Benefits payments
Comments
-
https://www.nhs.uk/news/pregnancy-and-c ... der-women/
FWIW, my local maternity unit which is all state of the art won't taken on geriatric births; mothers over the age of 35. They have go somewhere else.
From then on the risks of problems start to rise quite quickly.0 -
Missed that boatSlowbike wrote:just get your N+1 sorted before any kids come along .... otherwise your +1 may be a bit smaller than you'd like
Actually, getting the children's first bikes gives plenty of vicarious enjoyment.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
rjsterry wrote:
Missed that boatSlowbike wrote:just get your N+1 sorted before any kids come along .... otherwise your +1 may be a bit smaller than you'd like
Actually, getting the children's first bikes gives plenty of vicarious enjoyment.
I went the other way, had our first when we were both 25 and second at 30 so we get to do the selfish stuff in a couple of years in our late 40s.
It was a struggle in the early years with the first as we were both on poor wages, made possible by a father-in-law retiring and helping a couple of days a week and the wife at the time being a nursery manager so getting a slight discount. For the first 6 months I worked a part-time job on top of my full-time position but then got some extra qualifications and a private sector job paying enough to cover the extra from the part-time role. I'm glad we did it that way around though, it was still actually fairly common in the provinces to have kids in your mid 20s then but we still seemed to be the youngest parents at a lot of kids parties. I wouldn't fancy being in my late 50s with teenage kids, by then I hope to be spending disposable income for a few years before grandparent duties cut in!0 -
Or one subsides businesses paying wages that are too low. If there were no benefits, businesses would have to pay better wages. One of the largest benefits costs is housing. This has massively contributed to the wealth of many landlords. No benefits = lots of homeless people and lots of landlords going into debt and selling houses off.Coopster the 1st wrote:morstar wrote:]
As it is an internet forum and not a court of law I am not beholden to build a file of evidence. I think the sentiment is quite evident in some posts referring to 'my taxes' and spongers, scroungers + whatever other negative words are used to refer to benefits claimants.Ballysmate wrote:morstar wrote:Slowmart wrote:
So carry on blame failures of genetics, events, social or economic barriers. The cream will always rise to the top.
All well and good for the cream! Now what about people who work equally hard but, through either choice or circumstance pursue a path that is low paid.
Why does claiming benefits make them a lesser person?
Haven't gone through all 9 pages but has anyone actually claimed that?
No different to tax planning. If the rules say you're entitled to benefits, you're entitled to them. If you pay tax, it goes into the pot, it's no longer your money.
I'm not for one second saying the benefits system isn't taken advantage of. But so is the tax system. Zero difference. The right manage to ignore one of these issues, the left the other.
Edited to add. You only need to read the first page. Unless you want to know all about Arsenal.
There is a huge difference to 'my taxes' and 'my benefits'.
Simply put, one is what you earn and is taken away from you while the other is given to you out of someone else's earnings.
Wages, taxes, benefits and the cost of living are all interlinked. The government adjusts taxes and benefits in response to wages and the cost of living.
What you pay is just your piece of that puzzle. What somebody receives is also a piece of that puzzle.
Once you've paid, it's not your money and you don't get to choose how it's spent. It's not a perfect system and people abuse it at both ends.0 -
Or, more relevant to the OP, the government has a responsibility to maintain the welfare of the nation and a big part of this is the eradication of childhood poverty. The birth of a first or additional child is shown in studies to be one of the biggest factors in moving households below the poverty line. There is no sound financial case for the state to spend lots of money on children (or on caring for the elderly and infirm) but thats not the point. It's the moral responsibility of a civilised society.0
-
The jealousy bit is a Cake Stop added toppingrjsterry wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
Academic studies are all very well but they are usually done by people who know **** all about how businesses are run in reality. Add a dash of jealousy - et voila!Slowmart wrote:rjsterry wrote:Here's the original study:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.07068
Here's another related study.
http://www.terpconnect.umd.edu/~nesliha ... _Spain.pdf
There are also interesting studies into the relative impact of CEOs input to a business's performance.
https://www.inc.com/will-yakowicz/study ... e-ceo.html
You do realise that a CEO executes the company or group strategy agreed at board level? While some external KPI's such as share price are taken into account this is one data point amongst a diverse target set?
