Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2015 22:25:57 GMT 1
I prefer people that can work go out and get off their lazy backsides and earn what they have instead if sponging off other people their entire lives. A safety net is not supposed to be a way of life. Private industry can provide houses if people go out and work for a living. They don't build affordable housing 150k for a house isn't affordable!! 25 years at £500 a month plus interest. Most people work for up to 50 years now. In real terms, it is affordable. The problem lies with lenders wanting large amounts up front as a deposit, due to getting stitched up by self cert liars, irresponsible lending and IFA's who faked earnings for people who couldn't afford the mortgages in the first place.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2015 22:28:28 GMT 1
Exactly. I am by no means rich, work 8 to 5 every day and pay my mortgage, taxes and insurance on time every month.
It's affordable. You just have to want it bad enough.
As for down payments, I worked a second job to save mine.
|
|
|
Post by Christ in Shades (art) on Apr 3, 2015 8:20:40 GMT 1
I'd have said if you're working a minimum wage job a house at 150k is well beyond your means, no one would give you a mortgage.
|
|
|
Post by HuddsTerrier on Apr 3, 2015 9:23:49 GMT 1
I'd have said if you're working a minimum wage job a house at 150k is well beyond your means, no one would give you a mortgage. I just Googled the average house price in Yorkshire, it's £151k I guess middle income homes have always been beyond the means of the lowest earners - who'd have thought! You can easily though get on the Hudds property ladder for £70k. It's tough I agree but not impossible
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2015 9:49:46 GMT 1
You lucky sods. Average price here in Auckland is $784,000 or 370,000 GBPounds. Plus mortgage rates are 6% and you need 20% down to get that... wages are probably now on par with Northern UK.
Bought a detached house in a very nice place just South of Huddersfield a few weeks ago for 80,000 (needs work)... yes, compared to much of the world Yorkshire is well affordable.
|
|
|
Post by netterriers4 on Apr 3, 2015 10:02:56 GMT 1
I earn £6.80 an hour, We don't have Sky, We eat loads of veg, We have meat, We don't have central heating (stick another layer on, dint do us any harm when we were kids n dunt now, While everybody else is croaking from ailments this winter, We were fine, Gas bill = £60 for 3 months) But we do have double glazing, We have a mortgage on a nice little terraced house, We have not had a holiday for 4 years, We have nothing on the tick, We are not behind with any bills, We are not in poverty, Nobody in this country is, Apart from those who have slipped through the net, For whatever reason. Some folk wouldn't dream of making a good hearty stew, Full of goodness, And lasts you three days at least, Nah, Takeaway or some chicken dip shit with fries. Central heating, Sky tv, A car and takeaways should not be a given. I know of folk who are Tory this and tory that, " Had more money in my pocket before this lot were in ", Makes me pull my fucking hair out, They didn't have a job when the last lot were in ? That is fucking wrong. Never quite understood how someone out of work can get sanctioned for missing or being late for an interview at the job centre and then complain, What the fuck else do they have to do all week ? Supposed to be looking for employment, How are they expected to go to work on time if they cannot be arsed to go to sign on at the correct time ? Having worked in the social housing environment for over 12 years, I have seen it all, believe me. I aint decided who I will be voting for yet, But I will defo not be voting for Labour and hope they will be nowhere near any coalition. As my Granny used to say "they all piss in the same pot". But, Having had a paper round, Then a milk round at school, And never being out of work for long (always a job if you look), I would like to think that if ever the shit hits the fan again, I would gladly go out on the streets and earn my dole money, Stick a smile on your face and you never know, A successful business man may well drive past for a couple of days and think " I will give him a chance ". Everything good about our country right there.
