Newbie introducing myself (and asking if now's a good time to buy gold!)

[LemmyMcGregor]

2 minutes ago, Bigmarc said:

Have just woke up so let's not turn this into a fight. 

I think I read somewhere that 64% of families in the UK are on some type of benefit and one can argue that the state pension is a benefit paid by the current national insurance contributions. What are we supposed to do, let them all die off? 

I have had this argument many times here and I am definitely the only lefty in the room. 

Politics is the art of compromise.

As clearly stated, my view is that there should be no benefits of sort as they make you reliant on others, even a pension, you live to become reliant on the state, and when you get to the pension age they screw you all the same, so I firmly believe that you are better off not being made reliant on whoever is in power.

This said, I wouldn't want to remove it at once, we have made people reliant on this system and would be unfair to swipe it from under their feet. For example, if you're already getting your pension paid I would be more than happy to say that you've earned the right to keep on collecting it, you've paid into for crying out loud. I would be more keen on coming up with a long term solution that would wean people off.

State reliance is horrible, as you see the beneficial part of it, but you don't apreciate the damage it does. Sure, you want to help someone that's fallen on hardship, please do, in your time, with your money; by asking the state to do it, what you are doing is advocating for the state to forcefully take it off me, if you have to forcefully take it off me it is not a right.

In the end people should be wise and not only provide for themselves daily, but provide for themselves safety, which means storing food and wealth should hardship occurs, and we don't do this any more, if something goes South we go crying to the State and ask for benefits, but why should it be up to me to provide for something that wasn't careful? This way the State is making me poor and if someone close to me was to need help, I would not be inb a position to help me because the State is already milking me to help everyone else.

This leads to another problem, which is bigger, and this is societal break down, because now you expect the State to fix it, you will not do it yourself, if someone is in trouble your first answer, instead of offering someone a couch or some food, will be to tell him that the State should deal with it, because it is not your problem, is everyone problem, and your "generosity" manifests by pointing him to the benefits office or the local food bank.

But if you want to see the real damage done by benefits, look at the disintegration of the families and the amount with single mothers.

So, yeah, benefits sound good, but you define them by their effects, and the effects are disastrous.

This said, not looking for an argument either, just wanted to expand the point.

[katyc]

15 minutes ago, LemmyMcGregor said:

Politics is the art of compromise.

As clearly stated, my view is that there should be no benefits of sort as they make you reliant on others, even a pension, you live to become reliant on the state, and when you get to the pension age they screw you all the same, so I firmly believe that you are better off not being made reliant on whoever is in power.

This said, I wouldn't want to remove it at once, we have made people reliant on this system and would be unfair to swipe it from under their feet. For example, if you're already getting your pension paid I would be more than happy to say that you've earned the right to keep on collecting it, you've paid into for crying out loud. I would be more keen on coming up with a long term solution that would wean people off.

State reliance is horrible, as you see the beneficial part of it, but you don't apreciate the damage it does. Sure, you want to help someone that's fallen on hardship, please do, in your time, with your money; by asking the state to do it, what you are doing is advocating for the state to forcefully take it off me, if you have to forcefully take it off me it is not a right.

In the end people should be wise and not only provide for themselves daily, but provide for themselves safety, which means storing food and wealth should hardship occurs, and we don't do this any more, if something goes South we go crying to the State and ask for benefits, but why should it be up to me to provide for something that wasn't careful? This way the State is making me poor and if someone close to me was to need help, I would not be inb a position to help me because the State is already milking me to help everyone else.

This leads to another problem, which is bigger, and this is societal break down, because now you expect the State to fix it, you will not do it yourself, if someone is in trouble your first answer, instead of offering someone a couch or some food, will be to tell him that the State should deal with it, because it is not your problem, is everyone problem, and your "generosity" manifests by pointing him to the benefits office or the local food bank.

But if you want to see the real damage done by benefits, look at the disintegration of the families and the amount with single mothers.

So, yeah, benefits sound good, but you define them by their effects, and the effects are disastrous.

This said, not looking for an argument either, just wanted to expand the point.

