Claudia back on Strictly - fast forward her bits

Usually we record Strictly to be sure we don't miss it. this has the advantage that I can fast-forward thought the Claudia bits.

That woman makes me cringe.

Why does Amanda Platell think she's good? I want to Vote Claudia Off. Zoe and Tess for me. 

Claudia embarrasses herself with her inane antics. Does she thinks she's a Bobby Ball to Tess' Canon?

Either its the BBC humiliating her or if not then I'm right and we can do with out her - its spoiling the show.

But why is it only me that sees this?

Only thing about Tess is that she seems to be talking over the Judges lately. Oh, and I don't really like the additional dancers either, we want to see the Celebrities dance!

Also AP says about Obese people paying for their treatment. Similar to smoking it IS self induced.

EAT LESS! Simple.

I don't understand how these FAT people that are that fat that they can't move about continue to overeat? Surely someone is Feeding them? If you can't move much/at all  how do you shop/cook etc.

Ship them off to Sierra Leone or somewhere  where food is a Luxury. They would be seen as freaks and embarrassed to explain why they are so fat when these folk struggle on a starvation diet.

Its just not right is it?

Why should people get £25k disposable income for nothing? I'd love to have take home pay of £25k to support my wife and I. I'd have to earn over 35k to get that though. Its simple to me - why have Politicians not thought of it - TAX benefits as INCOME just like the rest of us?

That is a level playing field. Why get something for nothing. No argument that "its not worth working I'd be worse off".

 

Putin is great? For us!

Putin is to be feared. We need to be prepared to stand up to him. We need the wake up call. For too long now we've been complacent sitting back and getting fat. We are cutting our armed forces and being weak. So maybe soon Putin  Will test us for real. He is showing us up. No sitting back getting fat for him. Like it or not he is galvanising his country and they Will be a formidable foe both militaryly and economically. We need stomach this. We need the kick up the backside. Suppose there was a war, all our young people would have purpose, no unemployment. Not nice to sacrifice lives but what about the wasted lives, drugs , and idleness make? Living death for many.
We'll see eh?

Childen's education - when should it start?

I agree in one sense the earlier and better we educate our children the better for society.
Its too late when children get to secondary school and they can't read and write properly. This is where the underachieving comes in. They get distracted and won't learn. Yes there are some gifted and dedicated teachers who can tap into these kids and get them motivated to at least learn the basics to function in society. Too often its too little and too late, They disrupt lessons for the others and then get excluded. They end up on the scrap heap unemployed often into drugs and crime.
To me get them early while they are manageable and EDUCATE them, the regards to society will be tenfold.

We'll get a much better progressing society. Politicians go on about social mobility but its not pushing them into the best schools or Universities if they haven't got it then it won't get them anywhere.

The majority should be able to learn the basics. If I'd left school at eleven I'd be Ok in society. I went on to be stretched (in a grammar school) to go to Uni and get a degree. In those days it was the minority and we got a grant. How "socially mobile"is that? No matter what your background or income you get the opportunity to go to uni.

Now its still Money that buys privilege and I mean MONEY. Look at the top politicians all Eton educated.

I agree it should be the parents who teach these things to their tots not schools responsibility but when we've let a couple of generations get away with  it , learning little, they don't know what to do. It IS up to society to educate the children - give it another generation and we'll turn it around.

Look at Asia/China they are doing it now. They educate their children rigorously and now they're the powerhouse of the world, EVERYTHING is Made in China. We don't make much anymore - soon we won't be able to afford. Made in China.

Cashless Society ?

I'd like a Moneyless society like they have in Star Trek. We're not far off.
We have a sizeable underclass who want for nothing and do nothing to earn it. unemployed and people on benefits for life, smoke, drink, wide screen TV and Sky!
Why work?
Couldn't we all have the minimum then reward us differently for effort and worth?

It works for some people doesn't it.

Make the Unemployed do something

2 things here.

1. Why make folk forever - till they drop - when there are folk (younger) who need jobs?
2. People can't be beaten in to getting jobs.

If the long term unemployed genuinely can't get jobs look into why?

1. Help older folk retire and give their job to the unemployed
2. Maybe they need training/educating?

We are told often enough that there is a shortage of skilled people so TRAIN them.

It starts in schools  - too many young folk end up as NEETS. We need to stop this else we end up funding them in a life on the dole.

Set up some training for them. I remember years ago I was unemployed and got on a Manpower Services 30 week course, got paid a reasonable allowance and expenses and trained in Computer Programming. Started a new career and still doing it.