|
|
|
Post by netterriers4 on Apr 3, 2015 10:06:33 GMT 1
Live to your means fella, There was 66 food banks when Cameron came to power now there are 421 this is mainly due to zero hours contracts Even the queen is exploiting the working class and treating her staff like slaves link The tightarse old biddy gets 37 million a year from the taxpayers The value of the queen property are £87 billion and her personal wealth is £330 million Under the tories only the rich get richer and the poor will get poorer
What utter nonsense. 2.5% of employed people are on zero hours. There are as many examples of why they work as not. The right thing to do with them was to stop exclusivity of them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2015 10:10:33 GMT 1
I'd have said if you're working a minimum wage job a house at 150k is well beyond your means, no one would give you a mortgage. Over a lifetime of working, (now around 50 years), it's not beyond the means even of a single person on minimum wage. (£250 a month plus interest). As you say though, getting the mortgage is the issue, due to the recent credit crisis. Many other countries have 100 + year mortgages, passed down the family. The old tradition of 25 year terms is no longer valid. People are now living and working far longer.
|
|
|
Post by netterriers4 on Apr 3, 2015 10:12:12 GMT 1
I agree with you here, other than to point out that it's not a Tory government, it's a Tory led coalition. It's debatable whether we'd be better or worse off under a Tory majority government, although a tax cut of £805pa for basic rate taxpayers instead of a tax cut of £540000 from inherited wealth. You're right. I often forget that the Lib Dem's are part of it too at times. The raising of the personal allowance has benefited the lower paid by a reasonable amount and as far as I remember, the Lib Dems were the ones who championed this. It's gone up from £6,475 in 2010 to £10,600 this year, meaning no tax is paid on the first £883 a month now, rather than the 2010 amount of £539. Making minimum wage and all basic rate tax payers £825 a year better off than under Labour taxation. The same Labour that scrapped the 10p tax rate and left the top taxpayers paying less than they do now for three parliaments bar 13 weeks?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2015 10:14:23 GMT 1
I earn £6.80 an hour, We don't have Sky, We eat loads of veg, We have meat, We don't have central heating (stick another layer on, dint do us any harm when we were kids n dunt now, While everybody else is croaking from ailments this winter, We were fine, Gas bill = £60 for 3 months) But we do have double glazing, We have a mortgage on a nice little terraced house, We have not had a holiday for 4 years, We have nothing on the tick, We are not behind with any bills, We are not in poverty, Nobody in this country is, Apart from those who have slipped through the net, For whatever reason. Some folk wouldn't dream of making a good hearty stew, Full of goodness, And lasts you three days at least, Nah, Takeaway or some chicken dip shit with fries. Central heating, Sky tv, A car and takeaways should not be a given. I know of folk who are Tory this and tory that, " Had more money in my pocket before this lot were in ", Makes me pull my fucking hair out, They didn't have a job when the last lot were in ? That is fucking wrong. Never quite understood how someone out of work can get sanctioned for missing or being late for an interview at the job centre and then complain, What the fuck else do they have to do all week ? Supposed to be looking for employment, How are they expected to go to work on time if they cannot be arsed to go to sign on at the correct time ? Having worked in the social housing environment for over 12 years, I have seen it all, believe me. I aint decided who I will be voting for yet, But I will defo not be voting for Labour and hope they will be nowhere near any coalition. As my Granny used to say "they all piss in the same pot". But, Having had a paper round, Then a milk round at school, And never being out of work for long (always a job if you look), I would like to think that if ever the shit hits the fan again, I would gladly go out on the streets and earn my dole money, Stick a smile on your face and you never know, A successful business man may well drive past for a couple of days and think " I will give him a chance ". Everything good about our country right there. Spot on. It's a shame a growing number of people thinks this country owes them a living just for living here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2015 10:18:18 GMT 1
You're right. I often forget that the Lib Dem's are part of it too at times. The raising of the personal allowance has benefited the lower paid by a reasonable amount and as far as I remember, the Lib Dems were the ones who championed this. It's gone up from £6,475 in 2010 to £10,600 this year, meaning no tax is paid on the first £883 a month now, rather than the 2010 amount of £539. Making minimum wage and all basic rate tax payers £825 a year better off than under Labour taxation. The same Labour that scrapped the 10p tax rate and left the top taxpayers paying less than they do now for three parliaments bar 13 weeks? I agree. Did you read my post properly? I'm trying to dispel the myth that the Tories don't do anything for the less well off. They take far les tax from the poorest than Labour did.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2015 10:56:50 GMT 1