One thing that I always wondered about is if you lose your job you get unemployment allowance (something like £75 a week I believe). But if someone earns 100k a year they pay over £34k Tax/NI a year. If someone earns 50k they pay appx 12.5k in tax/NI. 20k earning is appx £2.5k. 15k is £800. The tax brackets are fair because someone on 15k can't afford to be paying more and that's totally fine. But when any of these people lose their job (through no fault of their own) they all get 75 quid a week unemployment allowance. Is that fair? Really...? 🤔

Edited September 6, 2022 by katyc

[GoldDiggerDave]

1 minute ago, katyc said:

One thing that I always wondered about is if you lose your job you get unemployment allowance (something like £75 a week I believe). But if someone earns 100k a year they pay over £34k Tax/NI a year. If someone earns 50k they pay appx 12.5k in tax/NI. 20k earning is appx £2.5k. 15k is £800. The tax brackets are fair because someone on 15k can't afford to be paying more and that's totally fine. But when any of these people lose their job (through no fault of their own) they all get 75 quid a week. Is that fair? Really...? 🤔

I challenge anyone to try and claim benefits.......Most will get jack S, you don't even get job seekers, when I got made redundant I'd thought I'd have a pop at it, will I've paid 40% tax for the last 13 years so I thought I'd paid into the system right?  

They take your partners income into effect so if they earn only 18k or more it's unlikely you will get anything,  oh and savings if you have saved money instead of spunking it then if you have more than 6k then it's game over no money for you, and the amount of hoops you have to jump though, they demand every one of your bank accounts and  savings details.    So most who get made redundant and get even a small payout 6-8k would instantly stop you getting any benefits 

Benefits are only for people who have made it a lifestyle choice, it will not help those who have worked all their life and fallen on hard times........Also even if you have paid into a lifetime Isa to buy a house they take this as savings......They system is totally broken.

I'm not bitter and luckily I was never desperate, just would not have minded a bit of the tax back out of the system that I had paid in.......In short you won't even get the 75 quid.  

[LemmyMcGregor]

10 minutes ago, katyc said:

One thing that I always wondered about is if you lose your job you get unemployment allowance (something like £75 a week I believe). But if someone earns 100k a year they pay over £34k Tax/NI a year. If someone earns 50k they pay appx 12.5k in tax/NI. 20k earning is appx £2.5k. 15k is £800. The tax brackets are fair because someone on 15k can't afford to be paying more and that's totally fine. But when any of these people lose their job (through no fault of their own) they all get 75 quid a week unemployment allowance. Is that fair? Really...? 🤔

I don't believe in tax brackets either, everyone should pay the same share of their work. "Oh, but he earns more! He needs to pay more!" 20% of 15k is 3,000, 20% of 100k is 20,000, he pays more.

Higher brackets just make it unworthy to produce more, and a state that places a limit on how much one can produce is mental, the more we produce, the richer we all are, as one producing excess money will push it back in the economy, I don't recall the term in English, is this induced economy? Anyway, economy is boosted when money is abundant and can be spent, if you pay it in taxes it usually ends up wasted, as when the government creates higher brackets all it does is bleeding the conomy in order to pay for a bunch of bureacrats, that more often than not all they end up doing is creating excuses to justify their salary.

We have seen it with the multiple scandals with social care that has made adoption a business, so you have a bunch of social care people going after the most vulnerable families and harass them to take their kids, so that they can justify their budget and pay someone else to raise those kids.

[LemmyMcGregor]

10 minutes ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

I challenge anyone to try and claim benefits.......Most will get jack S, you don't even get job seekers, when I got made redundant I'd thought I'd have a pop at it, will I've paid 40% tax for the last 13 years so I thought I'd paid into the system right?  

They take your partners income into effect so if they earn only 18k or more it's unlikely you will get anything,  oh and savings if you have saved money instead of spunking it then if you have more than 6k then it's game over no money for you, and the amount of hoops you have to jump though, they demand every one of your bank accounts and  savings details.    So most who get made redundant and get even a small payout 6-8k would instantly stop you getting any benefits 

Benefits are only for people who have made it a lifestyle choice, it will not help those who have worked all their life and fallen on hard times........Also even if you have paid into a lifetime Isa to buy a house they take this as savings......They system is totally broken.

I'm not bitter and luckily I was never desperate, just would not have minded a bit of the tax back out of the system that I had paid in.......In short you won't even get the 75 quid.  

This is my point, is not designed to help, is designed to win the votes of a specific target category and put us against each other, it's divide and conquer.

[katyc]

11 minutes ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

I challenge anyone to try and claim benefits.......Most will get jack S, you don't even get job seekers, when I got made redundant I'd thought I'd have a pop at it, will I've paid 40% tax for the last 13 years so I thought I'd paid into the system right?  

They take your partners income into effect so if they earn only 18k or more it's unlikely you will get anything,  oh and savings if you have saved money instead of spunking it then if you have more than 6k then it's game over no money for you, and the amount of hoops you have to jump though, they demand every one of your bank accounts and  savings details.    So most who get made redundant and get even a small payout 6-8k would instantly stop you getting any benefits 

Benefits are only for people who have made it a lifestyle choice, it will not help those who have worked all their life and fallen on hard times........Also even if you have paid into a lifetime Isa to buy a house they take this as savings......They system is totally broken.

