It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Those of you that wanted Welfare stopped have been granted their wish

page: 6
33
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 03:15 PM
link   

pavmas
reply to post by uncommitted
 


no it says 1 million i think i corrected that.

Listen its a lot more than people think, they are not paid poor, they are on boards where and comittees that earn them fortunes for a few days work a year, its a gravy train


You know what, stand up for what you think, get enough people to believe in you, put yourself forward to work for your council and then as an MP. The final salary for an MP at best would be less than two thirds of the current £66K a year they get now, that is logic, you want to moan, moan about something it's in your control to change or at least understand.

Sorry if that seems hard, it's the festive season and I'd like to wish you and yours all the best, but coming on this board expecting to throw figures around without the facts is like a red rag to some people.




posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 03:21 PM
link   
shaneslaughta


Not this president, you can thank nafa and bush for this mess.


NAFTA was Clinton's baby, not Bush's. Just sayin'.
edit on 12/16/2013 by ProfessorChaos because: messed up quote



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 03:25 PM
link   

uncommitted

Bilk22

uncommitted

Bilk22

theantediluvian
reply to post by pavmas
 



White House to allow jobless benefits to expire for 1.3 million

Not to be critical, but it's not the "White House," it's Congress. The President can't extend jobless benefits.
He seems to make laws and or break them when it suits his agenda. He pushed the last debt ceiling issue down our throats.


No, you are just making this anti Obama (yet again). Congress is a debate between two parties, would you like to show which is voting on what in this? Or is that too much to ask and you are going to route back to the birth certificate question rather than answer?

Mel Gibson is your avator, another person who likes to misconstrue facts to match their personal belief. Deny ignorance means face facts or find new ones that stand up to scrutiny, harder than it looks, isn't it.
That's not Mel Gibson. That's William Wallace


Now do you really think there's two parties in all of this? LOL Maybe you're not old enough


Now that is amazing, who went back with a camera and took the picture of Wallace? I think I could probably beat you on the age thing.


It's him. You just have to use your imagination


Well that's a race I wouldn't want to win, but lately I find I'm usually one of the older people in the room


Back to the issue of parties, you're engaging in exactly what they expect from you. Keeps everyone distracted from the real problems.



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by uncommitted
 



Yes, so? That MP pension would not be payable at 34, it would be payable at retirement age unless you retired through ill health and had an insurance policy in place.


I would imagine that there are insurance policies protecting the pension, so if he was to retire through ill health, then the policy will pay out. There haven't been many who have done that has there? Tried Googling it, but no exact matches found, strange.



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 03:28 PM
link   

uncommitted
reply to post by pavmas
 


Yes, so? That MP pension would not be payable at 34, it would be payable at retirement age unless you retired through ill health and had an insurance policy in place.

The whole current IPSA agreement is to reduce an MP's pension payout, with the 11% while they are in seat being a balancer - which do you think makes most sense?


edit on 16-12-2013 by uncommitted because: changed the word salary to pension in first line


This thread was not about MPs pension, all i know that years ago that an MP got 1/2 pot pension the day he was elected.there was a stink about it as Bobby Sands got elected and he was in H block and I think Gerry Adams was elected, anyway the outcry was that they would be entitled to claim their pension, ( was this media lies or propaganda i don't know) did Maggie T change it, I don't know but I dont want to spend time on it and here is the latest booklet on MPs wages and pensions.
parliamentarystandards.org.uk...



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 03:34 PM
link   
OP for your edification - we crossed this bridge last year at the same time. This must be Ground Hog Day all over again, or is that deja vu? LOL

Unemployment Insurance to be Extended, $30 Billion Cost Won't be Offset

Now I seem to remember Obama was our savior and was going to fix everything -the roads, the grid, the infrastructure, healthcare, our love lives - and also have employment at 100%? Maybe he was thinking unemployment at 100%?



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by uncommitted
 


Russell Brand dont make me laugh no time for the guy.

Listen you said MPs work for their money I disagree, i think they are the laziest overpaid bunch you will ever meet, just watch the debate on smoking before the banned it in pubs and clubs it was a joke.

They are overpaid clowns and are that far removed from normal people its a joke they are elected.

labour these are worse, at least the tories have cash labour come in as paupers and raid the lot and leave as millionaires.

Im all for democracy but true democracy where a dentist, a doctor a policamn a baker, from a community should represent people, not people who all went to Cambridge or Eton, I want a mixture of brains and ideas.



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 03:40 PM
link   

uncommitted

pavmas
reply to post by uncommitted
 


no it says 1 million i think i corrected that.

