Donate SIGN UP
Gravatar

Answers

21 to 40 of 48rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Avatar Image
Gromit, I'm not offended. I just agree with the OP. She's ignorant.
11:13 Thu 05th Aug 2021
Gromit, I'm not offended. I just agree with the OP. She's ignorant.
She quickly apologised and admitted she had ‘fumbled it’.

That is not ignorance.
She misspoke & intended no offence to the Queen - it's no big deal at all.
I've heard of Queen Elizabeth II but who's the other one putting her foot deliberately in her mouth?
In fairness it was an off-the-cuff remark
And by the sound of it an attempt to be self deprecating.
One can’t be offended because that would make one the same as all the people one moans about for taking offence :-)
//That presupposes that if they have less, it will be spent more wisely//

No, no. I don’t assume that at all , Zacs. I assume that however much they are able to access, the government will waste a sizeable proportion of it. In fact, if anything the proportion of waste is likely to be higher because the wasteful spending will continue at the same level, whereas the spending on things that people could do with will be cut due to “lack of funds.” Generally speaking, governments and “spending wisely” do not go hand in hand, so the less they are able to get their mitts on, the less they will have to waste.

//State pensions and State benefits have reduced the occurrence of absolute poverty.//

Possibly. But were they not at such generous levels it could be argued that indolence and dependency might be lower and people’s effort to sustain themselves might bring greater rewards. Who knows? Once the principle of “cradle to grave” dependency became an option the genie was well and truly out of the bottle and will never be returned. With the possible exception of the Covid vaccine rollout, I can’t actually think of too much that the State has done recently that has improved my quality of life significantly.
// ... it could be argued that indolence and dependency might be lower and people’s effort to sustain themselves might bring greater rewards. //

The idea of treating the threat of poverty as an incentive is problematic because, by nature, it would be a real threat. So no, I don't agree with this. No doubt some people are comfortable taking without giving, but the cost of sustaining the lazy is still minute compared to overall State expenditure.

// I can’t actually think of too much that the State has done recently that has improved my quality of life significantly. //

Perhaps not, but the impact of the State is measured by more than just its effect on you personally.
Slip of the tongue I think. She could've phrased it better.
I agree with you, NJ. Handouts don’t encourage the work shy to take responsibility for themselves. Why would they when they don't have to?
It was a joke !!
what is this "joke" of which you speak, anne? We know nothing of such strange beasts south of the border.
Ha ha. Come on jno AB is full of ‘ jokers’ . How did you retain your SOH ?
I am sorry to point out but
shouldnt judges know that the queen doesnt pay tax ?

sort of core knowledge for the job.

HMRC - the letters HM stand for Queen or sumfing ( writing in fluent AB speak)
[whispers] I had to import it illegally from the EUSSR, anne
Jno.... jolly good . :-)
I don't think UK state pension is over-generous & I'm sure the queen has had much worse things said about her than "she doesn't do much".

End of!
The Queen DOES pay tax.
//I am sorry to point out but
shouldnt judges know that the queen doesnt pay tax ?//

They might do if it was true. However, see para 8 of this document:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sovereign-grant-act-2011-guidance/sovereign-grant-act-2011-guidance
Our own dear Queen bless her. Will not be with us for too much longer. Then watch the swamp of admiration, and glorification that will spew from a fickle media.
You don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone....

21 to 40 of 48rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

How Ignorant Can You Get?

Answer Question >>