Another 3 pence in august what gives?

[martin84]

veryRS said:

Lots of stuff

I'm not sure who these people are. I've never met any of them, which is surprising if it is indeed 'the whole bloody country' as you state. To mention houses is a bit unfair, house prices are now so high they're on Neptune, nobody on an average wage can actually afford a house, irrespective of what it is and mortgage/rent payments are the cause of many families debts.

As for everything else, I've never had a foreign holiday, I dont buy a new TV every year (even if I did i'd sell the old one to minimise the expense) and I still dont actually own anything made by Apple. I'm not one to buy phones covered in features i'm never going to use. I've never had a car on HP. I had one loan when I was 20 and paid it back.

I'm sure there are people out there who like to keep up with the Jones' but they appear to be the more middle class lot who think other people care about them and their boring pathetic lives.

[MissChief]

veryRS said:

Whiles there are some people who are truly on the bread line due to no fault of their own an awful lot of people are actually skint because they over spend. A lot. Houses they cant really afford because they want some new 4 bed Barrat Box to keep up appearances, a new car every other year to keep up appearances, holidays in foreign climes a couple of times a year, new Ipod/Iphone/IGadget every few months, new plasma telly every year or so....and so on. If people lived within their means - and I mean properly within their means - regardless of what those means were they wouldnt be skint now. They only reason I have some spare cash is not because anyone has given it to me or because I have been luckier than anyone else but because I have only ever spent what I can afford after all the bills have been paid and still keeping some spare and now I have no debts. And that is the way I intend to carry on living.

The whole bloody country almost has been living on the never never for years - and it has been actively encouraged by various goverments - and now its all coming back to bite. People want to live a luxury lifestyle because someone else does and thats not fair and now the party is over, and people are waking up to find they have vomited down their fronts and are now lying in a pool of sick. Welcome, everyone, to reality.

Edited by veryRS on Wednesday 21st March 20:39

I think we both agree with each other! Yes there are many that, erncouraged by the government to spend beyond their means, egged on by cheap interest rates and easily available credit have spent more than they earn and now owe money which now needs paid back. I agree with everything you wrote!

[bga]

martin84 said:

bga said:

I want my business to grow. Tax it less and I will grow it more.

This is what the US Republicans say everytime an election is coming up, tax cuts tax cuts tax cuts. I want to hear from you why you cannot grow with the current tax system. Is it because you cant or because you dont want to?

More money retained in my business means I can grow it faster or with lower risk. Tax me when I take money out of the business.

martin84 said:

Well hardly anybody chooses to do that. The people you're talking about are a very tiny minority of people, the media portray them as the majority but you shouldn't be fooled. The Conservative's have done an excellent job of portraying all 3million job seekers as thieving scum but the reality is very different. My anger comes from the fact PH always focuses on this tiny insignificant group of people in almost every thread when in reality we have far bigger, more relevent problems.

A job seeker and a serial doleite are very different things. One of my brothers bummed off the state for 12 years with no intention of working. Guys and girls that I grew up with are serially unemployed approaching their mid-30's and claim there are no jobs where they are. The jobs are not the problem, it is that they are lazy. In early 2000's I did a stint at the DwP and I am under no illusion about the scale of abuse of the welfare system to support peoples lifestyles.

martin84 said:

The United Kingdom finds it vulgar to talk about money even in good times, its just how our culture is, we dont like discussing what people earn and we hate people who have too much money.

I don't disagree and the attitude makes me sad. If we take out those who have inherited wealth, most of the others will be there through hard graft, luck or a bit of both.

[veryRS]

martin84 said:

I'm not sure who these people are. I've never met any of them, which is surprising if it is indeed 'the whole bloody country' as you state. To mention houses is a bit unfair, house prices are now so high they're on Neptune, nobody on an average wage can actually afford a house, irrespective of what it is and mortgage/rent payments are the cause of many families debts.

As for everything else, I've never had a foreign holiday, I dont buy a new TV every year (even if I did i'd sell the old one to minimise the expense) and I still dont actually own anything made by Apple. I'm not one to buy phones covered in features i'm never going to use. I've never had a car on HP. I had one loan when I was 20 and paid it back.

I'm sure there are people out there who like to keep up with the Jones' but they appear to be the more middle class lot who think other people care about them and their boring pathetic lives.

Why do you think house prices are now so high? Because encouraged by the government (with stupidly low interest rates) people went on a housing bender for years treating their homes like cash machines borrowing more and more against debt they didnt even think about based on the fact house prices would keep on spiralling up fuelled by people buying houses they cant afford... a vicious circle that could only ever end with a housing market so ridiculously overinflated against wages that no-one can afford to buy. And here we are.