So the likes of CEO's, military leaders, leading academics, senior faith leaders, Premiership managers are all serial lucky people?
ok the last of my examples was tongue in cheek but Napoleon subscribed to your view as he wanted to know if his officers were lucky before promoting them
And look what happened to him, talent against luck....
Keep sticking your fingers in your ears, by all means. I don't see any jealousy in any of those articles. To use one of your favourites, what evidence have you got that luck doesn't have a significant impact? I love the way some people are trying to imply that the only difference between them and the CEO of a major corporation is a couple of lucky breaks. "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
The jealousy bit is a Cake Stop added toppingrjsterry wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
Academic studies are all very well but they are usually done by people who know **** all about how businesses are run in reality. Add a dash of jealousy - et voila!Slowmart wrote:rjsterry wrote:Here's the original study:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.07068
Here's another related study.
http://www.terpconnect.umd.edu/~nesliha ... _Spain.pdf
There are also interesting studies into the relative impact of CEOs input to a business's performance.
https://www.inc.com/will-yakowicz/study ... e-ceo.html
You do realise that a CEO executes the company or group strategy agreed at board level? While some external KPI's such as share price are taken into account this is one data point amongst a diverse target set?
So the likes of CEO's, military leaders, leading academics, senior faith leaders, Premiership managers are all serial lucky people?
ok the last of my examples was tongue in cheek but Napoleon subscribed to your view as he wanted to know if his officers were lucky before promoting them
And look what happened to him, talent against luck....
Keep sticking your fingers in your ears, by all means. I don't see any jealousy in any of those articles. To use one of your favourites, what evidence have you got that luck doesn't have a significant impact? I love the way some people are trying to imply that the only difference between them and the CEO of a major corporation is a couple of lucky breaks.
Not what the articles are saying. Found any evidence to support your view yet? What's your critique of the Harvard Business School study?
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm ... _id=2786521985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
yer - ok ... thanks for that ...Pross wrote:I wouldn't fancy being in my late 50s with teenage kids, by then I hope to be spending disposable income for a few years before grandparent duties cut in!
But then we did all our disposable income living years ago - when things were cheaper 0 -
My view that people are posting to imply that it's luck? I think you need to look at how successful they are compared to those that they think are just lucky for starters.rjsterry wrote:
Not what the articles are saying. Found any evidence to support your view yet? What's your critique of the Harvard Business School study?
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm ... _id=278652
Unfortunately I don't have time to critique your link, I'm too busy making my own 'luck' at work "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
The years between paying for growing up and education to (grand) parenthood are much shorter than might suit your plans. Make them count!Pross wrote:I wouldn't fancy being in my late 50s with teenage kids, by then I hope to be spending disposable income for a few years before grandparent duties cut in! The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
PBlakeney wrote:
The years between paying for growing up and education to (grand) parenthood are much shorter than might suit your plans. Make them count!Pross wrote:I wouldn't fancy being in my late 50s with teenage kids, by then I hope to be spending disposable income for a few years before grandparent duties cut in!
I'm counting on 10 years starting after the eldest graduates next year, she'll be career focused after that. The youngest has no plans for Uni fortunately!0 -
Just the getting them on the house ladder and weddings to contend with then.Pross wrote:PBlakeney wrote:
The years between paying for growing up and education to (grand) parenthood are much shorter than might suit your plans. Make them count!Pross wrote:I wouldn't fancy being in my late 50s with teenage kids, by then I hope to be spending disposable income for a few years before grandparent duties cut in!
I'm counting on 10 years starting after the eldest graduates next year, she'll be career focused after that. The youngest has no plans for Uni fortunately!
Happy days!The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0
