SE23.com - The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002  -  10,000+ members

Home | SE23 Topics | Businesses & Services | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | Advertising | Contact
 Armstrong & Co Solicitors


Post Reply  Post Topic 
Pages (4): « First < Previous 1 [2] 3 4 Next > Last »
Trust A Tory - Your Having A Bubble
Author Message
Ex FH Pat


Posts: 112
Joined: Oct 2009
Post: #21
17-05-2010 10:28 AM

You could be right Snazy

Totally agree about the benefits people giving something back, fair do to people who cannot work for any reason, yet some just sit at home watching sky on their 50inch plasma and waiting for the giro to drop into their letterbox every other week

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,504
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #22
17-05-2010 10:40 AM

Yup just to clarify I was not suggesting EVERYONE claiming benefits should have to give back, but if you long term cant find longterm employment then the local authorities etc should be able to put you to use.

Find all posts by this user Reply
roz


Posts: 1,796
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #23
17-05-2010 11:35 AM

Lets get a few things straight about people on benefit before people get on the usual high horse about benefit scroungers being made to pay back society.

I feel qualified to comment having spent over 6 months on the dole following my third redundancy in 11 years.

I spent every minute of the day on the internet and browsing newspapers searching for jobs that were simply not there. When I did get job interviews they were usually cancelled at the last minute as the funding for that post was frozen and the job withdrawn. And yes I did lower my expectations and requirements, as my particular field of work was in a bad way. Fortunately I managed to be successful in one of the three interviews that I managed to get but them had to wait another 4 months on the dole whilst they sorted out the paperwork- still signing on and having to still look for work.

There is for no one in that position any such thing any more ( if there ever was) as being able to sit around watching TV all day any more and there hasn;t been for years under the Labour Govt. You do have to prove that you have been actively searching for work and to apply for so many jobs per fortnight in order to secure benefit. If you are misfortunate enough to be 5 minutes late to sign on, one is ordered to a special queue to explain the misdemeanour, usually by a 10 year old. If you have the added misfortune to be ill on the day when you sign, your benefit is usually suspended and referred to a central office and you have to apply for SSP. The system is run like the army and miscreants treated pretty severely.
I was also given jobs in Walthamstow to apply for and also Essex, which were impossible as I have childcare responsibilties at the beginning and end of every working day. Fortunately my new job started whilst I was arguing the toss about that as it would inevitably

BTW , I'd have loved the 'authorities' to have put me to good use as I was completely bored and frustrated at not being able to work. In addition it is extremely isolating to suddenly have the social aspects of work suddenly taken away from you.

I would really challenge people to sign on and see how much fun it is being in the system, to have to live on a significantly reduced income and having to sign on every fortnight. I met so many people there who had worked all their lives who were in a difficult personal and financial position and who were becoming extremely depressed at their failure to find work. If you have never had the misfortune to be in that position, you're very lucky, but I wouldn't personally in this economic climate get too comfortable about it.

Find all posts by this user Reply
roz


Posts: 1,796
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #24
17-05-2010 11:56 AM

PS It is early days for this new government and whilst I despair about a) their general lack of experience , b)George Osborne (generally) and c) the general priorities of a Tory government, I don't really want to see the UK go down the pan so would actually like to see them getting the books to balance. But lets not start having a go at the unemployed, the ranks of whom are increasing and will doubtless do so further before the end of this parliament.

Find all posts by this user Reply
jon14


Posts: 145
Joined: Sep 2007
Post: #25
17-05-2010 12:07 PM

Roz Wrote:
PS It is early days for this new government and whilst I despair about a) their general lack of experience , b)George Osborne (generally) and c) the general priorities of a Tory government, I don't really want to see the UK go down the pan so would actually like to see them getting the books to balance. But lets not start having a go at the unemployed, the ranks of whom are increasing and will doubtless do so further before the end of this parliament.


Gordon Brown has the most experience of any chancellor under his belt and this mess is by and large his creation!

I don't think people are having a go at the unemployed - rather those who don't even sign on because they can't be bothered because they get more money living off benefits. In some ways you can't blame them - who would work when you get less money than not going to work? It's a fault of the benefit system more often than not.

I'm sure 99% of people on here would be sympathetic to your case Roz.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,504
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #26
17-05-2010 12:40 PM

Spot on Jon, I for one am not taking a pop at ANYONE who dares to claim jobseekers or whatever it is called now. Personally I have never had to claim anything, but thats probably through good luck and being open minded too.

As Jon says, the ones to be gunned for are the long termers, with no interest in working etc. I am sure everyone on here knows at least one person like this, and personally im fed up of paying for lazy people.

There are genuine cases in all scenarios, jobseekers, disability etc, but there are also a LOT of con artists, and they need dealing with. Could save hundreds of millions of pounds, if not more.
Also though, focus needs putting on those in NEED of help too. Misinformed people living in poverty etc.

Its a HUGE issue, but if someone can start dealing with it, I dont care which party they are from, or what college they went to.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Baboonery


Posts: 581
Joined: Sep 2007
Post: #27
17-05-2010 12:47 PM

I look forward to the abolition of pointless tabloid-pleasing measures like the cutting of funding for speed cameras, which only save lives (still, they're probably the lives of dolescum hoovering up OUR MONEY by not signing on [new one on me, that, still, look where it came from] and living in total luxury - you know, like all the ones the right-wing blowhards on these and other forums bang on about the whole time, but can never actually show us).

Speed is dangerous, and kills people. Speed cameras are painted bright yellow, each is preceded by a sign, there is a list of every single one on the internet. If you still get caught by one because you're too arrogant or self-important to slow down to within 10% of the speed limit, whose fault is that?