As for everything else, you (and I) my friend are very definitely in the minority. Its the aspirant middle classes and working classes who read chav weekly (heat magazine and ste like that) who have been brainwashed into thinking they can all lead a pop-star lifestyle and have spent years splurging cash they dont have and never will have (see housing above) actively encouraged by successive governments (and yes greedy bankers...who the hell thought self certification mortgages for people who that can barely add up was a good idea!???) that have lead us to this particular place in time and history.

The rich generally arent rich because they earn more they are rich because they spend less as a percentage of earnings. Yes you can argue thats easier with higher earnings but it really doesnt matter how much you earn (until you hit the real bread line), its what you spend compared to what you earn that matters - aka live within your means. Sure I'd love a jet set lifestyle but I cant afford it. I am not going to get all jealous of those that do and then try to emulate them with my pitful earnings but plenty of people do just that.

[veryRS]

MissChief said:

I think we both agree with each other! Yes there are many that, erncouraged by the government to spend beyond their means, egged on by cheap interest rates and easily available credit have spent more than they earn and now owe money which now needs paid back. I agree with everything you wrote!

Thank you!

[PlugUgly]

Part of the reason that taxes like this are popular with governments is that they are easy and cheap for them to implement. Adding 3p to a litre of fuel might see government revenues increase by 2.5p/litre sold, while a more complex tax like an increase in tax levied on income would see much smaller returns as administration costs eat into their 'profit' (for want of a better word), the same loss would also be true for businesses. So this is a relatively cheap way for the government to raise money to help pay for everything they pay for.

It's a shame that it falls to motorists to foot more of the bill, but it is an efficient tax and does act as an incentive to drive less, drive slower or trade down to something smaller and more efficient, all of which are good headlines.


Also, everyone keeps focussing on the social extremes - the 'rich' and those on benefits - but most of the population aren't either of those and if you were poor you'd want income support and other associated benefits so you didn't starve or freeze, and if you were rich you wouldn't want to give half of everything you earn to the government to spend on services that you by and large don't use.

[matthias73]

RizzoTheRat said:

matthias73 said:

RizzoTheRat said:

matthias73 said:

I would mention that the reason the government is hiking the taxes is probably something to do with a certain extended war in afghanistan. I'm currently in the process of becoming a member of the armed forces so I have no qualms with our country being there, but I am of the opinion that if you are ruining your own, in the failing attempt of marginally helping another, something is going wrong.

Just over 4bn per year so not as bad ad you'd think in the grand scene if things.

I don't think its quite that simple. The current budget for defence is around 35 billion I believe. If the afghanistan mission was pulled, the operational spending would obviously be cut, and less soldiers/equipment would be needed. For the general public, this would probably be quite a boost. For me obviously not, but the government should probably look at the money it is pumping into various things before deciding that the public has to shoulder more burdens.

I suggest we invade italy, steal their gold and women and go back on the gold standard.

Operations come out of a separate "war chest" and not the main MoD budget. Equipment bought for specific operations (eg Mastiff and Ridgback vehicles in Afghanistan) as urgent operational requirements don't come out of the main MoD budget and even stranger can't be brought in to core equipment when the war ends. Bear in mind as well a chunk of that, and the MoD's main budget, is spent in the UK, both as salaries to military and MoD staff, and with loads of British companies like BAe and Rolls Royce, and even a lot of the foreign companies they spend a lot of money with have a fair few UK employees.

I'm liking the Italy idea, and we may as well take France on the way there.

All fair points. My main point is that if the overseas operations were to end, then the forces could be downscaled and less money spent on them. However that does raise the question of what to do with the people who would have become paid soldiers..

I'm not by any means an economist-But I do stand by my opinion that middle east has probably drained us of a lot of money that could have been better spent. Still, I'm certainly not complaining, and I certainly hope I'l have the chance to serve there at some point. I'm grateful I'l never be in a political position where I have to make decisions on behalf of a country and its needs, which may not match my own opinions. I'm just being very broad minded here.

Interesting on the specific vehicle use though, obviously vehicles such as the landy were just taken out of the stockpile so to speak, but is there a decent reason for not bringing the mastif ect back into the fold? Will they remain as operational tour vehicles and used for pre tour training or just sent off somewhere?

[Holeshot46]

Marf said:

So the basic state pension, which EVERYONE gets regardless of contributions, that's not a benefit?

