Cut all the benefits/welfare, fix the economy

Post Reply New Topic

In case you didn't figure it out, I was saying that kind dismisal problem occurs on both sides.

Also, you telling me that we should raise taxes on Darren Hammond, he would be considered rich? He can barely make ends meet taking a second job.

I don't deny people gain knowledge as they get older, to do so would be stupid.

But as I said, I know some teenagers who are already smarter than some adults. Of course, they may very well be even smarter as they get older, but that's irrelevant in terms of my original point which is that you can't dismiss someone based solely on age, or, for that matter, on the basis that they're not as smart as they may be in the future, for you can say the same about any given adult too.

Last edited by Asp-Z on 07 Dec 2010, 2:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Yea. Xenon13 is only half right. It's true that multi-national corporations are faring much much better than anyone else in this recession, even though they are the entities most responsible for it. He's letting his emotions get the better of him if he thinks that the recession is a conspiracy to increase profits by deliberately raising unemployment.

Actually, Xenon13's statements are dead wrong for the most part. Sure there are multi-national corps doing well, but raising taxes are not going to affect them cause they will just pass it on to the consumer.

The taxes being hiked would just affect people like Nathan Hammond, whom is struggling to make ends meet, and had to get a second job just to stay in business.

Actually it wouldn't affect Nathan Hammond since the "tax-hike" would have only been on personal income. Income put aside to fund his business would be exempt from any increase.

Actually it would affect his income, cause the tax hikes are also on capital gains, not sure what his business falls under, but his taxes would go up. If the is a partnership it would go up cause the taxes are on his personal income. If he is an S-corp he would be taxed twice and each tax would be going up.

I would have to dig out my business law book to give you the specific details, but that's the situation.

Knowledge is not wisdom. In general, no matter how much brain power they may have, a teenager doesn't have as much perspective as someone older even if that older person isn't as smart. You're right though that nobody's arguments should be dismissed solely because of their age.

Some young people gain more wisdom than adults, too. No one can argue that all adults are wisdomous, even if they have lived for many decades some are the complete opposite.



Thank you, that was my only real point

There are several pages of debating your point, if you would care to go back and read them. I am dismissive of your position not just because you happen to lack the YEARS of jobsearching experience to fully comprehend its nature, or even prolonged experience of the dynamically changing jobs market. Its not even because you lack personal experience or memory of the last major change in government (13 years of Labour, remember? You wont. You were 3.) Its mainly because you pigheadedly refuse to pay any attention to even the clearest cold hard facts about employment, the jobs market, and the welfare state. You have your head deeply buried in the sand, and bleat the same mantra repeatedly. "There MUST be jobs they can do. ANYONE can run a business." and so forth, even long after its been proven otherwise.

Though on further reflection, the fact that you clearly aren't old enough to have had anything to do with the ADULT jobs market, and you aren't even old enough to earn full minimum wage because you are legally (and factually) still a child does seriously damage your position. You simply cannot legally have had enough interaction with the state machine to form a complete opinion on it. Your mother is claiming your benefits for you. I surmise from this that you do not own your own house or rent a property, nor have you ever had to pay Council Tax or utility bills on your own. I suspect its quite possible that you have yet to realise exactly how taxation works, or how much of the apparently HUGE sum of about 6 pounds an hour is eaten away before you ever even see it, on National Insurance contributions, pension plans, home insurance, road tax, income tax and so forth. You don't have children to support, so you won't be having to deal with the multitude of financial demands they place upon you. (Unless you're some sort of child father who should have known better.)

So with all due respect, understand now that there are great reams of life that you simply know nothing about, and can only really learn by living them. Its true that age does not automatically impart wisdom, but being "Smart" is not the complete set of skills needed for day to day survival, and it does not impart experience.

Some of us ignorant adults who don't know anything about the world remember when EMA was introduced. Some of us went to college and Uni without receiving it. WE still went. I wouldn't have minded getting 30 quid a week for doing nothing more than showing up at registration, but it was not to be. I might have shown up to more registrations if I were getting bribed to do it. But OUR motivation was learning more things than we knew at the start. Something you wont yet have done, seeing as any decent college course takes you up to at least 18, and Uni takes even longer.

You want to save a shedload of money, without penalising the poor or disabled, or raising taxes, or even making huge job cuts? Leave the EU. That's BILLIONS saved every year at ZERO loss to us. If anything we would start to make MORE money after we were freed to trade with the rest of the world properly. There's a positive answer for you, and its a proven fact too.

If you'd actually bothered to read my earlier posts, you'd know I'm actually against EMA...

And I run two businesses. Call me child all you like, but I do things to make my own money. I don't get EMA either, BTW, it's means tested and I don't qualify.



Your opinion on the EU isn't fact or proof of anything.

Since this whole thing is going nowhere, and you hypocritically don't seem to have taken anything I've said into consideration, I probably won't be responding to any more of your posts in this thread.

