|
|
Post by dappy on Jun 10, 2024 16:45:45 GMT
Dappy probably didn’t spend a lot of time studying the fine detail of the 2022 Act. If the main change of the act is to take away the concept of finding one or other partner to blame and instead focusing on achieving an amicable split if that is what both parties want - that seems sensible to me. The whole point of the Act is to enable a divorce to happen if only one of the parties wants it. Surely both partners have to want to be in a relationship for that relationship to exist in any meaningful way? |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jun 10, 2024 16:50:35 GMT
Ok so what changes would you wish made to benefits. I think the biggest cost is pensions. Does that get cut too? I'd base them on contributions, as our more enlightened neighbours do: No pay in, no get out.
Our pensions are already the lowest of pretty much any comparable country and of course most of our pensioners will have paid for them, so there's not much fat to trim there.
Benefits for non-contributing spongers however, well that's a different story.
|
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Jun 10, 2024 16:54:00 GMT
Benefits? No out of work handouts without a 5 year contribution history in the UK Out of work benefits for maximum of 5 year during working age All out of work benefit packages to be taxable at standard income tax rates Disability handouts for physical disability only , take alleged MH out of the equation ,eg Anxiety/ADHD/AST(unless completely non functiional) Benefit handouts to be awarded in voucher form for specific items only and exchangeable only in major supermarkets or utility companies. No booze/fags/Sky TV/takeaways etc OAP pension is a pittance (and it's taxable) , OAPS have paid in - leave them alone Over 50% of the total pension spend goes on pensions but that is to be excluded from your savage cuts. Is it fair to guess that you are a pensioner and this is a case of “leave my benefits alone but cut all the other buggers….”? Wrong , another of your lefty mates has tried that ''you must be an OAP ''one already - they too think it's fine and dandy for the OAP pension to be taxable but the working age benefits package to be untaxed. Income is income and it is inequitable the income of those who fund the benefits package income of spongers is taxed but that of the sponger is not where both exceed the personal allowance The everything for nothing brigade are the ones to have their free ride stopped, not OAPs |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 10, 2024 16:56:18 GMT
I keep asking the same question over and over again. It may well be true that children in happy nuclear families on average do better than other children. But we are not discussing them. What evidence do you have that children in unhappy nuclear families kept together by tax or other incentives /disincentives do better than children in non nuclear families There isn’t an incentive or disincentive in place so why ask stupid questions . We do know that children tend to do better in nuclear families . If you have evidence that all nuclear families where children do better are happy then post it ..see I can do that . |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Jun 10, 2024 17:04:18 GMT
I keep asking the same question over and over again. It may well be true that children in happy nuclear families on average do better than other children. But we are not discussing them. What evidence do you have that children in unhappy nuclear families kept together by tax or other incentives /disincentives do better than children in non nuclear families There isn’t an incentive or disincentive in place so why ask stupid questions . We do know that children tend to do better in nuclear families . If you have evidence that all nuclear families where children do better are happy then post it ..see I can do that . Good try to turn it round but it is for you to explain why you go against common sense and believe it is in most cases beneficial for children to live in unhappy households with unhappy parents argueing. It’s the crux of your case yet it defies logic. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Jun 10, 2024 17:11:24 GMT
Ok so what changes would you wish made to benefits. I think the biggest cost is pensions. Does that get cut too? I'd base them on contributions, as our more enlightened neighbours do: No pay in, no get out.
Our pensions are already the lowest of pretty much any comparable country and of course most of our pensioners will have paid for them, so there's not much fat to trim there.
Benefits for non-contributing spongers however, well that's a different story.
They already are. You need 10 years NI contributions to qualify, and 35 years for the full pension. www.gov.uk/new-state-pension |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 10, 2024 17:21:13 GMT
I'd base them on contributions, as our more enlightened neighbours do: No pay in, no get out.
Our pensions are already the lowest of pretty much any comparable country and of course most of our pensioners will have paid for them, so there's not much fat to trim there.
Benefits for non-contributing spongers however, well that's a different story.
They already are. You need 10 years NI contributions to qualify, and 35 years for the full pension. www.gov.uk/new-state-pensionEven illegals are abusing the system and the NHS... |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 10, 2024 17:23:14 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Jun 10, 2024 17:40:30 GMT
Well you ask what we want,for me Controlled immigration Civll servants reminded who they work for Parliamentary reform including abolishing the HoL the country’s biggest retirement home for failed politician's Some sort of penalisation for failing to honour manifestos Reform of the nhs (acknowledging it can’t do everything and should be centred on a core principle)with a pledge that it will be administered by a cross party group Return of grammar,technical,sec modern schools. Increased defence spending A set in stone guarantee that ex military or emergency service personnel who fall on hard times or suffer mental or other health issues are supported and it’s not left to charity. Regeneration of manufacturing Self sufficiency in food Energy security that isn’t tied to a mad rush to net zero. I could go oh but everyone else might disagree or want other things  |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Jun 10, 2024 17:41:42 GMT
Pretty good video. It backs up what I said, you need 10 years NI contributions to qualify for anything, and 35 years to get the full amount. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jun 10, 2024 17:50:55 GMT
I'd base them on contributions, as our more enlightened neighbours do: No pay in, no get out.
Our pensions are already the lowest of pretty much any comparable country and of course most of our pensioners will have paid for them, so there's not much fat to trim there.
Benefits for non-contributing spongers however, well that's a different story.
They already are. You need 10 years NI contributions to qualify, and 35 years for the full pension. www.gov.uk/new-state-pensionYes, I know.
That's why the left should lay off the oldies and tackle the spongers.
But fat chance of that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 10, 2024 17:56:52 GMT
There isn’t an incentive or disincentive in place so why ask stupid questions . We do know that children tend to do better in nuclear families . If you have evidence that all nuclear families where children do better are happy then post it ..see I can do that . Good try to turn it round but it is for you to explain why you go against common sense and believe it is in most cases beneficial for children to live in unhappy households with unhappy parents argueing. It’s the crux of your case yet it defies logic. It’s known that children do better in nuclear families . You want any attempt to keep nuclear families together to be abandoned because some children might be unhappy . You keep up this lie that the process will force couples to stay together . You haven’t graded the crux of my case . You make up a false claim and project it at me . |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Jun 10, 2024 19:53:50 GMT
Yes, I know.
That's why the left should lay off the oldies and tackle the spongers.
But fat chance of that.
In that case, I'm unsure what you meant by: |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jun 10, 2024 20:25:51 GMT
I've no doubt you are, Andy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jun 10, 2024 21:19:58 GMT
And this is why every illegal immigrant in the EU is desperate to get to the UK where they suddenly become refugees, and of course the EU wave them off as these poor refugees drag their dinghies down French beaches. To allow this to continue we must be mad, literally mad. |
|