Semantics indeed.

Sorry I'm late to the thread but loved this and totally agree! If it's not a benefit what is it... A reward... Oh a reward for getting old? Not at all similar to the reward of a house and money for having four kids and no job? But still, at least when they get old they won't need the pension or their houses paid for any longer...

What we need are some large communities built in the middle of the Brecon Beacons or similar where these scroungers are sent to live and eat for free but they have to work on the land or in factories every day to keep their house and be given food. Could be the start of an industrial revolution!

[J4CKO]

veryRS said:

martin84 said:

I'm not sure who these people are. I've never met any of them, which is surprising if it is indeed 'the whole bloody country' as you state. To mention houses is a bit unfair, house prices are now so high they're on Neptune, nobody on an average wage can actually afford a house, irrespective of what it is and mortgage/rent payments are the cause of many families debts.

As for everything else, I've never had a foreign holiday, I dont buy a new TV every year (even if I did i'd sell the old one to minimise the expense) and I still dont actually own anything made by Apple. I'm not one to buy phones covered in features i'm never going to use. I've never had a car on HP. I had one loan when I was 20 and paid it back.

I'm sure there are people out there who like to keep up with the Jones' but they appear to be the more middle class lot who think other people care about them and their boring pathetic lives.

Why do you think house prices are now so high? Because encouraged by the government (with stupidly low interest rates) people went on a housing bender for years treating their homes like cash machines borrowing more and more against debt they didnt even think about based on the fact house prices would keep on spiralling up fuelled by people buying houses they cant afford... a vicious circle that could only ever end with a housing market so ridiculously overinflated against wages that no-one can afford to buy. And here we are.

As for everything else, you (and I) my friend are very definitely in the minority. Its the aspirant middle classes and working classes who read chav weekly (heat magazine and ste like that) who have been brainwashed into thinking they can all lead a pop-star lifestyle and have spent years splurging cash they dont have and never will have (see housing above) actively encouraged by successive governments (and yes greedy bankers...who the hell thought self certification mortgages for people who that can barely add up was a good idea!???) that have lead us to this particular place in time and history.

The rich generally arent rich because they earn more they are rich because they spend less as a percentage of earnings. Yes you can argue thats easier with higher earnings but it really doesnt matter how much you earn (until you hit the real bread line), its what you spend compared to what you earn that matters - aka live within your means. Sure I'd love a jet set lifestyle but I cant afford it. I am not going to get all jealous of those that do and then try to emulate them with my pitful earnings but plenty of people do just that.

Some sense being talked, I see it quite a lot, people borrow more than they should, the link between effort and reward was severed, kids waiting for their break on Xfactor, the lottery, Premiership, as a Top DJ etc etc, people borrowing against their house to go on holiday, buy X5's etc etc and they get used to it, have seen people who I know earn not that much braying about their stuff and making it clear they only appreciate premium things but its not sustainable.

I don't owe anyone a penny, I am not here to be so shallow as to want to impress people, in fact I think a lot of the big ticket image cars bought by certain people are to demoralise others, I heard a good quote, think, randomly it was Will Smith, "People buying stuff they don't want, with money they haven't got, to impress people the don't like". There was that bloke who killed his family and himself, and burnt down the house when things werent going his way, an extreme way of expressing the fact he couldnt cope with people seeing him not being "considerably richer than you".

What impresses me more is someone who has restored, modified or built a superb car, not someone who can pay £600 a month for some SUV if they don't pay the bills and dont save any money.

[Vladimir]

J4CKO said:

Some sense being talked, I see it quite a lot, people borrow more than they should, the link between effort and reward was severed, kids waiting for their break on Xfactor, the lottery, Premiership, as a Top DJ etc etc, people borrowing against their house to go on holiday, buy X5's etc etc and they get used to it, have seen people who I know earn not that much braying about their stuff and making it clear they only appreciate premium things but its not sustainable.

I don't owe anyone a penny, I am not here to be so shallow as to want to impress people, in fact I think a lot of the big ticket image cars bought by certain people are to demoralise others, I heard a good quote, think, randomly it was Will Smith, "People buying stuff they don't want, with money they haven't got, to impress people the don't like". There was that bloke who killed his family and himself, and burnt down the house when things werent going his way, an extreme way of expressing the fact he couldnt cope with people seeing him not being "considerably richer than you".

What impresses me more is someone who has restored, modified or built a superb car, not someone who can pay £600 a month for some SUV if they don't pay the bills and dont save any money.

Totally agree with this and the previous quoted post.