I'm not bitter and luckily I was never desperate, just would not have minded a bit of the tax back out of the system that I had paid in.......In short you won't even get the 75 quid.  

Wow. Very good points there. Madness.

[kimchi]

9 minutes ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

I challenge anyone to try and claim benefits.......Most will get jack S, you don't even get job seekers, when I got made redundant I'd thought I'd have a pop at it, will I've paid 40% tax for the last 13 years so I thought I'd paid into the system right?  

They take your partners income into effect so if they earn only 18k or more it's unlikely you will get anything,  oh and savings if you have saved money instead of spunking it then if you have more than 6k then it's game over no money for you, and the amount of hoops you have to jump though, they demand every one of your bank accounts and  savings details.    So most who get made redundant and get even a small payout 6-8k would instantly stop you getting any benefits 

Benefits are only for people who have made it a lifestyle choice, it will not help those who have worked all their life and fallen on hard times........Also even if you have paid into a lifetime Isa to buy a house they take this as savings......They system is totally broken.

I'm not bitter and luckily I was never desperate, just would not have minded a bit of the tax back out of the system that I had paid in.......In short you won't even get the 75 quid.  

Absolutely spot on.

The only people who get it are those who know how to milk the system, and the genuinely elderly and disabled (though they are least likely to know what they are entitled to if anything) because they're been brought up on how to do it now. These are the people I mainly see buying cigarettes and scratchcards every time I pop into the corner shop near the last remaining council houses in this very wealthy town.

After my very disabled dad died it turned out he was incorrectly given the wrong level of benefits for the majority of the last 16 years of his life. Now how was he as a very serious Stroke victim, or my mum, who was dying of cancer, supposed to know, be able or even challenge that? They both trusted the (at the time, it's changed now) seemingly very nice 'old school' doctor to get it right, and he clearly put my father in the wrong group, and that was 18 years ago. It's much worse now. They tell you on the 'news' these days 'man who the authorities have been trying to prosecute for fraudulently claim benefits actually died from his illness months ago'.

I have some shocking second hand accounts to tell, absolutely shocking. One is a lady I knew about ten years ago who had significant mental health problems, but was at heart a lovely lady. She had social housing - she was put in a street full of heroin addicts and crack dens. Her son was very seriously autistic and as he reached his teens his violent outbursts were uncontrollable daily. She fought for a good year while I knew her for the respite care she was fully entitled to and they delayed and denied her any whatsoever every time. After a year or so, she had a complete breakdown, which she was open and honest about. Suddenly, they acted! They swooped in immediately and took BOTH her children away They were 'temporarily' housed so far away from her she couldn't pay the petrol to get to see them very often. She was utterly heartbroken. Finally getting her respite, she was now battling Social Services in Court just to try to see her kids, who also declined quickly with the 'care' at the place they were housed.

I could go on, I just hope she is still alive today, they pushed an already completely traumatised by the system (loving) mother to the brink of suicide the last time I saw her

Sorry for the depressing post, but I guess the point is that there is HUGE money to be made by Social Services and their friends in the legal system (all paid by taxpayers) and the (eventual foster care system). Illegal immigrants (let in by the Coastguard daily here in Kent) and lifelong benefits culture (by those who know how to play it) are HUGE and get all the headlines, but there is also far worse going on in the Social 'Care' system to honest loving families who just need a bit of help.When I was growing up friends, family and neighbours helped. When you're moved into a street of drug dealers and everything else far away from your family and are struggling the State who put you there will NOT help...

Sorry but I think this country is absolutely plucked.

[SidS]

45 minutes ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

I challenge anyone to try and claim benefits.......Most will get jack S, you don't even get job seekers, when I got made redundant I'd thought I'd have a pop at it, will I've paid 40% tax for the last 13 years so I thought I'd paid into the system right?  

They take your partners income into effect so if they earn only 18k or more it's unlikely you will get anything,  oh and savings if you have saved money instead of spunking it then if you have more than 6k then it's game over no money for you, and the amount of hoops you have to jump though, they demand every one of your bank accounts and  savings details.    So most who get made redundant and get even a small payout 6-8k would instantly stop you getting any benefits 

Benefits are only for people who have made it a lifestyle choice, it will not help those who have worked all their life and fallen on hard times........Also even if you have paid into a lifetime Isa to buy a house they take this as savings......They system is totally broken.

