Quote:
Originally Posted by roger skillin
Personally i think if someone is earning more than 44k a year then they don't need to claim benefits as they're already earning enough, those of us that still work our ass off for just 18k need them because we're only on 18k, so anyone moaning that they wont get benefits and they on 45k, do you want to swap jobs with me?
|
It's not that black and white, wealth obviously is a combination of both income and outgoings, and the opinion here has universally been that it's a good idea.
I would swap jobs with you sadly 18k before tax wouldn't pay the rent on my 2 bedroom, living room barely large enough for the sofas and kitchen, no dining room, maisonette.
If you've a problem with the amount of money you make maybe your time would be better spent doing something to increase this rather than complaining about those with higher incomes, many of whom would have come from low paid homes and worked their way to where they are now.
Just a friendly suggestion from someone who at one point was doing 17-18 hour days door to door to get to this apparently super-wealthy 44k mark.
You're obviously not that impoverished and in need of welfare from the state on your 18k/year if you can
afford 50Mbit, 2 V+ boxes, etc, so you get my point about it being about more than incomes.
---------- Post added at 10:29 ---------- Previous post was at 10:28 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taf
I wonder if they will finally see sense (and financial sense) and scrap the Road Fund Licence ?
|
I am lost as to what that would do to bring down the fiscal deficit, could you explain?