Car crash

I would say that I've given a somewhat accurate description of her normal behaviour. Do you not agree?
The last sentence was a bit fanciful, i must admit, because we all know that such a reaction would lead to social ostracization brought about by claims of missogonist racism.

As a response to your question, I can honestly say that if you weren't confronted with apposing views to that of your own, you would very quickly become bored and have to ask questions to which you undoubtedly already know the answer.

We are jester's, here to amuse you.

 

There was talk of a 'Money Tree' in last night's debate - well here's an explanation.
(warning, some sweary words used!).
https://twitter.com/chunkymark/status/870183459876212737

 

That's hardly an explanation, I would call it an envious rant, at best.
How unfair, some people are rich and I'm not, where's the justice? How can someone have more wealth than me...? It's so unfair, boo-hoo, I want to be rich, just like them rich folk.
Why, oh why, won't they give me some of their money, I only want to be like them.
I'll sit here and whinge until someone does....
So there.
It's so unfair.

 

The underlying message, though, is correct - there is plenty of money sloshing around that could be used to alleviate poverty and improve services, but, unfortunately, it's in the banks of the uber-wealthy, who are generally Tory to the back teeth.
How can this be morally justified?
But then, I forgot, Tory and morals just don't get on together.

 

That statement would probably ring true, if it were applied to the conditions of the 19th century, in the uk.
Nowerdays, I don't think so.

 

In what way?

 

chips me old Mucca, correct me if I'm wrong but I'm sure you have previously announced that brexit "would never happen"? Delusional?
"And In what way"? well the poor in the Victorian times would not have access to healthcare free at the point of use nor have access to unemployment benefit if they were unemployed or housing benefit if they couldn't afford a home or tax credits if they earns too little or DLA if they were disabled the list goes on

 

There will always be poor people and rich people, that will never change no matter what kind of governance is thrown upon us.

You would have to be very unfortunate indeed in this day and age to die from starvation brought on by poverty, the system is set up to make that an extremely unlikely event.
Go back 150yrs or so, and, well, you get the picture.

 

No they were put in workhouses and so were the mentally ill I know where I'd rather be

 

I didn't see the edit to your previous post, and the answer is no,as it happens tax credits (another new labour scheme) actually increases poverty as its based on the previous years income, meaning people end up owing money for achieving more!! Good old Blair

 

Ok, so your a champion of the poor but on the the other hand you are implying that because they improved their life they need to use food banks for a year it will all work out in the end? Sorry had to edit, who does it benefit? Obviously the tax payer as they will have millions in overpayments, what your trying to say is corporations don't have to pay them as much as they are subsidised by the government but this also applies to small business as well?

 

The working tax and family working tax credit system was seriously flawed right from the start. When it was first introduced, my oldest daughter had three young children and went to work. Juggling working time with dropping them off and picking them up from school/ nursery. In the first year , after filling in the form correctly, she was awarded , somewhere in the region of £2500, spread out over the year. The following year the tax office told her they had worked out her tax credits incorrectly and she now owed them £2000. She filled more forms in and had wage slips etc from her employer to send. Next year they awarded her £2700, but took off the £2000 they said she owed them. She struggled financially and at one point thought about giving up working altogether.
I too have had dealings with working tax credit. Six years ago I 'd been made redundant and after a few months got a job in a nursing home for 25 hrs per week. Job Centre had told me I would be entitled to working tax credits. On this basis I took the job. I was awarded around £1000 in WTC. The following year the tax office sent me a letter saying I'd been overpaid WTC and would have to pay almost £900 back. Tax credit for the following year worked out at about £2:50p a week. I actually wrote to them saying I did not want to claim it, but was told I had to claim this as there was an amount in the WTC that had been awarded, to pay back the £900 they reckoned I now owed them (and this was the only way to pay it back) The following year I refused to claim any WTC as I don't want all the hassle of them saying they made the mistake of paying me too much.

 

There isn't a need for working tax credits. From what I've seen it's a complicated mechanism that allows employers to pay less than they would normally have to knowing that the govt will top it up with working tax credits.
WTC hasn't increased earnings, it's decreased wages, the poor are roughly about as poor as they were before WTC, possibly poorer.

 

No there isn't. Read my post again.

 

Hang on I will try to do this in layman's terms for you ....
No I do not agree with Tax credits (refer to post where I remarked I am not in favour of tax credits)