I'm not bitter and luckily I was never desperate, just would not have minded a bit of the tax back out of the system that I had paid in.......In short you won't even get the 75 quid.  

I know all this to be true.

[kimchi]

Meanwhile we have the likes of Katie Price getting the taxpayers to foot the bill for her son to be taxied to and from school counties away (I think he's at college now) from her mansion with stables etc every day, because she won't move closer to the school her son needs to attend (because of his significant disabilities).

Her defence of that was that he couldn't cope without her every day, and she pays her taxes. OK, but then why is she taking partying holidays every few months as splashed across the newspapers every few months (goodness knows why they follow this never-was anyway)?

The system is deliberately broken is the only sane answer when you start to look at it.

[Bigmarc]

1 hour ago, katyc said:

One thing that I always wondered about is if you lose your job you get unemployment allowance (something like £75 a week I believe). But if someone earns 100k a year they pay over £34k Tax/NI a year. If someone earns 50k they pay appx 12.5k in tax/NI. 20k earning is appx £2.5k. 15k is £800. The tax brackets are fair because someone on 15k can't afford to be paying more and that's totally fine. But when any of these people lose their job (through no fault of their own) they all get 75 quid a week unemployment allowance. Is that fair? Really...? 🤔

Had to do it a little while back as a paper work exercise. Company I was working for went into liquidation, they owed me a few thousand and wasn't going to get it all unless I sign on. It's now called job seekers. You meet with a agent that gets you your benefit providing you look for a job and yes it's about £75 per week but that is just one area, you could be entitled to further benefits that are extremely difficult to navigate and require a mountain of paperwork. People just think you put your hand out and get money, this is not the case unless it's standard like child tax credits. Recently I had to go through disability claim for my mother after my father died. She uses a mobility scooter and has heart problems, the amount of paperwork involved and assesments was unbelievable. I am a fairly well educated man in engineering and I struggled. 

[ArgentSmith]

Welcome aboard 😁

[kimchi]

7 minutes ago, Bigmarc said:

Had to do it a little while back as a paper work exercise. Company I was working for went into liquidation, they owed me a few thousand and wasn't going to get it all unless I sign on. It's now called job seekers. You meet with a agent that gets you your benefit providing you look for a job and yes it's about £75 per week but that is just one area, you could be entitled to further benefits that are extremely difficult to navigate and require a mountain of paperwork. People just think you put your hand out and get money, this is not the case unless it's standard like child tax credits. Recently I had to go through disability claim for my mother after my father died. She uses a mobility scooter and has heart problems, the amount of paperwork involved and assesments was unbelievable. I am a fairly well educated man in engineering and I struggled. 

It was only when a found a Benefits Adviser who knew what boxes the assessors need to be 'ticked', and how rotten the system is, that I realised both how the system had fiddled my severely disabled father out of what he was rightfully entitled to for over a decade, and how you need an expert in the field (ideally) if you are going to get much success.

He had an almost barrister-like knowledge on the system, and only helped me for my father because he knew I was genuine. Needless to say, perhaps around seven years ago they started culling his team and he feared for his job. I think he's probably 'retired' (one way or another) now.

I have no idea how I finally got to see this man, somehow eventually, after years of complaining, I finally stumbled across him. They still never backdated my father's benefits (which would have made such a difference to his life) even though his GP signed an official document basically saying (medical evidence) that his condition had been wrongly assessed. It didn't matter - they wouldn't change their original decision.

[CANV]

I’m all for small government and people keeping their hard earned. But how long do you think you will keep it without the state protecting your right to have it.  
 

I mean you could employ Security team. Maybe group together to form one big one.  Oh I don’t know call it the police.  In fact everyone should pay a bit towards it. It protects us all.  Now transport. These roads need funding. Also education.  Oh hang on it’s 2022. 

[Ukbullionfan]

2 hours ago, CANV said:

I’m all for small government and people keeping their hard earned. But how long do you think you will keep it without the state protecting your right to have it.  
 

I mean you could employ Security team. Maybe group together to form one big one.  Oh I don’t know call it the police.  In fact everyone should pay a bit towards it. It protects us all.  Now transport. These roads need funding. Also education.  Oh hang on it’s 2022. 

Why bump this topic today when the last post was like two weeks ago and died ? Lol

[LemmyMcGregor]

1 hour ago, CANV said:

I’m all for small government and people keeping their hard earned. But how long do you think you will keep it without the state protecting your right to have it.  
 

I mean you could employ Security team. Maybe group together to form one big one.  Oh I don’t know call it the police.  In fact everyone should pay a bit towards it. It protects us all.  Now transport. These roads need funding. Also education.  Oh hang on it’s 2022. 