It can be set up with Companies, they train you, they help you look for a job.

I certainly don't agree with a "life on the dole", but more carrots (with strings).

Maybe the MPs could do with more "helpers" - that would save money then they wouldn't have to"employ" their families!

Asserby Wind Farm? Lose £100k off your house value!

Hooray! Another nail in the Coffin of WindFarms. Wind Farms lower house prices!!
WEll maybe this will make the good folks around Asserby wake up! If they are to lose £100k off the value of their house - while the WindFarm makes the Generators rake millions in! Also at last George os Borne "Conspiracy" - says he'll cut the subsidies - OUR MONEY.
The industry was recently dealt a blow by Chancellor George Osborne, who demanded huge cuts in government aid for wind farms.
The Chancellor told the Treasury to draw up plans for a reduction of 25 per cent in subsidies for onshore wind farms.

Next lets have NO VAT on Energy for Domestic use and cut the GREEN TAX.

Also what about the loss of 100 jobs in Skegness? Offically the most deprived seaside town?

A sweet factory is to close with the loss of all jobs - they can move to Leiceter or Czchekoslovakia - nice.

Will they find 100 jobs in skeggy? 

Perhaps if they want to work in an arcade for the summer or a hotel cleaning rooms.

WHat about some of this windFarm money coming to Skeg? There are hundreds off the coast and hundreds morte to be built and dozens planned for the Land.

Who gets the Millions from them - NOT SKEGGY!

RWE will get £36billion over 25 years for their off-shore farm - why can't 10% go to Skeg and ELDC for using our land?

Bedroom Tax? I don't get it.

So surprise surprise the "Bedroom Tax" is driving people to small houses and big ones are remaining empty.

Where are all these families that need big houses? It doesn't seem to affect the likes of Mrs Abu Quatada does it. Still living in her mansion in London at the Taxpayers expense? Move her up North - plenty of big houses here and they're much cheaper.

SO how does it work, is it like the Window Tax? That didn't last did it. 
Why don't people share big houses? I shared a house for 3 years when I was a Student. Ever watched Friends? Don't they share? 

But seriously isn't it a Human Right to have a spare bedroom? Surely that should be the limit 
occupants+1 spare room should be paid for by law.

I agree we can't go on funding endless folk living in bigger and bigger houses on benefits. Any way who said that everyone has a Human right to their own house, even if they have no money or job?

Comments please.

Benefits Cap? too right

Its this "something for nothing" society we are breeding that gets me. What right have people to think that they can "claim" everything in their benefits?

Right, we are a rich society and I believe we must look after the unfortunate, vulnerable and disadvantaged/disabled in our society. This does NOT give everyone the right to have their whole living allowances paid by the benefits system, there has to be a limit.

Mr Miliband is wrong when he says that Benefits must take into account where you live. Yes it is more expensive to live in the South than the North but generally wages are higher in the South. Does that mean benefits must be hoigher in the Southh than the North - well upto a point.

If I chose to move down south I would choose to live somewhere I could afford. If I was on benefits I would expect my benefits to cover my housing costs too? NO. If you do that then effectively the unemployed have a right to FREE housing whatever the cast and their circumstances.

No, No, No.

If you can't afford to live there on your Benefits then move - up North if necessary. Surely its the same being unemployed in Wakefiled as it is in Wandsworth, but houses are cheaper.

Hospital Scandal

It seems to me that cost cutting on the front line is to blame.

Also why do Nurses have to have degrees now? I guess if you've got a degree you think yourself a qualified clinician and not stooping to wipe someone's bum?

Fair enough.

What happened to girls (or boys) wanting to be Nurses because they wanted to care?

They don't need degrees just some intelligence and compassion. They used to go into Nursing at 16 with 3 or 5 "O" levels. What has happened?

WE are told there are thousands of unemployed youngsters. Can't we recruit them to do Nursing, in the old fashioned way. You don't all have to go to University and be a genius .

Young denied jobs because the old won't give up.

So now they're complaining that the Young can't get new jobs but the older workers are hanging on to theirs.

Well can you blame them? Think about it

1. Pensions are down - annuities are down - so you need more income
2. Interest rates are down - so no income there
3. Cameron and co keep telling everyone they'll have to work longer before they get a pension
4. Back to 1, even if you live to retire then your pension will be small so you need to work longer

So all around, if you've got a job better stick to it because you need the money.