Thatcher's aspirational home owning policies has left a desperate need for social housing and council run houses. We're in the midst of a housing crisis, especially in the south east and home associations have certainly not been the answer as they're in it for the money. Governments, both Tory and Labour have failed to build the houses that this nation requires in the past 30 years. As for the extra funding for public services, you won't be seeing that under the Tories anytime soon. Huge cuts expected and they don't dare detail them before the election. As a constituent of the Colne Valley guess how many public libraries will that constituency will have unless funding is found? ONE - Meltham and that is down to volunteers. A valuable public service destroyed. Let's not mention another valuable service in the Royal Mail being sold off under this government for far less than it's actual worth and the benefactors of that sale... Or the re-privatisation of the profitable East Coast Main Line. Labour being anti-business is also a myth. Clearly you woke up this morning and saw the front page of The Telegraph. Yet many small businesses are still angry about the rise in VAT, the thing David Cameron promised not to do in 2009. They're not anti business, they just wish to tax bigger businesses more since corporation tax in this country is one of the lowest in the world. As for Mr McCartney. He's an affable chap but not that good an MP. The two previous MPs for the Colne Valley Mountford (LAB) and Riddick (CON) did a hell of a lot more for it's constituents. He loves a good photo opportunity though. Why is it up to the Government to build and provide you with a house? Boy I don't miss that attitude. Wow. I'm astonished. Largely because the government has a duty to it's people to provide it's population with a safe living environment. We're going to a situation similar to America where renting is the only way many who work can generally afford to live unless they get help from families to buy homes or are part of a professional couple and both on a good wage. We have virtually no rent control measures meaning that people can exploit those that have to rent. Social Housing that is built that can be rented out at a fair rate creating profit for councils to reinvest is much better than no social housing leading to a crisis like no other and the south east of england is seeing that. The government under Thatcher sold off far too many council houses without ever replacing them and since then our population has increased a lot. I've been out of uni 2 years and know of only a few people who aren't still living at home, all bar one renting. Those I know who have moved to London are paying nigh on a grand a month for A BEDROOM. Not an entire flat , a bedroom. People will say well why don't the live in Yorkshire where it's affordable, well the jobs aren't here. People go where the jobs are, demand increases, prices rise. The next government has to encourage companies to spread jobs around the UK and get building social housing as well as incentivising the creation of affordable housing to buy. It's up to the government to incentivise the building of affordable housing, a criticism that can be made of Blair's government and this coalition one. Brown did try in his short tenure but the sub-prime mortgage crash stopped that. What's become evident on this thread is an extremely right wing view that everyone in this country who believes in a fair society somehow thinks we're entitled to it. It's quite embarrassing. I believe in a world where the government helps out those who need help and gives them the tools to succeed. The problem is there will always be a small minority who exploit the system and far too many on here are focusing on those who do so. They do it at the bottom of society, the so called work shy scroungers and I like a few on here know of a few, all the way to the top with the tax avoiders, MPs fiddling expenses etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2015 10:59:13 GMT 1
I agree with you here, other than to point out that it's not a Tory government, it's a Tory led coalition. It's debatable whether we'd be better or worse off under a Tory majority government, although a tax cut of £805pa for basic rate taxpayers instead of a tax cut of £540000 from inherited wealth. You're right. I often forget that the Lib Dem's are part of it too at times. The raising of the personal allowance has benefited the lower paid by a reasonable amount and as far as I remember, the Lib Dems were the ones who championed this. It's gone up from £6,475 in 2010 to £10,600 this year, meaning no tax is paid on the first £883 a month now, rather than the 2010 amount of £539. Making minimum wage and all basic rate tax payers £825 a year better off than under Labour taxation. Just a shame the Lib Dems had to trade off putting uni fees to 9k a year to help out the worse off in society.