Google it. EU costs us billions. Fact. You asked for a solution, you got one. Resorting to blind ignorance again isn't going to change it. Here is a start for you:

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/215 ... -of-Europe

Frankly I simply don't believe that you run two businesses. Lets see a link. What business? What do you sell? What service do you provide? What's your annual turnover? How many people do you employ? How much rent do you pay for your premises? Are you familiar with the latest health and safety legislation regarding the operation of fire extinguishers in the workplace?

And at 16 you legally ARE a child. Can you legally smoke, or get served alcohol? NO? Then you're still a child. Its not in dispute, its simply reality, which is why I sincerely doubt that what you are doing is actually properly running any sort of business. Especially if your mother is claiming DLA for you.

Also, its utterly irrelevant whether you get EMA, or are for or against it. What I'm saying is that EMA is a mere flash-in-the-pan for one intake of students to get frothy about. The next intake won't notice it missing just like the previous one didn't either.

I'm aware, but whether or not the money's wasted is your opinion.



One is a website which makes me money through ads and the like, the other is a business I co-own with a few other people from college which sells accessories for phones.

I won't tell you my turnover and such because, quite frankly, it's none of your business. But I will tell you we make profit.



At 16 I can legally move out of my house, get married, and have children.

What's my mum claiming things got to do with how mature I am? It's my mum's choice to claim DLA, there are reasons for this but, again, they're none of your business. My personal stance, however, is that I haven't needed it in my late teenage years, so I doubt I'll be claiming the DLA when comes to renewing it - because, at age 16, I have to claim it for myself, due to the fact I'm legally responsible for my own affairs.

As for whether or not I could legally drink: yes. Yes I could. The laws in the UK allow for people under 18 to drink under certain circumstances, I believe. However, I don't see how being able to legally get pissed and give myself cancer would make me any more of a responsible adult.



I never disagreed with that. You make it sound like something I supported.

Its not merely MY opinion that billions is wasted in Europe. Just go and look up some of the things they spend money on.

As I suspected, your "businesses" are merely a slightly more advanced version of "selling sweets to friends at school." When you have staff, an office, overheads, pay taxes etc, THEN you will be properly running a business. And dropping ads on a website isn't particularly entrepreneurial or brilliant and inspired.

As a child, most of your affairs have been handled by your parents. Your mother claims DLA for you. Which means YOU haven't been dealing with the DWP. She has. When YOU have had to deal with the DWP, then you will have a much better idea of how it works.

As it happens I hold a License to serve alcohol myself, and am a member of the BIIAB, so I'm fully conversant with the particulars of where and when someone under 18 may have alcohol. (It also serves as a management qualification, as it happens, which is substantially closer to running a business than "selling phone accessories") My point was not that drinking makes you an adult, merely that to legally get served you generally have to be over a given age. The fact that there is an exception to that rule when eating a carvery meal is irrelevant to the overall truism that you cannot get served alcohol at the bar. Nor can you buy cigarettes. So I reiterate, when you are old enough to a) buy your own drinks b) smoke and c) acquire a personal license, then maybe you will be in a better position to make such spurious claims about employment. These are just some of the many things you cannot do yet, and can only have done by breaking the law. There are plenty more.

OK, it's an opinion you and many others share, but it's an opinion nevertheless.



Yeah, they aren't multi-national corporations, but they're ways I make my own money.

And no, I don't "sell sweets to friends at school" - the accessories are either manufactured by the company itself, with branding and all, or imported directly from a manufacturer overseas. The products are then sold by us in markets and online.

The website isn't particularly brilliant, no, but it's easy money. I do business for profit, remember, not to be special and amazing. The glamorous businesses are rarely good ones to get into because the big players already own those markets and there's no shortage of demand of people trying to get into them, either.

Oh, and I also play the stock market a bit. I should be making a little profit on that tomorrow, in fact.



The only reason my mum deals with it is because the last time it was renewed was when I was under 16. Again, now that I'm 16, it's my responsibility.

You also seem to have ignored the fact I can legally move out, get married, and have kids... I'd say that matters a lot more than being able to drink and smoke.



Oh, how cute, you sell drinks to your friends...

I can get served coz I look older than I am

All this is meaningless, though, because I don't want to smoke or drink, and if I did, it'd be extremely easy for me to do so - in fact, at 16, I can legally smoke, even if I can't buy cigarettes, but that'd be no biggie since my college is full of people who have them.

But as I said above, the fact I can legally move out, get married, and have kids is surely much more a measure of adulthood than being able to kill myself with tar?

It would only affect him if his personal income is above 250K. The 250K would be money used to pay for personal spending, property taxes, utilities, etc. all for his own household living space. Taxes on business expendatures would not have been raised from my understanding. 250K or more for a household living space is pretty damn comfortable.

Also, here is a reference...

http://www.urban.org/uploadedPDF/1000651_taxfacts042604.pdf