Difference between teenage sex in the 60s and the 80 onwards

Karma

War Hero
Re: Difference between teenage sex in the 60s and the 80 onw

Macro-economics doesn't come down to simple choices. I've made my position clear several times in this thread, reduce the level of state intervention in personal income.

I'd also have an associated reduction in state supported medical services.

Both of those open opportunity for private sector investment.
 
Re: Difference between teenage sex in the 60s and the 80 onw

Karma said:
Macro-economics doesn't come down to simple choices. I've made my position clear several times in this thread, reduce the level of state intervention in personal income.

I'd also have an associated reduction in state supported medical services.

Both of those open opportunity for private sector investment.

Karma --- I don't know who you are but I assume you are working and have a reasonable income and a steady future.
However stop reading books and come out and see for yourself .

Personal income---------its now cast in concrete and has been for years that our social services are one of the biggest money users of them all.
Too long --its steam rollered. Can't be changed. Thats why New Labour are in power----- at the moment there are approximately 52% of the working population employed by the Government--civil servant or council pen pusher /worker.
They all vote Labour--if they didn't they would be on their fat butts. All with protected pensions and union controlled.
As for the non working population---------the minimum wage is a farce
it made the low paid worker poorer --by upping the min wage it brought the previous low paid workers who were recieving benefits into a different situation--ie loss of council rebates etc etc.
Latest from our Gordon is the one band income tax --the lower paid worker loses again!!
So they go on the Job seekers --its better paid .

As for privatisation of the health services ---- well the same people who recieve free treatment will still be getting it ----------ie those on benefits!!
So apart from the fat cats running the hospitals claiming from the government for services rendered the tax man still pays out!!

The incoming europeans are paid at a contracted rate via a local 'labour supply ' operator . The operator gets a nominal sum and the actual worker gets a percentage dependant on hours worked. Most of the workers are tied with paying back the loan they used to get here in the first place.

Wicked world---------- just keep paying the taxes-- :lol: :lol:
 
Re: Difference between teenage sex in the 60s and the 80 onw

Karma said:
Macro-economics doesn't come down to simple choices. I've made my position clear several times in this thread, reduce the level of state intervention in personal income.

I'd also have an associated reduction in state supported medical services.

Both of those open opportunity for private sector investment.

Are you a polititian or something like that, why not just say what you really mean,

Slash income tax and pay for it by canning the NHS letting those who can pay pay and those who can't die.
 

pingbosun

Lantern Swinger
Re: Difference between teenage sex in the 60s and the 80 onw

slim said:
So why are there so many teenage pregnancies?
Were young people's emotions different in the 60s to those in the 80s?
What is the real reason for so many teenage pregnancies?

So the conclusion teenage pregnancies are caused by the welfare state.

G'day Slim.

I don't have the actual figures for down here in OZ, but the government has at last admitted that many teenagers are actually trying to get pregnant to receive the benefits from the social service.Many of them have never had a job since leaving school and don't intend to gat one, by keeping pregnant.

They have in the last couple of year stated that if these girls have any more than two children by different fathers, then they can be made to look for work, as this is one of the reasons that they are becoming pregnant in the first time, they receive a house/flat, money, subsistence help from the Sally Army., or Vinnies and a good weekly pension from the state, it indeed is a sad state of affairs [no pun intended!!] that after being educated at the governments expense, they are then ready for a life time of bludging of the country for the rest of their lives.

pingbosun

ontop-1.jpg
 

CRYSTALTIPS

Lantern Swinger
Re: Difference between teenage sex in the 60s and the 80 onw

Think its cuz people back then had morals and standards unlike today where no one gives a uk!!! Sad but there we go!!!

Also, people were more religious then and had strickter up bringings so anyone breaking these rules and they KNEW about it!!!!

Its just a shame that its only the minority now that has morals and standards and cares about their society.

While the majority are all chavs, knocking kids out as fast as they can as if its going out of fashion. And to gain more money off the welfare state!!!!
Personally I think if youve had 5 kids by the age of 20 you should be steralised cuz quite blatently the woman cant look after her body OR should i say Respect her body!!!!!!!!!
 

Karma

War Hero
Re: Difference between teenage sex in the 60s and the 80 onw

Maxi_77 said:
Slash income tax and pay for it by canning the NHS letting those who can pay pay and those who can't die.

That's not what I've said.

I've said, bring expenditure in the welfare state down to affordable levels.

We need to invest more in infrastruture, but reducing the public sector commitment to personal income and health would free up resource to do that.

And releasing funding in the NHS is a much wider debate, and one that's not really been touched yet.
 
Re: Difference between teenage sex in the 60s and the 80 onw

Karma said:
Maxi_77 said:
Slash income tax and pay for it by canning the NHS letting those who can pay pay and those who can't die.

That's not what I've said.

I've said, bring expenditure in the welfare state down to affordable levels.

We need to invest more in infrastruture, but reducing the public sector commitment to personal income and health would free up resource to do that.

And releasing funding in the NHS is a much wider debate, and one that's not really been touched yet.

Stop talking in politico speak, it is still not clear what you are really proposing, hence my rather blunt comment, you clearly wanted income tax reduced and talked about private resources being used instead of the NHS, to the casual observer that means just what I said, if you mean different then say it plainly.
 

Karma

War Hero
Re: Difference between teenage sex in the 60s and the 80 onw

Maxi_77 said:
Stop talking in politico speak,

The welfare state is unaffordable, I really don't know what's unclear about that.

Current levels of state income, from personal and corporate taxation, are moderate.

What I'm talking about is reducing expenditure on the welfare state, not reducing the taxation load.

And tbh I'm talking about ecopnomics, not politics, although I have alluded to the political implications of addressing the problem once or twice.
 
Re: Difference between teenage sex in the 60s and the 80 onw

Karma said:
Maxi_77 said:
Stop talking in politico speak,

The welfare state is unaffordable, I really don't know what's unclear about that.

Current levels of state income, from personal and corporate taxation, are moderate.

What I'm talking about is reducing expenditure on the welfare state, not reducing the taxation load.

And tbh I'm talking about ecopnomics, not politics, although I have alluded to the political implications of addressing the problem once or twice.

Sorry if I'm being thick but doesn't this mean cut income tax "reduce the level of state intervention in personal income." and doesn't "I'd also have an associated reduction in state supported medical services." mean make the b*rstards pay for it themselves.

Peter
 

Karma

War Hero
Re: Difference between teenage sex in the 60s and the 80 onw

Maxi_77 said:
Sorry if I'm being thick but doesn't this mean cut income tax "reduce the level of state intervention in personal income."

No, it means stop spending as much on giving out cash. Exactly what the thread started with a rant about. I'm just broadening out what Slim was ranting about away from what appears to be a very small and reducing segment of the population.

Notwithstanding that I do recognise that I'm assuming a degree of familiarity with the topic which many probably don't have.

doesn't "I'd also have an associated reduction in state supported medical services." mean make the b*rstards pay for it themselves.

The NHS spends an inordinate amount on increasingly esoteric and expensive treatments. A retrenchment to core services would reduce spending. Yes I would means test for treatments and I would anticipate requiring people to fund many non-core treatments themselves.

The classic example is non-essential cosmetic surgery
 
Well whilst there is perhaps a trifle less jargon and politico speak in that it is still pretty much mumbo jumbo which basically means spend less so we can tax less
 
Top