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Apr 3, 2015 11:00:11 GMT 1
The same Labour that scrapped the 10p tax rate and left the top taxpayers paying less than they do now for three parliaments bar 13 weeks? I agree. Did you read my post properly? I'm trying to dispel the myth that the Tories don't do anything for the less well off. They take far les tax from the poorest than Labour did. Ah, but that doesn't tie in with the idea they are all Eton toffs who are only interested in helping the upper classes and keep the 'working class' down- Labours entire argument for a lot of their voters it seems. Truth is, thanks to the tories, you have to earn over £200 a week now before you even start paying income tax.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2015 11:00:16 GMT 1
There was 66 food banks when Cameron came to power now there are 421 this is mainly due to zero hours contracts Even the queen is exploiting the working class and treating her staff like slaves link The tightarse old biddy gets 37 million a year from the taxpayers The value of the queen property are £87 billion and her personal wealth is £330 million Under the tories only the rich get richer and the poor will get poorer
What utter nonsense. 2.5% of employed people are on zero hours. There are as many examples of why they work as not. The right thing to do with them was to stop exclusivity of them. And just to be clear, whilst some parties seem to still be using this as a "we would do this, power to the people" type flagpole, exclusivity was ALREADY stopped and backed by the recent amendments to Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act:- www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/26/section/153/enactedI wonder back in the day what percentage of workers were employed on " what would now be classed as zero hours contracts but at the time were simply called casual labour". As a kid in the 70's I remember signs saying, "Welders/Labourers wanted, meet here @ 7:30am", my grandma spoke to me of the 40's and 50's of queuing up at the factory gates whilst the bosses counted in the number of 'menders' they needed that day, and the rest were sent on their way.
|
|
Tinpot
Mental Health Support Group
I'm really tinpot
Posts: 22,184
|
Post by Tinpot on Apr 3, 2015 11:04:50 GMT 1
The same Labour that scrapped the 10p tax rate and left the top taxpayers paying less than they do now for three parliaments bar 13 weeks? I agree. Did you read my post properly? I'm trying to dispel the myth that the Tories don't do anything for the less well off. They take far les tax from the poorest than Labour did. Except that the Tories (like Labour) wanted to keep the income tax threshold at £6475, just like Labour. And they wanted to reduce the top tax rate to 40% (just like Labour). Both those policies were from their coalition partners. What I will say though is that out of Tory, Labour, Lib Dem and UKIP, Labour are the only ones who haven't yet offered any further tax cuts for lower earners. Labour are also promising that if elected, they'll ensure that minimum wage is £8/hr by 2020 - neglecting to mention that if the coalition's policy of raising it in line with inflation is continued (by whoever gets elected in May) it will almost certainly be higher than that anyway!
|
|
|
Post by EastCoastTerrier on Apr 3, 2015 11:10:14 GMT 1
It would be interesting to see people ages on here compared to their views. I would guess the majority of people who see that the government need to do more to help housing prices and getting on to the property market and at the younger end, and those who feel people are just being lazy and its doable if they work hard are pushing on a bit.
|
|
Tinpot
Mental Health Support Group
I'm really tinpot
Posts: 22,184
|
Post by Tinpot on Apr 3, 2015 11:10:14 GMT 1
I agree. Did you read my post properly? I'm trying to dispel the myth that the Tories don't do anything for the less well off. They take far les tax from the poorest than Labour did. Ah, but that doesn't tie in with the idea they are all Eton toffs who are only interested in helping the upper classes and keep the 'working class' down- Labours entire argument for a lot of their voters it seems. Truth is, thanks to the tories lib dems, you have to earn over £200 a week now before you even start paying income tax. Edited for accuracy. Tory policy on raising the income tax threshold was the same as Labour's - I.e. keep it at £124.52 per week. Raising the threshold was a concession the Tories made to their coalition partners. If anybody is "keeping the working class down" though it's Labour. Welfare dependency must be a horrible situation to be in. Can't afford to work because you'd be worse off if you did, so you stay unemployed and become more and more unemployable.
|
|
|
Post by netterriers4 on Apr 3, 2015 11:11:22 GMT 1
The same Labour that scrapped the 10p tax rate and left the top taxpayers paying less than they do now for three parliaments bar 13 weeks? I agree. Did you read my post properly? I'm trying to dispel the myth that the Tories don't do anything for the less well off. They take far les tax from the poorest than Labour did. At fear of being branded a Mail reading right wing loon like you - I agree Labour know they can bank on the drones in safe seats voting for them. What we need is a chance for a real say in elections - it's looking more likely another coalition is on the horizon so why not let us have 2nd and 3rd votes so we get a coalition we want - not one which suits the parties?