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,504
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #28
17-05-2010 12:53 PM

They are also only effective for about 30 metres on a road. Im not against people receiving penalties for speeding, its fair game. But they are put up in stupid places, rediculously ineffective and lets be honest here.... its NOT about saving lives anymore, its about revenue.
The life saving part is a huge bonus, but there are better ways..... Including educating people too.

I am all for a jay walking law too, how about you?

Find all posts by this user Reply
Baboonery


Posts: 581
Joined: Sep 2007
Post: #29
17-05-2010 01:01 PM

I don't think pedestrians should be criminalised for using the road in a way convenient to them when it is safe to do so, no.

Find all posts by this user Reply
roz


Posts: 1,796
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #30
17-05-2010 01:03 PM

One of the main reasons why some people may be better off on benefit that in going to work is childcare costs. For one child its around 900 per month before tax credits, for two/three its certainly not worth going to work when children are pre school unless your income is circa 60k. It is better for children to be predominantly raised by their parents than by a nursery. So can you blame people for not wanting to go out to work for that reason?

Like a good many people I don't actually agree this mess is all his creation as it appears to be shared amongst most European countries and globally. There was increased expenditure only in the latter years of the Labour Goverment. ( remember 'Prudence'?). If it weren't for some of the actions he took we would be in a much worse mess than we are now. Thats an opinion actually shared by some of the right wing press.

Find all posts by this user Reply
jon14


Posts: 145
Joined: Sep 2007
Post: #31
17-05-2010 01:06 PM

Baboonery Wrote:
I look forward to the abolition of pointless tabloid-pleasing measures like the cutting of funding for speed cameras, which only save lives (still, they're probably the lives of dolescum hoovering up OUR MONEY by not signing on [new one on me, that, still, look where it came from] and living in total luxury - you know, like all the ones the right-wing blowhards on these and other forums bang on about the whole time, but can never actually show us).


Where did it come from Baboonery?

Find all posts by this user Reply
jon14


Posts: 145
Joined: Sep 2007
Post: #32
17-05-2010 02:20 PM

Baboonery?

Find all posts by this user Reply
Perryman


Posts: 810
Joined: Dec 2006
Post: #33
17-05-2010 02:29 PM

Sounds like a speed camera every 30m would do the trick then.

I'd love to see more of them, but perhaps the penalties should be more flexible to take into account that everyone pushes the limit.

Perhaps as long as drivers do not accumulate too many warnings in a set period then the slate is cleared. Common sense tells us if someone goes down the same route 60 times a month and only marginally breaks the limit once, then they are a safe driver.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,504
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #34
17-05-2010 02:42 PM

Quote:
I don't think pedestrians should be criminalised for using the road in a way convenient to them when it is safe to do so, no.


But thats NOT what jaywalking is, is it. So lets not twist it. If thats the case I assume you are all for raising speed limits on clear straight roads, motorways at night, and A roads at night.

Camera's are NOT what they are made out to be. However the one thing all road safety campaigners seem to forget when we talk about accidents is WHY was the pedestrian in the road in the first place.
All well and good saying the car should go slower, stop faster, pay more attention etc, but does the pedestrian have NO responsibility in the matter?
Also I would not think that jaywalking would be a "criminal" act.

Perryman, no, but areas with speed problems could adopt SPEC's which is FAR more effective and unlike Gatso, does not cause sudden braking, which also causes accidents.

Out of interest I am all for safer roads, but also realistic. having attended a large number of nasty accidents its interesting to see true cause, and believe me its not always speed.

Speed kills... yes, but so does stupidity.


Roz, re childcare, thats just another great example of a system thats not working, and I agree that its a bad situation. However once again im sure these people still make up a minority of the group under the microscope. It most definatly needs an overhaul, but given how long its been an issue im not sure there is any quick fix.
I dont blame the recession on GB for one second. Sure there were signs missed, but a global crash is just that.
Now we have a 5 year term to see what the Tories will do to continue the recovery. Im sure both sides will be critical of each other, but now we just have to go with the flow, with crossed fingers.

Find all posts by this user Reply
NewForester


Posts: 377
Joined: Feb 2008
Post: #35
17-05-2010 02:43 PM

Maybe we should remove the speed cameras, airbags and other safety equipment that the HSE tsars impose om us and let Darwinian principles of survival of the fittest rule once more.

Find all posts by this user Reply
michael


Posts: 3,223
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #36
17-05-2010 02:49 PM

Where is this thread going?

Find all posts by this user Reply
jon14


Posts: 145
Joined: Sep 2007
Post: #37
17-05-2010 02:51 PM

When thigns are going well, you normally put cash aside for a rainy day. Labour just spent, spent and spent. Not all Gordon's doing but he has to carry some of the can. The deficit is our main problem.

Fact is, we now have to make cuts to pay off the deficit - making a double dip recession more likely.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,504
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #38
17-05-2010 02:51 PM

lol a little extreme dont you think?
Airbags are a safety device, and work.
Let be sensible about this here. Speed cameras which continue to catch people speeding.... is that working then?? I think we miss the point here.. The idea of them is to slow the average on the road down and penalise those who refuse to comply.
But a camera that continuously gets 1000 people a week is NOT working. Hence the suggestion fo SPEC's.

Originally there was a threshold for installation of cameras but that seems to have fallen away, leaving some profitable cameras in place.

Find all posts by this user Reply
jon14


Posts: 145
Joined: Sep 2007
Post: #39
17-05-2010 02:52 PM

Michael Wrote:
Where is this thread going?


Hopefully to a place where Baboonery answers my question!

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,504
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #40
17-05-2010 02:53 PM

Sorry Michael, spun it off a bit there.

Find all posts by this user Reply

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields