To have zero sympathy for this woman

[wasonthelist]

The tearful woman on BBC Question Time claims to have been a Tory voter. She's reaping what she sows.
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/hame-you-hardworking-mums-tearful-6643284

That should read "no cuts to tax credits"

I do feel sorry for her regarding the public vilification. I've never voted Tory, never would. But it's easy for a lot of people not to look beyond their own circumstances. I also think it must have taken a lot of guts to stand up & say what she did - she must have there would be accusations of the "I'm alright Jack" attitude. Which in her case may have been true. But it doesn't detract from the truth of what she's said.

The government shouldn't be making up people's wages, it should also not allow people to be self employed officially but claim benefits, its dishonest call them unemployed.

The other thing here is that since the 1970's the real value of wages has been falling as the distribution of wealth has changed. The reason we are better off in terms of living standards is that we have been massively benefitted by cheaper goods being produced in the emerging economies across this time.

Since the Thatcher government no one has done anything to address this issue, the fact that the wealth produced by nations ( and facilitated by the provision of their services) has been massively redirected to the wealthy. The average middle class, and looking at mumsnet you're all average and middle class, have been duped into voting this way by been given the crumbs from the table, and whipping up of jealousy and disgust towards individual groups (benefit claimaints, single parents, government employees etc etc).

Tax credits have allowed ordinary people to get by, and have acted as a subsidy on corporate profit througout this time ( as a PP said they have existed in someway since the Heath government and CTCs/higher rate CB were a replacement for being able to claim children as tax dependent).

What we should be doing is demanding that the distrubution of wealth is done in a fairer way, that people are paid a decent wage, for job security, that WORK pays and that it pays for all, not just those who have capital to start with.

Oh god I sound like Karl Marx

Oh and misti please explain why you want to repeal the human rights act?

I think she only voted 'in her head' anyway

Many of those companies making profits though are mostly owned by the pension funds of ordinary people. It is rare rather than the norm that a big UK company is owned by one oligarch.

That should have said "she must have known there would be accusations of the "I'm alright Jack" attitude."

Ha! longtimelurker101. Speak for yourself. I'm certainly not middle class. DH even less so. We both grew up very poor.

Would that be the pension companies that rip off the investors with charges and fees? The ones that in some cases people would have been better off leaving the money under the bed? The pension funds that despite a rampant market over the last few years are paying out low returns, whilst paying massive wages, bonueses and dividends

Oh yes, that'll be them.

Definitely not middle class here! Not even close to it.

TelephoneI ... me too! But If you went to uni or are in any kind of professional role you are classed as middle class now.

Or have a mortgage for that matter..

Many employers although not actually giving employees the hours still want them to be available and basically "on call" in case they change their minds and decide to give them the hours after all. But they dont want to pay them for being "on call" This is down to shit management as well as paying workers less and needs to stop.

I couldn't stand Maggie Thatcher but at least she was from the sort of background i.e. lower middle class market town that an awful lot of us could understand, and she did have a feel for how a lot of people lived and thought. Cameron and Osborne and Boris Johnson, (although his star seems to have waned), are rich boys who don't understand how large numbers of people live and don't want to either.

Yes, if they took tax credits away but insisted that employers paid a realistic minimum wage, and made efforts to create work in workless areas, with non of this zero hours rubbish, then it would be more acceptable.

longtimelurker um what gave you the idea I wanted to? It was just an example of an election promise that the Tories haven't kept, but they didn't actually tell outright porkies about. In contrast with tax credits where they blithely lied through their teeth.

Was it a blatant lie? He didn't want to cut tax credits, but sadly (weeping, violins playing) the mess that the nasty Labour government made meant that he had to, (and we will gloss over your 5 years in government chum.) Let's hope it's a George Bush 'read my lips, no new taxes' type statement, which went on to hurt him electorally.

what actually was reported which is open to differing interpretations
fullfact.org/factcheck/economy/child_tax_credit_cut_promise-46421

That link proves he never promised that at all and the left are lying, as ever.

He's a sneaky fucker. He said he wouldn't cut child benefit, which he's not doing (yet), and he said he didn't want to cut tax credits. While I think he was blatantly lying with that last point, and already knew exactly what they were going to do, it's hard to prove he was actually lying. I hope this blows up in his smug, shiny face, I really do.

"The Prime Minister did seem to rule out cuts to tax credits before the election, but the government suggests he may have meant to refer to child benefit. If so, it’s clear a lot of listeners would have got the wrong idea based on what was actually said."

Direct quoute from the link, it means he said one thing, or implied something, but has done something different. Its Orwellian use of language, full on doublethink.

Iain Duncan Dickrot wanted to cut the child benefit or restrict it to two children, I can't remember which but he was stopped by pig shagger Cameron who said it will stay.

If I could afford to place a bet I would put Money on Child Benefit being done away with.

Only the very wealthy think these cuts are a good thing as it won't have any affect on them. Well aren't you the lucky ones!

sorry but im repeating this from earlier

hold on a set of nails will cost anything from £25-£35 and in fills will be £16-20

a full set will take approx 1 hr and in-fills 45 mins,she is working from home so im sure she is claiming expenses (electric,water etc) no costly rent either to pay and she is not making a profit

she is either terrible at business or not being honest

if she is not making a profit she really should work for someone else,though i doubt that will happen as i think there is alot more to this

i think she has made a big mistake going public as her whole life will be under the microscope now

seriously how can she not be making a profit????

seriously how can she not be making a profit????

I imagine that she is not doing all that much business. If so, she needs to find a way to drum up more trade.

University does not make you middle class now that pretty much everyone goes to uni. I finished uni in May and will be doing my pgce next year. I did get a full time 16k a year job, but there is a reeeally long story with DP's student finance and etc etc I had to quit the job and am now unemployed with a young DD. Even when I get a nmw job, I won't be eligible for the living wage because I'm only 21... but I'll still lose over £1500 in tax credits.

If this is what middle class is these days, it's pretty much the same thing as being working class. I know a lot of actual middle class people, and their lives are a million miles away from mine. Maybe in a few years when we're both teachers, sure - but going to uni doesn't make you middle class these days.

Why should those without kids subsidise those who do have them?