I've said before i the 2Cs could understand it, the old could retire gracefully and let the young have the jobs. The money they'll be pouring in to give the young a start could go to REtrining the old, and swapping the jobs with them.

1. Ensure pensions are maintained at a reasonable level
2. Ensure the older people maintain their savings rates at a reasonable level
3. Allow people to retire if they give their job to a young person
4. Older people need less to live on than when they're working.

What about it C&C?

GIVE the unemployed jobs

So Labour want to give the Unemployed jobs? Maybe if they'd looked after the economy better then we would be in such a mess with rising unemployment then there would be enough jobs.

but they want to pay for it using our Pensions again.

The Conservatives are doing better but they still don't get it. We need a society where it pays to work but the vulnerable are looked after. We know there is a pensions crisis. How are they going to solve it - make us keep working into our 70's.

Doesn't this government realise that basically the best way to get the pensions bill down is to encourage folk to save for their pensions, then they won't be dependant on benefits. Make pension fund charges fair and transparent. Guarantee tax relief on contributions, guarantee annuities at retirement.

Benfits should not rise faster than wages

Benefits should not rise faster than wages,  at least that's what IDS thinks.

I agree. Labour put us on this ever increasing spiral of benefits yet we are in this financial crisis and those who work are having to make sacrifices so why should benefits rise automatically?

WE are paying them. I work in local Government and have not had a pay rise for 4 years!! 

We all have to make sacrifices so benefits must be frozen.

All I can say is 

1.  when you lose your job, if you've been paying National Insurance, then you should get a better cushion for a limited period until you get another job. Linked to your previous wages with  cap.
2. where is the incentive for married couples David? 2 can live as cheaply as one.

If there is at least one wage earner in a household let the tax allowances be pooled. This will hep the unemployed.

Rehouse folk on Benefits to the "North"?

Local authorities say sky-high rental costs in the capital, combined with the incoming benefits cap has forced them to send people miles away from home.

So send folk Up North where housing is available and cheap?

What is wrong with this? There are different ways to look at it.

If you've no job, no chance of getting a job what is wrong with living anywhere, there is nothing tying you down. If you're homeless then a house in Newcastle surely is preferable to the street in London - it isn't really paved with gold! 

If the housing is available and no local folk are waiting then I see nothing wrong in this. In fact why not build more houses "up north", it'll boost the economy. Building houses then people on beneits have to ive. They buy food, clothes, kids go to school, use the buses, pubs, etc. etc. 

Now I'd much rather live in a cottage in the country to any city. Give me the Yorkshire Dales, Cotswolds, Norfolk, if some one gave me a house and paid me to live there - I'd be mad not to take it up. So what's wrong?

Look, for example there are 7000+ people on the housing list for East Lindsey and most of those live elsewhere now, Sheffield, Nottingham etc. They don't work either but they want to live in East Lindsey so they like the idea. Its just tere aren't enough houses and who is going to build them? Also there are plenty of local folk waiting for houses but do they get first choice? not always it depends on the rules. Now I don't think that's fair.

Those London Centric folk don't care what goes on North of the M25. So they'l send all their dross away up North to stop them spoiling their neighbourhood. This can't be right but then they had the Olympics in London. Not Manchester or Leeds, but LONDON! SO billions get spent in London - does this help Newcastle? You get my drift.

I LIVE IN THE NORTH! so what is wrong with moving these folk up North? IF, and it is IF they want to move, and IF the homes are available (that is no one local waiting).

More people up North means more investment necessary.

Hamza out! his brood live on state still

Yes at long last we've got rid of Abu Hamza! but I wondered how long it would be before it was realised that we're still supporting his brood at the States expense.

Justice has at last prevailed and the man who claims to detest this country protested fo 8 years that it was unfair to make him leave. All the while his family lived at our expense in a "luxury" home.

I support the Government in its effort to end the "something for nothing culture" - but where these folk are British through and through it does seem crassly unfair that we bend over backwards to support blatant foreign criminals who have come here for shelter and handouts and abuse our hospitality. 

If refugees are convicted of a criminal offence in this country boot them out immediately, and make their families follow them.

I would still rather fund jobless young people born and bred here than criminals. WE need to give them jobs. What about making benefits conditional on doing some community/voluntary work?

It seems crazy that if you're unemployed and "seeking work" you are NOT allowed to help out in you "free" time doing charity work for NOTHING, because you're not "available for work"! Of course you'd stop immediately and attend an interview and get a job.