Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Sentenced:

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

55% OFF new PortraitPro 12 - use code EPHZROS414.
Paul Morgan
Paul Morgan e2 Member 1214395 forum postsPaul Morgan vcard England6 Constructive Critique Points
23 Dec 2012 - 12:13 AM

Who you calling racist, that a bit extreme Col Smile

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
23 Dec 2012 - 12:13 AM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

lemmy
lemmy  61675 forum posts United Kingdom
23 Dec 2012 - 10:38 AM


Quote: Day and night Lemmy, you said day and night, then John came along to back you up, you made the point of explaining you meant this in figurative terms, if that is t6he case then I`ve spent most of my working life working these sort of hours and I bet many others have done so here as well.

Me too. So what? All I said was that the Polish guy was 'working day and night' ie, very long hours that I know from personal experiences many people don't want to do. I don't know what you took exception to in that.

In terms of crime and immigrants, the percentage of crime committed by immigrants is the same as that committed by the indigenous population. However, there is a rise in crime when large numbers of immigrants move in simply on the basis that there are more people.

In other words if 25% of the 100,000 population in Anyville, UK are immigrants then 25% of the crime will be by immigrants. BUT if 10,000 immigrants move in, crime will go up by 10%. That will apply whether the immigrants come from eastern Europe or Bognor Regis.

Before anyone takes exception to this, could they please read it properly!

JackAllTog
JackAllTog e2 Member 53469 forum postsJackAllTog vcard United Kingdom58 Constructive Critique Points
23 Dec 2012 - 11:01 AM

So the fact remains - Leonid, part of a larger network, already on the run from the police in the UK for similar offences.
Must now do just under a month of unpaid work and be a good boy fr 2 years.

On this occasion 9000 people could have lost an average of 460 that's - perhaps a third of a small town potentially losing months of savings to this guy, who has to do 20 days of community service, that is in no way a fair sentence and no surely no deterrent for anyone looking to do the same - and that's the point, the sentence is rubbish.

Last Modified By JackAllTog at 23 Dec 2012 - 11:02 AM
thewilliam
23 Dec 2012 - 2:33 PM

The police and courts seem to be frightened that they might be accused of racism. Maybe that explains the unusually lenient sentence.

Remember when a gang of men from the Rochdale area were running teenage girls as prostitutes and for abuse? It seems that the police initially soft-pedalled because they didn't want to be accused of racism.

marktc
marktc e2 Member 342 forum postsmarktc vcard United Kingdom13 Constructive Critique Points
23 Dec 2012 - 6:14 PM


Quote: If you check the figures you would find the people coming to the UK from Eastern Europe are far more likely to be paying tax etc than UK residents. And as employers will tell you their performance as employees is not too bad on mass either. Of course they will have their elements who are criminals, just as we create home grown criminals but the coming to the UK to take benefit story, well remember, if you earn less than 40kpa its likely you will take more out from the system than you pay in tax over your life.

If they have come to the UK to work they are motivated.

This has been discussed many times, are you certain it is that easy to walk in and claim in the UK.

I EARN LESS THAN 40K SPENT 24 YEARS IN THE RN WORK FOR A BLUE CHIP COMPANY SAVING TWO PENSION AND NEVER CLAIMED A DAYS BENEFIT IN MY LIFE... CHEEKY SOD.

chris.maddock
23 Dec 2012 - 8:40 PM


Quote: I EARN LESS THAN 40K SPENT 24 YEARS IN THE RN WORK FOR A BLUE CHIP COMPANY SAVING TWO PENSION AND NEVER CLAIMED A DAYS BENEFIT IN MY LIFE... CHEEKY SOD.

I think the point that you have missed is that the statement to which you object does not only mean benefits - for example;

Surely you went to school? How do you think that was paid for?
How about a doctor or hospital? Same question applies.
Are you expecting to get a state pension? Same question.
Forces pension? Same question.

The point was that unless one earns over around 40k/pa all the tax/NI you will have paid during your entire working life still won't meet the cost of your education, healthcare, etc., etc. Obviously it's a generalisation since very few people will have started work at 40k and never had a rise.

strawman
strawman  1021991 forum posts United Kingdom16 Constructive Critique Points
24 Dec 2012 - 12:08 AM

What is cheeky with pointing the realities that unless you have paid in past a certain amount there is a fair chance that you will take out more than you get. There is nothing cheeky about that. I have not said anything negative about that. If by RN you mean Royal Navy, then for 24 years you were paid for by tax payers. Nothing wrong with that, it is an honourable profession. But you do have to understand that tax payers have to pay for such roles and all people who are working for tax funded bodies do not add net tax income. For example if you earned 20k and paid 2.5k in taxes the net balance is 17.5K that has to be funded from tax. They are not wealth creation roles. So 24 years in RN will be tax payer funded so yes you have been paid for by all those who have earned money by not being in public service as only those not in public service will have put more tax in than their income takes out. That is not a negative thing or a slur, rather a reality. If I do not knock innocent immigrants then why would I knock you.

