKAGE but you'd rather try to pretend it's nothing to do with them . Again you try to pretend that a single handout is the norm - whereas claiming one handout opens the gate for others and the truth is its an untaxed income PACKAGE AS demonstrated a single parent with an unlabelled child can take home the untaxed equivalent of more than double the personal allowance whereas a normal non sponger would need to earn some £33000 pa to take home the sme. The benefits cap is , of course theoretical , it goes out of the window as soon as one of the household gets a trendy illness label (amongst other options) Your language is utterly pejorative and laden with malice. Which will do nothing to make me see you as anything other than a malignant cunt. You are a total waste of my time and a waste of good space and a waste of air. Humanity gains nothing from the existence of hate fuelled turds like you. Go do the rest of humanity a favour and devote your body to scientific research. That you know know fuck all about how the benefits system actually works is blatantly obvious too. You ignorant buffoon, lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2024 20:13:21 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2024 20:19:58 GMT
Only dishonesty is coming from your keyboard in your desperate foul mouthed attempt to pretend that benefits packages are subsistence level . They aren't , far from it. Normal people pay for their accommodation out of taxed income , benefits spongers get it as part of their handout income in an untaxed benefits PACKAGE but you'd rather try to pretend it's nothing to do with them . Again you try to pretend that a single handout is the norm - whereas claiming one handout opens the gate for others and the truth is its an untaxed income PACKAGE AS demonstrated a single parent with an unlabelled child can take home the untaxed equivalent of more than double the personal allowance whereas a normal non sponger would need to earn some £33000 pa to take home the sme. The benefits cap is , of course theoretical , it goes out of the window as soon as one of the household gets a trendy illness label (amongst other options) Your language is utterly pejorative and laden with malice. Which will do nothing to make me see you as anything other than a malignant cunt. You are a total waste of my time and a waste of good space and a waste of air. Humanity gains nothing from the existence of hate fuelled turds like you. Go do the rest of humanity a favour and devote your body to scientific research. That you know know fuck all about how the benefits system actually works is blatantly obvious too. You ignorant buffoon, lol Says a clueless twat who has zero experience of it beyond what he reads in the Daily Mail. Prat, lol
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 3, 2024 21:11:16 GMT
Your language is utterly pejorative and laden with malice. Which will do nothing to make me see you as anything other than a malignant cunt. You are a total waste of my time and a waste of good space and a waste of air. Humanity gains nothing from the existence of hate fuelled turds like you. Go do the rest of humanity a favour and devote your body to scientific research. That you know know fuck all about how the benefits system actually works is blatantly obvious too. You ignorant buffoon, lol Says a clueless twat who has zero experience of it beyond what he reads in the Daily Mail. Prat, lol Internal dialogue ?
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Jun 3, 2024 23:48:29 GMT
Only dishonesty is coming from your keyboard in your desperate foul mouthed attempt to pretend that benefits packages are subsistence level . They aren't , far from it. Normal people pay for their accommodation out of taxed income , benefits spongers get it as part of their handout income in an untaxed benefits PACKAGE but you'd rather try to pretend it's nothing to do with them . Again you try to pretend that a single handout is the norm - whereas claiming one handout opens the gate for others and the truth is its an untaxed income PACKAGE AS demonstrated a single parent with an unlabelled child can take home the untaxed equivalent of more than double the personal allowance whereas a normal non sponger would need to earn some £33000 pa to take home the sme. The benefits cap is , of course theoretical , it goes out of the window as soon as one of the household gets a trendy illness label (amongst other options) Your language is utterly pejorative and laden with malice. Which will do nothing to make me see you as anything other than a malignant cunt. You are a total waste of my time and a waste of good space and a waste of air. Humanity gains nothing from the existence of hate fuelled turds like you. Go do the rest of humanity a favour and devote your body to scientific research. That you know know fuck all about how the benefits system actually works is blatantly obvious too. You ignorant buffoon, lol Yet more foul mouthed spittle so typical of extreme lefties so strangled by their own bias , lack of comprehension skills and complete sense of self righteous importance that they are unable to converse civilly. An utter disgrace to the socialist cause they claim to espouse
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Jun 3, 2024 23:52:02 GMT
Your language is utterly pejorative and laden with malice. Which will do nothing to make me see you as anything other than a malignant cunt. You are a total waste of my time and a waste of good space and a waste of air. Humanity gains nothing from the existence of hate fuelled turds like you. Go do the rest of humanity a favour and devote your body to scientific research. That you know know fuck all about how the benefits system actually works is blatantly obvious too. You ignorant buffoon, lol Says a clueless twat who has zero experience of it beyond what he reads in the Daily Mail. Prat, lol Talking about yourself?
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Jun 4, 2024 6:05:31 GMT
The problem with trying to increase taxation by squeezing the rich is that there aren't enough of them. The top 1% already pay 30% of taxation. But under Gordon Brown (with his near 50% big state) more than 50% of the country became net beneficiaries of the tax system - in fact income tax in particular has become a very expensive money redistribution system. There's basically no net revenue from income tax. So the problem is definitely that the poor don't pay enough net tax. And the reason is that many of the "poor" people are not as poor as HMRC thinks. Almost every tradesman I use gives discounts for cash. But it's actually quite difficult now for the wealthy to avoid tax. That oft quoted statistic of course conveniently ignores NI and VAT, not to mention Council Tax, Fuel Duty, and so on VAT is the big one of course, but there is, in theory, no VAT on necessities. It's meant to be on "luxuries". There's no VAT on food etc so genuinely poor people should pay little VAT. Of course nowadays people on benefits drive around in Range Rovers but that's another story. The thing is that after the reforms of the Tories over the last few governments have made it very difficult for the rich to avoid tax. The days when footballers could get their salary paid into an investment company and they received it as zero interest loans and paid no income tax have long gone.
|
|
|
Post by piglet on Jun 4, 2024 9:06:58 GMT
srb, is that you or wedgewood benn? Can i remind you that he was a toxic lefty, like you, but just before his death, he rowed back on his life, regretting all of it, and admitting he was wrong. He grew up just in time.
|
|