Listen its a lot more than people think, they are not paid poor, they are on boards where and comittees that earn them fortunes for a few days work a year, its a gravy train


You know what, stand up for what you think, get enough people to believe in you, put yourself forward to work for your council and then as an MP. The final salary for an MP at best would be less than two thirds of the current £66K a year they get now, that is logic, you want to moan, moan about something it's in your control to change or at least understand.

Sorry if that seems hard, it's the festive season and I'd like to wish you and yours all the best, but coming on this board expecting to throw figures around without the facts is like a red rag to some people.


My health is not up to it or I would, but I would back any independent local who would stand and promise to work for the people, i would sit and pack their envelopes for them, all we need is 350 to get elected and get control, democracy is great if it belongs to all the people.



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 03:41 PM
link   

peter_kandra
Aren't people allowed to collect for something like 99 weeks maximum?
Seriously...almost 2 years of collecting unemployment and people still want more? It's a safety net, not a lifetime income stream.

Yes, they did pay into the system. In the states I've lived in, I paid in about $200 a year, plus whatever my employer did. 99 weeks of benefits uses much more than gets put into the system.


I remember when unemployment comp was only paid for six months and you were cut off after that. And you had to work for at least a year before you were eligible again. And it didn't pay a whole lot either.

It made people get off their ass and find work, if not create it themselves.



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Bilk22
 


But they passed it last year, this year they have broke up for Christmas and not passed it.



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 03:56 PM
link   

pavmas
reply to post by Bilk22
 


But they passed it last year, this year they have broke up for Christmas and not passed it.
So how many times must they keep doing it? Obama was supposed to have all this fixed by now. I mean it's going on 6 years.

Sometimes I wonder how all these people have time to post on the internet. I know how I can. I'm retired and own real estate. Just wondering how others have the time and can afford to do so. Doing it at work on someone else's dime? At home collecting unemployment with nothing to do? Won the lottery and would rather post than travel? Trust fund babies? How? There are tens of thousands of web sites where people post all day long.

Yes let's extend unemployment indefinitely.



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by pavmas
 


A brilliant ex-slave in America, named Booker T. Washington, once said there is as much dignity in tilling a field as their is in writing a poem. He is right, you know? The dignity comes in providing for yourself and making your own way in life, whether you be a janitor or an astronaut. The American welfare state has taken away much of people's dignity, by making them rely on government for a handout, turning government dependents into near slaves.

Look at the reaction on this thread by some. "Starve the rich, etc..."
That is the direction they are pointing you in, or trying to.
Don't let them turn you into a mindless zombie who thinks "all rich are evil!"

Maye they just tried harder than I/you/we did? Why does anyone else deserve the fruits of their labor?

I'm a "right winger," but I believe in welfare, as long as the person recieving it gives ample proof that they are TRYING to better their lives and trying to make something of themselves, no matter what their mode of employment might be, in the end.

The problem today is everyone wants to start at the top. GL w/ that.

I believe in government assistance for the mentally/physically disabled, for the young, for the old who can't take care of themselves, and for those who are trying to take care of themselves but aren't having much luck, but are showing proof, REAL proof, that they are TRYING TO BETTER THEIR OWN LIVES.

For the layabout who wants to watch Springer and eat bon-bons and post on FB all day, who thinks the hard working taxpayers of America are "suckers," I say, get off your ass and get a job, or at least TRY, you worthless slug.



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by pavmas
 

Dont confuse unemployment-TERM and EXTENSION benefits with welfare. They arent the same thing. And you are wrong. Welfare is still and will still be the only income for MILLIONS more of your few million JOBLESS Unemployment benefits. 2 totally different things.



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 05:32 PM
link   

AutumnWitch657
Unemployment is not welfare but thanks for insulting a few hundred thousand who used to have an income they paid taxes on to support the unemployment program and are now unfortunatly are out of a job due to a crappy economy. Way to go on tbat pride building statement.


20 + stars for a post that is ENTIRELY inaccurate.

THE EMPLOYER PAYS unemployment insurance.

The employees don't.

www.csmonitor.com...



Truth: Unemployment insurance is paid for primarily through employers' contributions. You, as an employee, do not pay into any unemployment compensation fund directly.


voices.yahoo.com...
edit on 16-12-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 06:18 PM
link   
Real simple solution.

Put tariffs on EVERYTHING imported to make them priced they way they should be and stop taking advantage of cheap labor.

This gives the US companies the incentive to move back and provide jobs for our people. If the companies all complain about the high tariffs, cut them off cold turkey and see how well they survive with no base to sell to. Then if they fail from their own unchanging and stupidity, another company will pop up to provide the service the way we need it handled.