|
|
|
Post by EastCoastTerrier on Apr 3, 2015 11:14:39 GMT 1
I won't be voting because I don't live in England anymore. But if I did, it could bethe first time I'd vote conservative despite being brought up in a coal mining Maggie thatcher hating labour community.
|
|
|
Post by netterriers4 on Apr 3, 2015 11:15:08 GMT 1
What utter nonsense. 2.5% of employed people are on zero hours. There are as many examples of why they work as not. The right thing to do with them was to stop exclusivity of them. And just to be clear, whilst some parties seem to still be using this as a "we would do this, power to the people" type flagpole, exclusivity was ALREADY stopped and backed by the recent amendments to Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act:- www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/26/section/153/enactedI wonder back in the day what percentage of workers were employed on " what would now be classed as zero hours contracts but at the time were simply called casual labour". As a kid in the 70's I remember signs saying, "Welders/Labourers wanted, meet here @ 7:30am", my grandma spoke to me of the 40's and 50's of queuing up at the factory gates whilst the bosses counted in the number of 'menders' they needed that day, and the rest were sent on their way. We employ drivers on zero hours contracts rather than a casual basis. Sometimes we have deliveries, sometimes we don't. In the past they were casual - paid the same and treated the same. I made them employees so they shared in our ethos and felt "part of it" And they get some other benefits like death in service. They keep their freedom and flexibility yet according to Millibland we are evil incarnate for that.
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Apr 3, 2015 11:15:27 GMT 1
Why is it up to the Government to build and provide you with a house? Boy I don't miss that attitude. Wow. I'm astonished. Largely because the government has a duty to it's people to provide it's population with a safe living environment. We're going to a situation similar to America where renting is the only way many who work can generally afford to live unless they get help from families to buy homes or are part of a professional couple and both on a good wage. We have virtually no rent control measures meaning that people can exploit those that have to rent. Social Housing that is built that can be rented out at a fair rate creating profit for councils to reinvest is much better than no social housing leading to a crisis like no other and the south east of england is seeing that. The government under Thatcher sold off far too many council houses without ever replacing them and since then our population has increased a lot. I've been out of uni 2 years and know of only a few people who aren't still living at home, all bar one renting. Those I know who have moved to London are paying nigh on a grand a month for A BEDROOM. Not an entire flat , a bedroom. People will say well why don't the live in Yorkshire where it's affordable, well the jobs aren't here. People go where the jobs are, demand increases, prices rise. The next government has to encourage companies to spread jobs around the UK and get building social housing as well as incentivising the creation of affordable housing to buy. It's up to the government to incentivise the building of affordable housing, a criticism that can be made of Blair's government and this coalition one. Brown did try in his short tenure but the sub-prime mortgage crash stopped that. What's become evident on this thread is an extremely right wing view that everyone in this country who believes in a fair society somehow thinks we're entitled to it. It's quite embarrassing. I believe in a world where the government helps out those who need help and gives them the tools to succeed. The problem is there will always be a small minority who exploit the system and far too many on here are focusing on those who do so. They do it at the bottom of society, the so called work shy scroungers and I like a few on here know of a few, all the way to the top with the tax avoiders, MPs fiddling expenses etc. Peoples expectations have changed so much and its the 'entitlement attitude' that drives us so called 'right wingers' mad. I work half the week in a place full of uni graduates in their 20s and most don;'t live at home but rent or have recently bought. None of them are on anything like a fortune but what they consider acceptable as a first home is vastly different from the first place I bought, that for sure. So are the cars they drive and of course i didn't expect an expensive mobile phone or satellite tv or a fortnight abroad every year with a few city breaks thrown in when i first got on the property ladder ( interest rates were 15% by the way!! ) I cut my cloth as people seemed to do back then, did without stuff I couldn't afford and i didn't feel 'entitled' to anything or have the feeling the tax payer has a duty to provide me with a very nice life thankyou, like you seem to. My son barely earns more than the minimum wage but has just got on the property ladder and still has enough to run a cheap car. He cuts his cloth when it comes to all the luxuries. It can be done. If your ex uni mates are still living at home its because they choose to and maybe they don't want to give up the luxuries they are used to.