Why have "we" been so brainwashed into "demanding" so many goods, a big house, new cars, flash holidays when we simply cannot afford it.

While our company makes reasonable money, it's certainly nothing amazing and our take home earnings are genuinely pretty modest yet by being sensible, paying off all debts many years ago and living within our means, we have a decent "safety net" and can occasionally go mad and buy something like a VW California for cash. We wouldn't have EVER considered it on finance/a loan because that would mean we couldn't afford it. Same with anything.

We do take it to extremes though - we are saving to buy a house outright (been renting for aeons) and refuse to get a mortgage. Not many do that.

[Willy Nilly]

Flawless Victory said:

Willy Nilly said:

Only skimmed the thread.

To keep it on topic, I bought some unleaded on Sunday. £142.9. My car holds 55 litres, if I put 50 litres in it, some quick calculations showed that the tax on that 50 litres would equate to a touch over 20% of my basic weekly wage AFTER I have paid income tax and NI.

I've tried writing to my MP, I've tried phoning to make an appointment to see him but just get fobbed off. Yes, we have to pay tax, but I'm about ready to start shooting people.

Maybe you should cut out the foreign holidays first.

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

I have 21 day holiday a year and have 34 days remaining.

I have not had a day off sick since 2004 when I was hospitalised after an accident at work fractured my neck.

The last holiday I had was 3 nights in Italy to go to a friends wedding 2 years ago. The last proper holiday was 2007, a weeks skiing.

I will go 4 months in the summer without a weekend to myself, during this 4 month spell there will be 2 months were I will expect to work every single day, probably all day without a break and upto and over 50 hours overtime per week.

I've not had any time off since christmas and will not be getting any until possibly having the week off to which you linked, but it's not looking like i will be able to go now.

So I don;t have any foreign holidays to speak of to cut out. So fk off.

[David87]

They're really getting to people, these fuel prices. Whenever I've told someone I've recently bought a new car they look at me as if I'm a total moron for buying something with a 2.5-litre engine.

[Manicminer]

My local has put petrol up by 2p again this week. 141.9 now.

Funnily enough all the different retailers in the area sell fuel at the same price give or take a penny. How come they're never investigated for price fixing?

[Vladimir]

David87 said:

They're really getting to people, these fuel prices. Whenever I've told someone I've recently bought a new car they look at me as if I'm a total moron for buying something with a 2.5-litre engine.

I just checked if you have an ST or an RS then was interested in your other cars. What struck me (hard) is that you don't seem to lose money on ANY cars - in fact you usually make money. How the hell do you manage that?!

While some losses have been tiny (£100 on one car!), they have all been losses!!

Only made money on a boat!

[J4CKO]

Vladimir said:

J4CKO said:

Some sense being talked, I see it quite a lot, people borrow more than they should, the link between effort and reward was severed, kids waiting for their break on Xfactor, the lottery, Premiership, as a Top DJ etc etc, people borrowing against their house to go on holiday, buy X5's etc etc and they get used to it, have seen people who I know earn not that much braying about their stuff and making it clear they only appreciate premium things but its not sustainable.

I don't owe anyone a penny, I am not here to be so shallow as to want to impress people, in fact I think a lot of the big ticket image cars bought by certain people are to demoralise others, I heard a good quote, think, randomly it was Will Smith, "People buying stuff they don't want, with money they haven't got, to impress people the don't like". There was that bloke who killed his family and himself, and burnt down the house when things werent going his way, an extreme way of expressing the fact he couldnt cope with people seeing him not being "considerably richer than you".

What impresses me more is someone who has restored, modified or built a superb car, not someone who can pay £600 a month for some SUV if they don't pay the bills and dont save any money.

Totally agree with this and the previous quoted post.

Why have "we" been so brainwashed into "demanding" so many goods, a big house, new cars, flash holidays when we simply cannot afford it.

While our company makes reasonable money, it's certainly nothing amazing and our take home earnings are genuinely pretty modest yet by being sensible, paying off all debts many years ago and living within our means, we have a decent "safety net" and can occasionally go mad and buy something like a VW California for cash. We wouldn't have EVER considered it on finance/a loan because that would mean we couldn't afford it. Same with anything.

We do take it to extremes though - we are saving to buy a house outright (been renting for aeons) and refuse to get a mortgage. Not many do that.

We are lucky to not have a mortgage, really we are possibly a little to cautious but we have three kids and will get old, so we need to provide for the kids for quite a bit longer, university and helping them onto the housing ladder whilst making some provision for when we aren't working any more. I think people tend to live up to an image and get cajoled into buying stuff based on the impression they have given others, i.e. "You can afford it" so just buy stuff they possibly cant actually afford.

