Not meaning to start a political war but...

I used t court a lovely Newport lass at that pub

 

im just glad they chose to offset the petrol increase till later in the year, when i will be earning more money so will be able to more easilly absorb it... as a student right now who HAS to drive back and forth from uni and two jobs, more petrol costs really wouldnt be acceptable to me. I can barely afford to drive as it is.

What did piss me off was the talk of increasing tax on more polluting cars, and droping or even removing completely the tax on nice shiny new efficient cars.

Well what about people like me... who cannot afford to buy new cars, have to get older ones, and often medium to large engine sizes as they are cheaper to buy.

Its another case of the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. We drive old cars, so we pay more fuel, more tax, more insurance, while someone earning well with plenty of cash can go out and buy the most fuel efficient car on the market and save a bomb on all three. It seems you have to actually be well off to save any money any more.

Whereas those who do not have access to credit, loans, or any large sum of money, will just lose more and more and more.

Rant over

 

....So single mums will be better off by £650 a year?
That'll be WORKING single mums.
So they work at a job AND they work as mums too-I'd like to see any of you(us) 'blokes' try that-I know and I have and believe me give me a traditional blokes position as breadwinner anyday.
They deserve our respect not our contempt.

 

then they don't need £650/year!!

I haven't treiid any thing cooky, I've kept myself to myself..





I'm meaning to tread on any ones toes......I'm just saying.

.....er,???

,

might it pay them to work out where there means is coming from before getting in the family way, THUS being a drain on the state.

I think thats what I might do....

 

I really meant that L'shall was local, rather than refering to its pub.

The red house is the one on the main n' port/telford road.....on the r'about for edgmond (IIRC) ?

WE use to tgo there occassionally from HAAC(the agri coll).

 

Your complete ignorance shames you.
Have an ideology by all means but back it up with some basic knowledge not Daily Mail crap.
FYI the huge majority of single mums are left holding the baby by feckless blokes or divorce or relationship breakdown.
A number of years ago I found myself in the position of having to work and look after 2 kids-believe me BOTH are full time jobs-just because one doesn't carry a wage doesn't mean it isn't hard work..
The £650 is an increase in family tax credit for working people (couples on low incomes too) and child benefit, paid to everyone with kids, working or otherwise.

40 hrs on minimum wage is barely enough to pay peoples rent and fuel costs-hence FTC makes work worth it.
You should direct your ire at the multimillionaires who pay no tax whatsoever.

 

lol





not COMPLETE ignorance I would hope!!

yes, ok, maybe....

you said it your self, paid to people with kids...

Yes , ok not my best post maybe.....and I was half expecting a some what thorny response from some one I got it!


I guess its good that single Mums and Dads ARE looked after.

I don't have a family, or a wife (or g/f)....

I acn't afford one!







(edit. the last para to be taken VERY tongue in cheek)

 

I'm always interested in people's economic and political attitudes. Sound equipment sites aren't usually strong on political discussion, more along the line: "just look what the idiots have done now."

Why are single mum's victims? Haven't they and the father taken a series of decisions that puts them in that situation? Why does someone who has chosen to put themselves in that position require subsidy by those whose decisions have not put themselves in that situation?

Back street abortions were usually because adequate birth control was not available. Now it is, universally. There's a shortage of babies for adoption if you find you cannot cope with your situation.

Why aren't the fathers of these children working and paying toward their maintainance? Why should those of us already supporting our own children pay for their children as well?

It is too easy to paint "single mothers" as victims in the media. If anyone is a victim, it is the child of irresponsible parents.

 

You appear to have touched a nervewell done.-
Ah well, at least we weren't disagreeing about cables

 

david - i'm a single dad - i fought long and hard to get a custody order when i got divorced. i've been at the mercy of tax credits in order to top up the wages i could earn between 9.30 and 3.00 (as those were the hours my child was at school) and if they weren;t there i'd have been out on the street in the clothes i stood in and nothing else.
as others have said your ignorance amazes me - these kids you seem to so dispise are the ones who will be paying your state pension, propping up the nhs and generally greasing the cogs that drive the country on as somewhere you can be reasonably confident that when you get old or if you loose your job, get ill or are disabled you're not going to starve or freeze to death or die of a disease that could be easily cured.
my previous g/f was a single mum - she worked hard on a till in asda earning slightly more than minimum wage - because she had to fit her work around her child. even then she had to pay for childcare to take up the slack, again if not for tax credits she'd have been out on her arse and unable to work.

<and reeelaaaxxxx>

 

I think you might find it was ONE other Julian

.....and that was resolved ( Ithink)in subsequent posts.


I think I made it clear one of my posts prob wasn't ideal.



http://www.zerogain.com/forum/showpost.php?p=230213&postcount=27









"these kids you seem to so dispise ......"

No, true enouigh, I am not a kiddie person.

The rest of that para......I think there are some arguable points in there.



"my previous g/f was a single mum - she worked hard ......."

I'm sure she did.

I think many of us do.

 

mods i think on balance this thread has outstayed its welcome

it certainly hasn't gone thhe way i origionally intended

might i suggest you get rid?

 

Do you still agree with your first post or has your opinion been swayed?

 

I think there are many deep-rooted factors here

I'm holding my own council now

 

Hi David,

You've raised a serious point and we can't just get rid of threads just because it hasn't gone the way you intended.

 

.....That's the trouble with raising political points, it's often cause for some fairly deeply held principles and beliefs being expressed.
Us Brits are often at our best united against a common enemy, although unfortunately in this case it's the wrong enemy
Whereas I think there are indeed 'some' feckless slags dropping kids all over the place they are a tiny minority, Non dom millionaires on the other hand are 100 % a bunch of tax dodging scumbags who should (with the right legislation)be f*****g hammered alongside their uk registered corporate offshore tax dodging companies such as Tesco.
There "I feel better now, I feel better than James Brown"

 

It's the law that needs changing, you can't blame people (well, lawyers) for exploiting loopholes, it just shouldn't be allowed, the holes should be plugged.

I was reading an article the other week about some lawyer who specialises in helping celebrities and the well-heeled off motoring offences. Simply by being well versed in the procedures that should be followed in order for a conviction to be watertight, he can spot that police mistake and get the culprit off. It's a terrible load of bollocks really, if they've got the wedge he'll give them a good chance of getting away with it even if the evidence is damning, but for the other 99.5% of the population it's a different story. The law is an ass, m'lord .

 

Nick Freeman is doing all of society a service. Or would you prefer the police/DPP to bodge through everything they feel like regardless of statutory procedures? If they did their jobs properly he wouldn't have one.

 

I refer the honourable gentleman to the first sentence from my previous post:

"It's the law that needs changing, you can't blame people (well, lawyers) for exploiting loopholes, it just shouldn't be allowed, the holes should be plugged."

So yes, I feel the police should be encouraged to follow procedures, as failing to do so supplies loopholes for Mr Loophole to exploit. Perhaps Mr Freeman should get some sort of knighthood for his services to society, I for one feel much more secure on the roads knowing that although there might be a handful more speeding or drunk motorists on the road on his account, at least the police might be a little more efficient with their paperwork.