Indeed, because the state is doing a great job protecting those rights, with protesters being jailed for holding up a placard. When the state turns tyrannical, we have no protection from it.

[CANV]

1 hour ago, Ukbullionfan said:

Why bump this topic today when the last post was like two weeks ago and died ? Lol

because I dont live on here and like to check out the notifications I see on previous chats..  why comment on something that has died in your opinion ....     ?...  lol 

[CANV]

12 minutes ago, LemmyMcGregor said:

Indeed, because the state is doing a great job protecting those rights, with protesters being jailed for holding up a placard. When the state turns tyrannical, we have no protection from it.

I agree we have too much 'state' at the moment.   but we do need some..  the game is getting where you want it to be.   if everyone is unhappy with a deal it normally means its the right price..  

I'm with you , less is better. but you have to convince the voters , well about 40 per cent of the ones who can be bothered to turn up and vote 

[Bigmarc]

10 minutes ago, CANV said:

well about 40 per cent of the ones who can be bothered to turn up and vote 

If you don't like labour or conservative then it's a wasted vote so why bother? 

[GoldDiggerDave]

20 minutes ago, CANV said:

I agree we have too much 'state' at the moment.   but we do need some..  the game is getting where you want it to be.   if everyone is unhappy with a deal it normally means its the right price..  

I'm with you , less is better. but you have to convince the voters , well about 40 per cent of the ones who can be bothered to turn up and vote 

Will voting make any difference?  All the political parties are all controlled by the likes of the WEF + WHO anyway    I'm with George Carlin when it comes to voting, it's an illusion given to the masses to make them feel the have freedom of choice they don't.  They can decide what fast food they want or what one of the 300 tv channels to watch  but when it comes to meaningful choice there is very few options, political parties, banks, insurance, health care, energy companies and these are now becoming increasing limited.  Society has been funnelled into total compliancy and most still think they are free.

 

[CANV]

23 minutes ago, Bigmarc said:

If you don't like labour or conservative then it's a wasted vote so why bother? 

dont then. or run for a council seat n work your way up..     but this is probably more for a politics thread than the newbie gold one. 

8 minutes ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

Will voting make any difference?  All the political parties are all controlled by the likes of the WEF + WHO anyway    I'm with George Carlin when it comes to voting, it's an illusion given to the masses to make them feel the have freedom of choice they don't.  They can decide what fast food they want or what one of the 300 tv channels to watch  but when it comes to meaningful choice there is very few options, political parties, banks, insurance, health care, energy companies and these are now becoming increasing limited.  Society has been funnelled into total compliancy and most still think they are free.

 

not voting certainly won't 

[ArgentSmith]

7 minutes ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

most still think they are free

I think people are actually scared of freedom, most people want to be told what they can and cant do, what's best to eat, how often should they eat etc, the list goes on and on.

[ArgentSmith]

3 minutes ago, CANV said:

not voting certainly won't 

Voting just encourages them, gives them a "mandate"

[Bigmarc]

22 minutes ago, CANV said:

dont then. or run for a council seat n work your way up..     but this is probably more for a politics thread than the newbie gold one.

Just replying to why you think 40% of people can't be bothered. 40% of voters may want something different other than the same two parties we have had for the last 100 years.

[CANV]

19 minutes ago, Bigmarc said:

Just replying to why you think 40% of people can't be bothered. 40% of voters may want something different other than the same two parties we have had for the last 100 years.

its not 40 per cent who cant be bothered, its 40 per cent who generally vote (except for Brexit which was the highest turn out for ages). .

its nearer 60 per cent who don't .. most don't care or cant be arsed, thats up to them. you cant make them..  if you think there is enough people to make a difference then go for it.  

but there isn't ...  if you know what this 'difference' is that will attract the don't care/cant be arsed/what's the points  let us all know.  

their views are too disparate to collate into one party..   and P.R. in any form is always rejected in this country.  by those who can be arsed to vote about it.  

[LemmyMcGregor]

1 hour ago, Bigmarc said:

If you don't like labour or conservative then it's a wasted vote so why bother? 

There was a party that never got elected but campaign for nearly 3 decades for Brexit, and pushed it through.

There are local areas where councils are being controlled by local entities not affiliated to the mainstream parties.

The "if you don't vote for the main parties, your vote is lost", is all part of the agenda, if you think that your vote doesn't matter and you stop voting, there is no longer a need to convince you to vote for them, and they can rely and the few local activists.

But yeah, we're vastly off topic, we should go back to bash Silver and propose to @katyc, the first few pages were rather amusing 🤣