People at work assume I am minted and don't understand why I don't spend more, realistically its because I am not a high roller, I am not rich and I don't want credit, could buy pretty much any car and it would perhaps raise the odd eyebrow but realistically I would have spent everything on a depreciating asset, as it is I have four grands worth of old 944, hopefully it wont lose much value now. I went mad the other day as I got a bonus from work, ordered a new Ipad but I thought long and hard about it, it wasnt a whim, I think thats the problem for a lot, they like to think its not a big deal when really £500 of disposable income is a lot these days but people seem embarrassed to admit it as they like to project this aura of wealth which isn't backed up by actual income, lets face it the average salary doesn't leave much for most after living expenses these days.

[not260]

We're all doomed, things are only going to get worse.

40% of the population will be over 60 within the next decade, so more pensioners and more people requiring nursing home/social/hospital care. This is very expensive, then you've got the unemployed, those that can't work, those that are too young to work and all of a sudden you have the minority of people supporting the majority. This is one of the arguments for immigration at the moment which it would seem is being scaled back on because there's no jobs.

I got made redundant 3 years ago, couldn't find work quickly so went back to Uni for 3 years to study for a career that I would definately get work in. I'm unemployed at the moment, I'm not eligible for any benefits and times are tough. I really don't like being tarred with the unemployed brush. There are some people desperate to work but there really is a lack of jobs.

To those who think that putting up the price of cigs will serve smokers right for there burden to the NHS the real expensive issues in the NHS are alcohol abuse and obesity (maybe they should tax food)

I fear that 3p a liter is the least of our worries.

[martin84]

veryRS said:

As for everything else, you (and I) my friend are very definitely in the minority. Its the aspirant middle classes and working classes who read chav weekly (heat magazine and ste like that) who have been brainwashed into thinking they can all lead a pop-star lifestyle

For what its worth, the Radio Times has a circulation three times larger than Heat. Even if you combine all of the glossy rags like Ok, Hello, Heat etc which I presume you're talking about then their combined circulation figures suggest only 2.3% of the population read them. So im still not sure its 'the whole bloody country' as you put it earlier.

veryRS said:

The rich generally arent rich because they earn more they are rich because they spend less as a percentage of earnings. Yes you can argue thats easier with higher earnings

Yes I can argue that and i'd be right. It's always easy to live within your means if your means are very large.

veryRS said:

Sure I'd love a jet set lifestyle but I cant afford it. I am not going to get all jealous of those that do and then try to emulate them with my pitful earnings but plenty of people do just that.

I dont think everybodies looking for a Jet Set lifestyle. The thing I hate about this website is its one-extreme-or-another attitude, if somebody wants something slightly better than bleak poverty then you accuse them of wanting a jet set lifestyle.

PugUgly said:

Also, everyone keeps focussing on the social extremes - the 'rich' and those on benefits - but most of the population aren't either of those

Fair point. This website believes there's only benefit scroungers and 50p tax payers with the latter paying for the former with nobody in between.

PugUgly said:

if you were rich you wouldn't want to give half of everything you earn to the government to spend on services that you by and large don't use.

Its not half of what they earn. Its half of what they earn over £150,000. How many people in this country earn a 6 figure salary? Extremely few. Not enough to win an election, put it that way. If rich people dont like their taxes funding services which they might not use then they should go abroad. 'I dont use the services so why should I pay?' is not a valid argument.

By the way, if I was rich I wouldn't care less about anything. Do you think I'd even waste my time finding out where my taxes went?

J4CKO said:

I don't owe anyone a penny

Well arent you fking marvellous. You after a medal or something?

You assume everybody in debt has got their through their own fault and for no good reason, when in reality for you to not owe a penny to anybody you've had some good luck along the way, probably born into a well to do family. My parents bankrupted themselves when I was a child, they both lost their jobs unexpectedly in a horrible stroke of terrible luck, suddenly perfectly managable bills became impossible and they spent everything they had, including taking credit at horrific rates and selling everything they owned just to make sure I was unaffected. They didn't have family on either side (I've never met any grandparents or aunts/uncles etc) to help them out and they didn't have Oxford degrees to wander into a high paid job either. When you start with nothing you struggle to save anything and debt is largely unavoidable. It took them 15 years to get back in the black just because they wanted me to have the same things all the other kids had.

