Really? More than 50% you say? Hmmmmmmm. Anyway, it's not in the slightest bit immoral that some families are net gainers in the tax/benefits system.
Not some, most. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/j...akes-more-in-benefits-than-it-gives-in-taxes/ The state wastes our money, tax me less and let me spend my money on things that would grow the economy instead of funding a huge army/navy/RAF/nuclear arsenal, a huge welfare state and a bloated NHS. £685bn on Welfare etc.!!! FFS!!
If there's hee haw wrong with them, doesn't that fall under the diddling the system category? It's pretty much the same argument - diddling the system equates to the same moral situation as aggressive avoidance. If I completely subvert the argument, do you believe that these people are simply "maximising their income"? I don't - they're taking what they're not entitled to. My mate's wee sister is disabled - she gets a car out of it and isn't on THAT much cos she lives up a ****ty close in a ****ty part of town. She doesn't drive but her family use the car to get her to hospital and the like. She doesn't have the ability to maximise her earnings cos she physically can't work - if the prevailing thought was that people in that situation should be on a par with everyone who is on the breadline, then that isn't fair. She physically cannot "improve herself" by getting a better job - that's not her fault and she shouldn't have to live at the same level as people who COULD do better for themselves but, for whatever reason, stay in their minimum wage job. There's a meritocratic argument there. Your life should not be lived at the lowest level of comfort with no chance of improvement because your disabled. An able bodied person can get promoted or get a new job or a second job and, as such, has the opportunity to improve their life. If these people complain that disabled (genuine) people are getting more than them then I see absolutely no issue with that at all. It would be an absolutely abhorrent society that would insist that disabled people live as the poorest of the poor. If someone is getting DLA when there's nothing wrong with them, then they should be prosecuted. The solution to people cheating the system shouldn't be to punish those that genuinely rely on it
I agree about the military bit that we don't need. The NHS, though, contrary to popular opinion is the second most efficient health service in the developed world (behind Ireland). The least efficient health service in the ENTIRE world is the (entirely private) USA. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/aug/07/nhs-among-most-efficient-health-services
Calm yourself down old man. Both are immoral. People like you just argue for the sake of it. At least I stick to my principles on here. Nah.......its not working is it?
What's not working? I admire a man of staunch, unbending principals, ER. Even if I disagree with you at times, it's people like you that but the "Great" into "Great Britain" God bless you and our beloved Queen Bess.
"A moral system valid for all is basically immoral.” ― Friedrich Nietzsche Morality is in the eye of the beholder ...
You get taxed whether you can afford it or not. Whether it's your wage, your weekly shop, buying fuel, electricity, practically everything. Whether HMRC realise that tax, i.e you pay VAT but that might not get paid to HMRC as the trader could suffer an insolvency event and not be able to pay HMRC, is irrelevant.