|
|
Tinpot
Mental Health Support Group
I'm really tinpot
Posts: 22,184
|
Post by Tinpot on Apr 3, 2015 11:16:34 GMT 1
I agree. Did you read my post properly? I'm trying to dispel the myth that the Toryies don't do anything for the less well off. They take far les tax from the poorest than Labour did. At fear of being branded a Mail reading right wing loon like you - I agree Labour know they can bank on the drones in safe seats voting for them. What we need is a chance for a real say in elections - it's looking more likely another coalition is on the horizon so why not let us have 2nd and 3rd votes so we get a coalition we want - not one which suits the parties? So, what you're saying is we should have a referendum on whether to change to a voting system that allows people to register 2nd and 3rd preferences?
|
|
|
Post by netterriers4 on Apr 3, 2015 11:16:52 GMT 1
I agree. Did you read my post properly? I'm trying to dispel the myth that the Tories don't do anything for the less well off. They take far les tax from the poorest than Labour did. Except that the Tories (like Labour) wanted to keep the income tax threshold at £6475, just like Labour. And they wanted to reduce the top tax rate to 40% (just like Labour). Both those policies were from their coalition partners. What I will say though is that out of Tory, Labour, Lib Dem and UKIP, Labour are the only ones who haven't yet offered any further tax cuts for lower earners. Labour are also promising that if elected, they'll ensure that minimum wage is £8/hr by 2020 - neglecting to mention that if the coalition's policy of raising it in line with inflation is continued (by whoever gets elected in May) it will almost certainly be higher than that anyway! As I say, this will probably mean more in work benefits keeping those low earner suckling on the states teet. Instead they could let people keep more of what they earn to spend how they want!!
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Apr 3, 2015 11:18:32 GMT 1
Ah, but that doesn't tie in with the idea they are all Eton toffs who are only interested in helping the upper classes and keep the 'working class' down- Labours entire argument for a lot of their voters it seems. Truth is, thanks to the tories lib dems, you have to earn over £200 a week now before you even start paying income tax. Edited for accuracy. Tory policy on raising the income tax threshold was the same as Labour's - I.e. keep it at £124.52 per week. Raising the threshold was a concession the Tories made to their coalition partners. If anybody is "keeping the working class down" though it's Labour. Welfare dependency must be a horrible situation to be in. Can't afford to work because you'd be worse off if you did, so you stay unemployed and become more and more unemployable. Possibly, but its the Tories rescuing of the economy from the mess they inherited that has made it possible.
|
|
|
Post by EastCoastTerrier on Apr 3, 2015 11:19:45 GMT 1
Wow. I'm astonished. Largely because the government has a duty to it's people to provide it's population with a safe living environment. We're going to a situation similar to America where renting is the only way many who work can generally afford to live unless they get help from families to buy homes or are part of a professional couple and both on a good wage. We have virtually no rent control measures meaning that people can exploit those that have to rent. Social Housing that is built that can be rented out at a fair rate creating profit for councils to reinvest is much better than no social housing leading to a crisis like no other and the south east of england is seeing that. The government under Thatcher sold off far too many council houses without ever replacing them and since then our population has increased a lot. I've been out of uni 2 years and know of only a few people who aren't still living at home, all bar one renting. Those I know who have moved to London are paying nigh on a grand a month for A BEDROOM. Not an entire flat , a bedroom. People will say well why don't the live in Yorkshire where it's affordable, well the jobs aren't here. People go where the jobs are, demand increases, prices rise. The next government has to encourage companies to spread jobs around the UK and get building social housing as well as incentivising the creation of affordable housing to buy. It's up to the government to incentivise the building of affordable housing, a criticism that can be made of Blair's government and this coalition one. Brown did try in his short tenure but the sub-prime mortgage crash stopped that. What's become evident on this thread is an extremely right wing view that everyone in this country who believes in a fair society somehow thinks we're entitled to it. It's quite embarrassing. I believe in a world where the government helps out those who need help and gives them the tools to succeed. The problem is there will always be a small minority who exploit the system and far too many on here are focusing on those who do so. They