|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Sept 1, 2024 17:59:40 GMT
No, you are dishonestly moving goalposts here. They have met your 3 criteria and are still in poverty. You have admitted there are OTHER factors - ie. NOT the three criteria. Now you are claiming the "other factors" are the "three criteria". You are either suffering from dementia, have no idea how to formulate a coherent argument, or are lying; which is it? All The Best If you do not understand what the discussion is fair enough - but try and keep it civil. I'll repeat what I said .. slowly.. so you might understand.
1: Finish school.
2: Get a job, any job and work full time.
3: Dont get married before 21 and have children only when married.
Follow those 3 steps and you have just a 2% chance of ending up in poverty.
I get what you said. Of all the people I know who adhere to the 1-3 criteria you set out over 50% of them routinely have to make the "heat or eat" choice, and - crucially - earn less than 60% of the Median Income (which is £34,693), and so are within the Official Government definition of poverty. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Sept 2, 2024 6:05:16 GMT
That you admit other factors may drag people down clearly indicates you know your 3 criteria are utter bullshit. Yes - they either didn't finish school or had a kid or got married too young. The system works - follow those simple rules and you will not be in poverty. twaddle - Net migration accounts for around 89% of the 1.34 million increase in England’s housing deficit (the amount of homes we have underbuilt by) in the last 10 years What you seem to overlook there are the two POLITICAL decisions that sent house prices rocketing The first being Lawson's absurd MIRAS antics that pushed the price of the home "worth" 39,500 and bought with a £35,000 mortgage when I was earning £15,000 and Moira was earning £8000 to £86,500 the day before living in sin dual.MIRAS relief ended, and tanked to £62,500 the following Monday. The second being the antics of Brown in his days as chancellor which saw the £97,500 home I bought in 1997 spike to £350,000 before another tanking to £225,000 when Lehmann Brothers went under These two, and other equally insane political actions distorted the housing market and pushed prices well beyond the ordinary home buyers budget and comprehensively threw the rational approach of the past fifty years straight down the toilet far more than the insane importing of hostile invaders which has screwed housing demand daily since... |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Sept 2, 2024 6:11:47 GMT
If you do not understand what the discussion is fair enough - but try and keep it civil. I'll repeat what I said .. slowly.. so you might understand.
1: Finish school.
2: Get a job, any job and work full time.
3: Dont get married before 21 and have children only when married.
Follow those 3 steps and you have just a 2% chance of ending up in poverty.
I get what you said. Of all the people I know who adhere to the 1-3 criteria you set out over 50% of them routinely have to make the "heat or eat" choice, and - crucially - earn less than 60% of the Median Income (which is £34,693), and so are within the Official Government definition of poverty. All The Best Ok I wasn't aware of the definition. Thanks for that 60% of £34693 is £20816 £11.44 (the adult NMW) multiplied by 40 (the working week as I knew it) multiplied by 52 is £23,785 Pacifico is right No one in a proper job can possibly fall into the government definition of poverty. ....it's not allowed, by law If they only "worked" 48 weeks as some temporary agency supplied workers find themselves exploited to in order to 'earn' their holiday pay then they still collect £21,964 Pacifico's statement was that they get a job, any job, AND that they Work Full Time. Unless Full Time is not eight hours a day five days a week, there really isn't a way to work full time and be in poverty as defined by the Government |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Sept 2, 2024 7:17:03 GMT
I wanted this in a separate post but somehow the phone screwed up. Let's try with the PC ...
Now, I think the real problem is that there are not enough ways a person with a British passport born to parents with a British passport CAN work full time and there are a large number of reasons for that
And like Dan Dare I firmly believe that a company that wishes to employ an immigrant should pay a huge fee for so doing, and in my case I believe all of that should go to fund UK based training for UK citizens in the area those companies seek recruits, in order that we may properly address the problem that has plagued this country for decades, the ease by which a UK organisation can steal another country's skilled workforce rather than train up its own people to do the job.
And Politicians who pretend there is a skills shortage in the face of facts to the contrary should be taken out and hung. Blair initiated a fast tracked visa scam to flood the UK with C++ and Java programmers sourced from India starting within weeks of taking office. He did it because certain software house multi millionaires on that continent had a quiet word in his ear.
The fact was the country had many thousands of such people but none were prepared to work for the utter pittance those Indian software houses were prepared to pay in order to keep their CEOs in the lifestyle the contracts they illegally outsourced provided.
I am proud of the role I played in exposing and denouncing that fraud.
|
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Sept 2, 2024 16:01:23 GMT
I get what you said. Of all the people I know who adhere to the 1-3 criteria you set out over 50% of them routinely have to make the "heat or eat" choice, and - crucially - earn less than 60% of the Median Income (which is £34,693), and so are within the Official Government definition of poverty. All The Best Ok I wasn't aware of the definition. Thanks for that 60% of £34693 is £20816 £11.44 (the adult NMW) multiplied by 40 (the working week as I knew it) multiplied by 52 is £23,785Pacifico is right No one in a proper job can possibly fall into the government definition of poverty. ....it's not allowed, by law If they only "worked" 48 weeks as some temporary agency supplied workers find themselves exploited to in order to 'earn' their holiday pay then they still collect £21,964 Pacifico's statement was that they get a job, any job, AND that they Work Full Time. Unless Full Time is not eight hours a day five days a week, there really isn't a way to work full time and be in poverty as defined by the Government Full Time is 35 Hours per week, 40 hours at work but most people do NOT get paid for their lunch break. Minus Tax. Minus NI. And presto, below 60% of Median. That is the problem of setting a Minimum Age and then being stupid enough to tax them on it. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Sept 2, 2024 16:17:21 GMT
Ok I wasn't aware of the definition. Thanks for that 60% of £34693 is £20816 £11.44 (the adult NMW) multiplied by 40 (the working week as I knew it) multiplied by 52 is £23,785Pacifico is right No one in a proper job can possibly fall into the government definition of poverty. ....it's not allowed, by law If they only "worked" 48 weeks as some temporary agency supplied workers find themselves exploited to in order to 'earn' their holiday pay then they still collect £21,964 Pacifico's statement was that they get a job, any job, AND that they Work Full Time. Unless Full Time is not eight hours a day five days a week, there really isn't a way to work full time and be in poverty as defined by the Government Full Time is 35 Hours per week, 40 hours at work but most people do NOT get paid for their lunch break. Minus Tax. Minus NI. And presto, below 60% of Median. That is the problem of setting a Minimum Age and then being stupid enough to tax them on it. All The Best Ok so it's not gross it's net |
|
|
|
Post by dodgydave on Sept 4, 2024 1:57:44 GMT
What country? The country is so badly fragmented because of mass immigration and Scottish / Irish / Welsh nationalism, there will never be widespread consensus for anything anymore.
Personally, I'm crossing off all those bucket list items, because by 2050 The West will be on fire!
|
|