My point was the benefits story is more complicated than the story that some members of the press love to dole out about foreigners coming to the UK to live off benefits. I know plenty of people who have come to the UK and contribute to the UK financially and socially, so rather than having a go at immigrants and labelling them all as spongers etc perhaps we ought to recognise that a fair percentage contribute to life in the UK in a positive manner. And we all need to take care how we point at people as taking advantage as some of us may be beneficiaries without realising it. We all need to chip in to pay for armed forces, NHS, Police Fire brigade, pensions, benefits etc. So even if you never had a days benefit (and neither have I in my life having held various jobs since I was 12 and never held less than 1) you have probably been to the doctors, you have had the benefit of the forces, perhaps a school education for kids as well as yourself, you may or you may intend to draw state pension.

There is a fact that people need to grasp about the UK. We as a country are spending more on public spending (be it public services or pensions or benefits etc) that we can support through the raising of taxes. So we either we need to pay more taxes (discuss is it company tax, VAT, income Tax as you will) or spend less on public services. I personally think taxes have to rise and public spending has to cut but sadly the last two governments have not gone far enough so it is going to be even more painful that it needed to be as we put it off, why because national debt is still rising so we are not even re-paying it yet. And one lesson life has taught me, the more you owe the more they jack up interest rates so it gets even harder to pay off. And another problem the UK government have is that pensions are funded by current tax payers, not be investment of past contribution. So as people live longer guess what that rises too. So net issue either pension age goes up or those working in the future get an even bigger tax load. And yes that will give me pain as I will have to work longer or save harder to bridge the gap so I am in that category too. We need to fix this not leave a mess for our poor kids to pick up.

Here is an old study on who pays what % It shows the lowest 50% of the UK income pay 11% of the nations tax. Or put it another way, the top 10% of income people pay over 50% of the UK's tax income loading. So a lot of us are relying on others to pay for what we receive. It is a social question as of course the more you make the more you can afford to give away and I for one would not want to alter that balance, but neither would I want to bite the hand that feeds me. so it is more than fair to say that if you are not in the top 10% of income generators you are probably benefiting from someone else picking up the majority of the tax bill. I know that I do. I will let a real socialist argue about wealth distribution, I just wanted to point out the situation lest we decide to point the finger at people and tell them they are benefiting from the tax/welfare system, it could turn out the majority of us do...

Last Modified By strawman at 24 Dec 2012 - 12:12 AM
Focus_Man
Focus_Man  4481 forum posts United Kingdom631 Constructive Critique Points
24 Dec 2012 - 9:13 AM


Quote: Here is an old study on who pays what % It shows the lowest 50% of the UK income pay 11% of the nations tax. Or put it another way, the top 10% of income people pay over 50% of the UK's tax income loading. So a lot of us are relying on others to pay for what we receive. It is a social question as of course the more you make the more you can afford to give away and I for one would not want to alter that balance, but neither would I want to bite the hand that feeds me. so it is more than fair to say that if you are not in the top 10% of income generators you are probably benefiting from someone else picking up the majority of the tax bill. I know that I do. I will let a real socialist argue about wealth distribution, I just wanted to point out the situation lest we decide to point the finger at people and tell them they are benefiting from the tax/welfare system, it could turn out the majority of us do...

It would of course be easier to bear if we taxpayers (Even pensioners can pay tax still) didn't have to foot the bill for all the waste in the public sector. Maybe then we wouldn't have 10% paying 50% - it might just be 10%! Food for thought - but more likely defensive arguement from public sector.

Happy Christmas

Last Modified By Focus_Man at 24 Dec 2012 - 9:14 AM
lobsterboy
lobsterboy Site Moderator 1013937 forum postslobsterboy vcard United Kingdom13 Constructive Critique Points
24 Dec 2012 - 9:42 AM


Quote: didn't have to foot the bill for all the waste in the public sector. Maybe then we wouldn't have 10% paying 50% - it might just be 10%!

Ahh back to the fantasy world of the tabloid press Tongue

thewilliam
24 Dec 2012 - 10:13 AM


Quote: didn't have to foot the bill for all the waste in the public sector. Maybe then we wouldn't have 10% paying 50% - it might just be 10%!

Trouble is that senior people in the most profligate parts of the public sector are very powerful, determined to keep their jobs and this means that they need to maximise their empires. I'm sure that "Yes, Minister" covered this topic.

