Quizzes & Puzzles4 mins ago
Nanny State
Why does Labour hate us looking after ourselves?
For those that do want to look after themselves, comrade Brown tries to discourage this by plundering personal and company pensions of �5 Billion a year (my father in law's pension has been more or less wiped out), and those that can't be bothered to look after themselves are almost encouraged to stay at home because of the wealth of benefits they can receive.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Flanker8. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
QM - No labour spin?????
MORI is not independent - it is commissioned and I quote from their own website...."Clients are at the heart of everything we do"
Is this also the same 'independent' pollsters who when polling residents in Dnmow regarding expansion at Stansted asked the question "whether a noise contour of 66 decibels (dBA Leq) was a fair level to determine compensation for noise" - no spin their then.....and by the way, that poll was 'independently' commissioned by BAA.
Finally, if you would like to see the accuracy of these polls, I suggest you read about the 92 elections.
Not forgetting the abolishing of married couples allowance and replaced with some other allowance, heralded with much fanfare....and wait for it.......to be implemented after 8 months.....and most of us did not qualify for it anyway. Sneaky or what. Also the fuel duty which was to be used to improve our transport infrastucture and then Tony Poodle let it slip that it was actually to prop up the NHS.
I cannot believe that in this day & age people still fall for the left wing dogma that QM spouts. There are some indisputable facts regarding the pensions issue. 1) Labour removed the dividend tax credit which REDUCED the money going in to pension funds by an estimated �5bn pa. 2) This money has already had tax paid on it by the company who EARNED it in the first place. 3) Pensioners including those at Dexion, Ferodo and many others, will be much poorer as a direct result.
Money paid into pension funds is nominally tax free, because when it is taken out as an annuity it is taxable. (ISAs etc are the other way around)
Labour's record speaks for itself. I cannot think of one single field in which they have delivered on the numerous promises which they made through dodgy sound bites, and sleaze, spin and the politicisation (sp?) of the civil service have become a way of life. Unelected and highly paid "advisers" fill the corridors of power, and anyone who speaks out against the tyranny is smeared and attacked, even ordinary members of the public are branded as racists, extremists etc. We have the government we deserve.
Oneeyedvic � I totally agree with you that someone going along to their doctor �pretending� to be incapacitated or exaggerating any problems they have in order to receive benefits is defrauding the system. What I was trying to get across, perhaps not very well, is that the system is not thorough enough in actually physically checking out people who claim to be incapacitated. I get the impression from the person I know that he merely has to go along to a doctor every few months to be asked a set of questions and is then signed off again. It just seems to be paper exercise. On a more general point, I have no problems with paying increased NI contributions if the money goes towards improving the NHS, I simply do not see why people who choose to take out PMI through their employer should also be taxed on the premium paid by their employer. The govt is already charging Insurance Premium Tax on the PMI premiums so they are effectively taxing the same pool of money twice.
Well...if we're to talk about "spouting dogma", why is it that people with apparently Tory sympathies seem to have memories that stretch no further back than 1997 when they start spouting?
Nigel Lawson, the Tory Chancellor, imposed a cap on pension fund surpluses in his 1986 budget. He also allowed employers to choose whether to use funds above the cap level to give pensioners better benefits or to 'take a holiday' from paying contributions themselves. Guess which option employers - largely Conservatives, of course - chose!
The government of the day was warned that this threatened the future security of pensions but just ignored the warnings. The buoyant stock market of the Nineties hid the impending crisis they had created. Employers saved themselves billions, so they can't really complain about having to pay them back now, one way or t'other! Regardless of the above facts, now all the blame is laid at Labour's door.
And don't even get me started on the disaster caused by Thatcher's cutting of the link between pensions and average wages and tying them to inflation. The original Labour-inspired link is the very thing today's pensioners are demanding to have reinstated. Over the years, this alone represents a heist of gargantuan proportions against society's poorest...our state pensioners. It's pretty clear who the real 'plunderers' have been in this game!
And there I at least shall leave it.
Miss Zippy - I totally agree with you on both counts.
Some people are good actors & very good at trying to hoodwink GP's & employers.
When I was at work, we had one particular employee who was constantly off sick with a 'bad back'. He used to send in medical certificates covering him for weeks at a time & refused to lift anything in the Parts Department where he worked. That is until I made an appointment for him to see the Occupational Health Doctor, at our local hospital. The employee wasn't happy about this, but his own GP was & agreed to sign an internal form asking for him to do so. After visiting this particular OHD, the report came back that he was in fact fit to attend work. He knew he was in a no win situation & came back to work. When he realised that he was under scrutiny & no longer able to shirk his responsibilites, his attitude changed, he knuckled down & his attendance record changed dramatically - for the better!
well said QM. Anyway flanker, you are not helping the NHS by having private medical insurance you are helping yourself to jump the queue. if that's not a benefit i'm a dutchman. Pension fund shortages are the fault of rubbish fund managers and perhaps an aging population. many people have had to take reduced pensions from their funds. The individual should limit risk by spreading investment. The welfare system is a welcome safety net for all of us. Never mind individual cases. tell me how much benefit fraud costs the uk per year?
jm
What utter tosh - Private Medical does alleviate the burden on the NHS because my treatment is being paid for by an insurance company: I've had four operations, all rugby related (so you could argue self-inflicted) all paid for by my insurance company: how can you honestly state, in all seriousness, that my operations being paid for by my insurance company has not helped the NHS??? Ridiculous argument.
simply that the private health sector is worth around 3 billion a year compared to around 70 billion for the NHS so PMI is a tiny sector of health care. I'm certain that the NHS could afford to treat you for your injuries if you so wished. Your employer decided to offer you PMI as a perk to attract you to your job. You chose to take PMI because you rightly knew it would benefit you with shorter waiting times, quicker access to the best meds and a better room with sky tv. That is obviously a benefit in kind.
jim