I dont know why im putting all of this on a public forum, I'm just trying to point out people dont always get into debt for holidays and cars.

J4CKO said:

I see it quite a lot, people borrow more than they should, the link between effort and reward was severed, kids waiting for their break on Xfactor, the lottery, Premiership, as a Top DJ etc etc, people borrowing against their house to go on holiday, buy X5's etc etc

If they shouldn't borrow it then the lender shouldn't have lent it, is the flipside. Also, the link between effort and reward was deservedly broken to be fair, effort alone counts for very little. An honest man with no friends who works 95 hours a week with maximum effort will still get nowhere in comparison to a guy with rich parents who sent him to Oxford and made friends with all the people who could do him a favour. The dirty secret is 100 people can put in the effort and usually only 1 gets any reward, so I dont blame people for trying something with slightly better odds. If everybody who put in effort got the rewards, the poor would end up far too rich and the super-rich Middle England plutocrats wouldn't like that. Social engineering at its finest.

Also I'd never discourage anybody from chasing a dream if they genuinely believe. Too often in this country we tell people to not bother trying to be a footballer or an actor because they'll never make it and they should get used to having nothing for their entire lives. I think if someones got a genuine talent they should give it a go and the only people who'd criticise them are those too afraid to do it themselves.

David87 said:

They're really getting to people, these fuel prices. Whenever I've told someone I've recently bought a new car they look at me as if I'm a total moron for buying something with a 2.5-litre engine.

People are sick of this fuel tax and they wont like you helping the Chancellor get his way by buying an uneconomical car. You (and me) are essentially his right hand man by owning 2.5 litre cars. A US Congressman a few years ago said it was every American's duty to buy a Prius to reduce the US's dependency on oil from the unstable, undemocratic middle east. Here, plenty will feel depriving our Chancellor of money is every Briton's duty.

not206 said:

To those who think that putting up the price of cigs will serve smokers right for there burden to the NHS the real expensive issues in the NHS are alcohol abuse and obesity (maybe they should tax food)

I really get fed up when somebodies only 'solution' to something is to tax it. After all, targeted tax has stopped people smoking, drinking, buying cars, taking flights and buying petrol hasnt it? Oh..oh no wait...

While we're on it, the biggest avoidable expense in the NHS recently was the £14billion computer system which doesnt work, which was implimented despite everybody telling them it wouldnt work.

[Flawless Victory]

Willy Nilly said:

Flawless Victory said:

Willy Nilly said:

Only skimmed the thread.

To keep it on topic, I bought some unleaded on Sunday. £142.9. My car holds 55 litres, if I put 50 litres in it, some quick calculations showed that the tax on that 50 litres would equate to a touch over 20% of my basic weekly wage AFTER I have paid income tax and NI.

I've tried writing to my MP, I've tried phoning to make an appointment to see him but just get fobbed off. Yes, we have to pay tax, but I'm about ready to start shooting people.

Maybe you should cut out the foreign holidays first.

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

......

/Cut whiny stuff about how not having a foreign holiday.

Thank you for paying more tax than you need to.

[Nick M]

Clearly this thread is throwing up a lot of opinions based on peoples' perception of the 'facts', but it's interesting to see how misplaced some of those perceptions are when real actual facts are shown.

The net result seems to be that too many people think it's somebody else's fault or somebody else's problem, and while people continue to play the blame game no real progress is going to be made in turning the UK around.

The biggest challenge to be overcome, it seems to me, is how to deal with the overwhelming sense of resentment - resentment at the bankers, resentment at the government, resentment at employers for not giving out pay increases, etc. Some of that may be justified, some of it may not, but while that feeling remains it's fundamentally unhealthy for the economy. And frankly, it's not helped by messages such as "we're in this together" message if we're patently not.

Until there's a wholesale shift away from this resentment and an acceptance that nobody is going to fix things for us then sadly I think we're in for a period of stagnation.

Sort of like the 70's all over again, without the bell-bottom trousers...

[matc]

Mr Gear said:

Maybe they should actually give less to the poor? You know, just give them food stamps or something instead of cash?

They obviously can't be trusted with the stuff. Give an unemployed person actual real money and they will only spend it on fuel, Sky TV and fags anyway. Benefits. Damned right they benefit.

I'm a mug for going out and earning my £££.

Could not agree more! And to top it off they're setting the standard for their fatherless little johnnys to carry on in their footsteps.

This is where the government should focus ALL of their energy in sorting out.

Benefits were introduced to help those who had worked all their lives, and fallen on harder times; it now seems like a sensible career path!