Focus_Man
Focus_Man  4481 forum posts United Kingdom631 Constructive Critique Points
24 Dec 2012 - 10:51 AM


Quote: didn't have to foot the bill for all the waste in the public sector. Maybe then we wouldn't have 10% paying 50% - it might just be 10%!

Trouble is that senior people in the most profligate parts of the public sector are very powerful, determined to keep their jobs and this means that they need to maximise their empires. I'm sure that "Yes, Minister" covered this topic.

Exactly, it seems perverse to ask the mandarins to make savings when all they do is make those at the 'coal face' redundant whilst keeping their own jobs.
Here in Wirral may savings have been identified and savings made. We all know from the private sector just how much waste has been eradicated, swathes of middle managers being made redundant and the effect not even noticed as an example. Purchasing initiatives being another. The nasty one was extending payment terms to small businesses who do notice the effect in cash flow. The public sector is the worlds worst at that which is the main cause of higher costs. the supplier having to raise costs to cover the temporary losses. The other thing (and I did this) was to invoice weekly rather than monthly, this removed 21 days from payment terms and reset the balance.
This all goes to show what can be done easily without recourse to the 'fantasy world of the tabloid press'. Some of us were there and know exactly what goes on without ever freading a newspaper.

lobsterboy
lobsterboy Site Moderator 1013937 forum postslobsterboy vcard United Kingdom13 Constructive Critique Points
24 Dec 2012 - 11:14 AM


Quote: This all goes to show what can be done easily

Most public sector organisations have already done most of those actions and will continue to do so as cuts bite yet won't come near to the massive savings you were talking about.

answersonapostcard
answersonapostcard Site Moderator 1012491 forum postsanswersonapostcard vcard United Kingdom15 Constructive Critique Points
24 Dec 2012 - 12:03 PM


Quote: The nasty one was extending payment terms to small businesses who do notice the effect in cash flow. The public sector is the worlds worst at that which is the main cause of higher costs. the supplier having to raise costs to cover the temporary losses.

Never found that, public sector always paid us within 30 days, the private sector and one particular large organisation regularly pays 60 days plus, if they can get away with it 90 days.

Last Modified By Moderator Team at 24 Dec 2012 - 12:10 PM
lemmy
lemmy  61675 forum posts United Kingdom
24 Dec 2012 - 12:45 PM


Quote: the private sector and one particular large organisation regularly pays 60 days plus, if they can get away with it 90 days

Yes, my experience too. In my field of editorial work, picture/ art/ features desk would have a budget. If they had overspent one month, some people's invoices would get 'overlooked' or 'stuck at the back of the drawer'.

"Sorry, old boy, we'll make sure you get it in next month". Sometimes that meant that payment would come four months after doing the assignment. Meantime, I had paid out material costs, transport, processing, air fares sometimes. So even though I was making a hefty amount of money, I was often paying overdraft costs to the bank.

Eventually, I moved more and more to working for German publishers, Das Neue, occasionally Der stern, Frau Im Spiegel and many others and German agencies. Shoot the stuff, ship it out to Germany with your invoice and within two weeks, the money was in your bank account by direct transfer. This at a time when the British were still using cheques. "Isn't signed?". "Sorry old boy, we'll issue another next month."

The Germans I worked with loved England but saw us much as we traditionally see the Italians, emotional and chaotic but with great charm. My experience with British businesses has left me feeling that at heart the British are untrustworthy in business, piratical by nature. They will keep you waiting for money not because they cannot afford to pay you but because they think it's putting one over on you and it makes them feel good.

I'm not saying all businesses are like that, of course, but enough to encourage me to prefer working for Germans and French than British.

cathal
cathal  9492 forum posts Ireland4 Constructive Critique Points
24 Dec 2012 - 3:55 PM

In the first Gulf war in 1991, British and American forces launched 288 Tomahawk cruise missiles were fired at Kuwait and Iraq to destroy Iraqi forces. Each cruise missile costs about 868,000. I've lived in the UK since 1990. If I live the rest of my working life in the UK, I don't think I will pay enough income tax to fully fund one of those missiles. Even if I included all the indirect taxation, it's doubtful that I'd still be able to cover the cost.

Find other examples of tax payers money being spent, regardless of whether you agree with it or not, and equate that to your own tax bill. The pay off some people have received when their own failure has ended their career (Bankers, BBC bosses, etc.) The cost of government inquiries (The Levinson enquiry / Bloody Sunday enquiry / etc.) Governments spend big!

You may prefer to think of your tax paying for the big diagnostic machine the NHS used to save your life. The armed forces, or police, who keep you safe. The entertainment you enjoy on TV or radio...

Unless you are a seriously high roller, your tax bill isn't significant as an individual contribution. It may be significant to you, but in the grand scheme of things... it's a token.

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.