If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Are you talking about vibrators from the other thread or...? :-P
If you are talking about not caring about vibrators, I think it's an unusual thing to not care about (hence the :-P)
If you mean you don't care about what things 'men' don't like.. I don't think that's particularly unusual is it? I'm not really sure on your angle.
Though then again, I don't have a problem with vibrators but am a man. I don't know what that says about me.
Women have worked fucking hard to get some equality, it's still not all there, so if you are intimidated, take your man vagina and pack it with sand somewhere the fuck else.
</militant feminism>
good.
Great stuff!
[Mock Rage]I'm Glad We Agree[/Mock Rage] :grump:Old Mad
I was actually thinking that today. I loathe the man. I want him gone. But the fact he isn't, in a kind of twisted way, is the best endorsement of our justice system for a long time. That, in spite of being one of the most despised men in the country with the full weight of the government against him, our legal system will not buckle.
He shouldn't be deported for saying bad things. He should be extradited to face trial if his human rights are not infringed.
That's not to say I wouldn't kick him repeatedly in the kidneys if I met the fucker though.
That! It's the whole evidence gained through torture could be used in a case against him. We either accept torture or we don't, there is no middle ground.
Also, I'm intimidated by dildos. If any of you had been subjected to my fevered, ill co-ordinated pin-pricking you'd know why.
Huzzah for our legal system, and also for living in a country where he hasn't just been "knocked off"
Fact is all of us will have to pay pension contributions and that's fine. But people who are retiring now, who didn't pay into a pension, are basically getting a big bump up to the same level. My HR manager has paid serps all her life for nothing now. That could have been a mortgage on a buy to let.
Obviously she will be retired soon and get her pension, that she has actually paid in for. But everyone she ever worked with who didn't put anything away is going to get the same pension paid for by the younger generations instead.
The reason it's 'ok' though is because pensioners are untouchable politically, whereas youngsters are irrelevant in our current democracy.
That's never going to happen, nor should it, there are people who don't earn enough to pay into a private pension scheme. But, it's not absurd to suggest getting your state pension later in life, if you can live to 90 why should you retire at 65? Neither is it absurd to start looking seriously at cuts to pensioner benefits when cuts are being made so drastically against other vulnerable areas of society, like the disabled.
Essentially, whether or not you worried about your pension for the last 40 years or just bought 5 buy to let properties... The government has your back. This will be paid for by increases in contributions from current workers.
The big flaw of course is that this new model will eventually be unaffordable. So we will pay in the higher pension contributions but the system will collapse by the time we are of pension age.
Doesn't seem fair to me that we are subsidising them when they had a whole working life to build up an adequate pension.
Www.if.org.uk has some more information if you're interested.
I think that pensions and cold weather payments should be means-tested. It's obscene that millionaires get state pensions and can't give it back to the state. Ester ransen spoke a few months back on newsnight about it and she said that hers goes straight to charity as she doesn't need it. But not all rich people are that benevolent.
I thought it was the military
DWP is three times the MoD spend, IIRC.
There's a theory of ageing called the activity theory, which believes being active keeps people healthier and alive longer and personally i believe if people are given a more open choice about working rather than such a guided one it could effect them in a positive, as i know many older people who have told me it was only after they finished working and because more socially secluded that they started to get ill and mentally deteriorate. Because although at some point i do believe all people (except the rare cases) will follow the disengagement theory because inevitable health deterioration and begin to prepare for death. But i also believe when people are retired and made to feel like this have to leave a job it may speed up the process somewhat.
That is my personal opinion anyway, the idea of pensions mean tests made me think of it
I feel ambivalent towards the issue in general. A strong and healthy welfare state is of paramount importance to a strong and healthy society - platitudinous I know. However, as with most things, it's a double-edged sword. It's also a topic that produces some of the most unhelpful and lazy rhetoric, especially toward people who believe inefficiencies can be found - wheelchair users being forced down t'pit, springs to mind.
The choice is between spending more and getting more, or spending less and getting less. I don't think anyone would choose spending more to get less.
I support means testing to a degree, but it is very easy to evade it. I have found through personal experience, those who are 'savvy' get a large benefit, those who are desperate and not savvy get caught out. It actually makes the system work in reverse.
A universal benefit or income would be my eventual solution, as it makes it completely transparent, is fair to everyone and removes the social stigma.
The pensions issue is a peculiar one because pensions are increasing, regardless of your previous contributions, which is being paid for by cuts that affect younger people more (family benefits etc.)
I don't think that's fair really. Increases in pensions should be funded by increases in property taxes. LVT ideally.
I must misunderstand you here, dude. It sounds like you're trying to tell me you think that the DWP is a well-oiled, fine-tuned, low tolerance machine that's humming along in an efficient and streamlined manner? You can't be telling me that. Anyone who's come into contact with the public sector know it's the most bloated, lumbering and inefficient machine man's ever created. About 50% of my friends work in the public sector and to a man they've all got stories of inefficiencies that would make your eyes water.