Then once a majority of the companies are manufacturing back in the US, and everyone has decent jobs and a little extra money, just slightly increase the prices so you have a little bit larger profit margin, and everyone wins.

The Government wins because we now have a bigger, better taxation base both from the companies and the working citizens.

The Companies win, because now folks can actually afford their useless products and they have a happier work base

The Citizen wins, because now they have a decent job and money to buy foolish things with.


Do you know how crazy it sounds to hear that our government shipped our jobs out of country. They cut their ownselves by doing so. The tax base reduced from fewer workers and fewer companies here paying any taxes. Make it to where its PROFITABLE to have the company here and alot of this will go away. It may mean higher prices initially to get readjusted, but more people will have jobs and can afford it after a short time. Sheesh, its not rocket science people, and we should be DEMANDING this solution and holding anyone inhibiting said outcome accountable. They are traitors to our country, themselves, and our all of our great citizens. Screw the folks in China or Mexico or Japan if it means taking care of own. we cant help them if we cant help ourselves.



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 06:29 PM
link   
My wish is all you scumbags feeding off the system making your pathetic excuses would hurry up and die already. Those of us wealthy enough to secure our futures with our own hands rejoice in your destruction. Back at it you serfs



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 07:00 PM
link   

phishfriar47
Real simple solution.

Put tariffs on EVERYTHING imported to make them priced they way they should be and stop taking advantage of cheap labor.

This gives the US companies the incentive to move back and provide jobs for our people. If the companies all complain about the high tariffs, cut them off cold turkey and see how well they survive with no base to sell to. Then if they fail from their own unchanging and stupidity, another company will pop up to provide the service the way we need it handled.

Then once a majority of the companies are manufacturing back in the US, and everyone has decent jobs and a little extra money, just slightly increase the prices so you have a little bit larger profit margin, and everyone wins.

The Government wins because we now have a bigger, better taxation base both from the companies and the working citizens.

The Companies win, because now folks can actually afford their useless products and they have a happier work base

The Citizen wins, because now they have a decent job and money to buy foolish things with.


Do you know how crazy it sounds to hear that our government shipped our jobs out of country. They cut their ownselves by doing so. The tax base reduced from fewer workers and fewer companies here paying any taxes. Make it to where its PROFITABLE to have the company here and alot of this will go away. It may mean higher prices initially to get readjusted, but more people will have jobs and can afford it after a short time. Sheesh, its not rocket science people, and we should be DEMANDING this solution and holding anyone inhibiting said outcome accountable. They are traitors to our country, themselves, and our all of our great citizens. Screw the folks in China or Mexico or Japan if it means taking care of own. we cant help them if we cant help ourselves.

My mother & I were mulling over the idea of fining the living crap out of any US HQ'd company that ships jobs overseas, and that money should go directly into the Unemployment Benefits program. They've got the option of sticking it out in the US to avoid the fine, or sticking it out overseas with the fine. Either way, if let's say, GE or Ford thinks they can build cars cheaper in Mexico to ship back to the US for sale, the difference in cost is made up in combined import tariffs and fines. Ergo, you damn sure aren't saving anything going overseas.



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 07:03 PM
link   

ProfessorChaos
shaneslaughta


Not this president, you can thank nafa and bush for this mess.


NAFTA was Clinton's baby, not Bush's. Just sayin'.
edit on 12/16/2013 by ProfessorChaos because: messed up quote


Just sayin? or just blowing smoke?


Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1986 among the three nations, the leaders met in San Antonio, Texas, on December 17, 1992, to sign NAFTA. U.S. President George H. W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas, each responsible for spearheading and promoting the agreement, ceremonially signed it. The signed agreement then needed to be authorized by each nation's legislative or parliamentary branch.


en.wikipedia.org...

No, Bush Sr started the ball rolling, Clinton kept it rolling, so did Bush jr and Obama. Nafta is the last four administrations baby. That is why all the partisan arguing is futile and ridiculous. The parties have no problem working together when it's the people and the country getting shafted.



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by KawRider9
 


Healthcare is a busine$$

You would be better off tearing out all the amalgam from your mouth and getting a Berkey water purifier.


The snake, guide of the dead and protector of merchants, shepherds, gamblers, liars, and thieves is a DEAD giveaway.



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by pavmas
 


Congress is screwing Americans on this one. It's not Obama's fault we have a congress that is Anti-American because they don't like him. This is just crazy. But you can only get away with this for so long until people snap.



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join