do it at the bottom of society, the so called work shy scroungers and I like a few on here know of a few, all the way to the top with the tax avoiders, MPs fiddling expenses etc. Peoples expectations have changed so much and its the 'entitlement attitude' that drives us so called 'right wingers' mad. I work half the week in a place full of uni graduates in their 20s and most don;'t live at home but rent or have recently bought. None of them are on anything like a fortune but what they consider acceptable as a first home is vastly different from the first place I bought, that for sure. So are the cars they drive and of course i didn't expect an expensive mobile phone or satellite tv or a fortnight abroad every year with a few city breaks thrown in when i first got on the property ladder ( interest rates were 15% by the way!! ) I cut my cloth as people seemed to do back then, did without stuff I couldn't afford and i didn't feel 'entitled' to anything or have the feeling the tax payer has a duty to provide me with a very nice life thankyou, like you seem to. My son barely earns more than the minimum wage but has just got on the property ladder and still has enough to run a cheap car. He cuts his cloth when it comes to all the luxuries. It can be done. If your ex uni mates are still living at home its because they choose to and maybe they don't want to give up the luxuries they are used to. Is his house in London?
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Apr 3, 2015 11:20:16 GMT 1
It would be interesting to see people ages on here compared to their views. I would guess the majority of people who see that the government need to do more to help housing prices and getting on to the property market and at the younger end, and those who feel people are just being lazy and its doable if they work hard are pushing on a bit. Was it a quote from Churchill that went something like- ' If you aren't voting Labour by the time you're 20, you have no heart. If you aren't voting Tory by the time you're 40, then you have no brain.'
|
|
|
Post by netterriers4 on Apr 3, 2015 11:20:34 GMT 1
At fear of being branded a Mail reading right wing loon like you - I agree Labour know they can bank on the drones in safe seats voting for them. What we need is a chance for a real say in elections - it's looking more likely another coalition is on the horizon so why not let us have 2nd and 3rd votes so we get a coalition we want - not one which suits the parties? So, what you're saying is we should have a referendum on whether to change to a voting system that allows people to register 2nd and 3rd preferences? Yup. Was shouted down in the last parliament and will be for my lifetime I bet. All the same, vested interests trumps the right thing to do.
|
|
|
Post by EastCoastTerrier on Apr 3, 2015 11:22:41 GMT 1
It would be interesting to see people ages on here compared to their views. I would guess the majority of people who see that the government need to do more to help housing prices and getting on to the property market and at the younger end, and those who feel people are just being lazy and its doable if they work hard are pushing on a bit. Was it a quote from Churchill that went something like- ' If you aren't voting Labour by the time you're 20, you have no heart. If you aren't voting Tory by the time you're 40, then you have no brain.' Not sure I never met the guy, but I heard he was quite clever so could of been. It does reflect my opinions and how they are changing though. Perhaps in stereotype terms when your 20 your skint, when your nearing 40 you have good cash to look after.
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Apr 3, 2015 11:22:46 GMT 1
Peoples expectations have changed so much and its the 'entitlement attitude' that drives us so called 'right wingers' mad. I work half the week in a place full of uni graduates in their 20s and most don;'t live at home but rent or have recently bought. None of them are on anything like a fortune but what they consider acceptable as a first home is vastly different from the first place I bought, that for sure. So are the cars they drive and of course i didn't expect an expensive mobile phone or satellite tv or a fortnight abroad every year with a few city breaks thrown in when i first got on the property ladder ( interest rates were 15% by the way!! ) I cut my cloth as people seemed to do back then, did without stuff I couldn't afford and i didn't feel 'entitled' to anything or have the feeling the tax payer has a duty to provide me with a very nice life thankyou, like you seem to. My son barely earns more than the minimum wage but has just got on the property ladder and still has enough to run a cheap car. He cuts his cloth when it comes to all the luxuries. It can be done. If your ex uni mates are still living at home its because they choose to and maybe they don't want to give up the luxuries they are used to. Is his house in London? No. Is that where these uni graduates mentioned are living with their parents?
|
|