• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Cash in hand.......morally wrong?

On what basis do you think they claim benefits too other than your obvious snobbynish towards tradesmen?

Where did I mention tradesmen? I'm talking about anyone who does the majority of their work cash in hand. My sisters ex boyfriend (long time ago now) used to do work at the local market three times a week and still claimed jobseekers allowance.
 
If the state thinks you aren't working or earning below certain thresholds you get these benefits. Why would you tell them you don't deserve them? Enecdotally everyone knows the practice is completely rife. What's the M1 measure now? Most if the cash in circulation is subject to the black economy IMO. Because cards are so ubiquitous and becoming ever more so.
 
I suppose you have to say yes it is morally wrong, but there are different levels.

Jimmy Carr avoided millions in tax, how much is a gardener avoiding ? If Carr had been less greedy he wouldnt have been criticised that much (plenty of people avoid some).

Tax avoidance generally is a rich issue, if you are not rich you obviously aren't avoiding that much so there is no point going after them. No different to anything else in life, you punch someone once its not that bad, you do it 50 times and its a major crime. Its obviously wrong to punch someone once but its not as bad as 50. Same rule applies here.
 
I suppose you have to say yes it is morally wrong, but there are different levels.

Jimmy Carr avoided millions in tax, how much is a gardener avoiding ? If Carr had been less greedy he wouldnt have been criticised that much (plenty of people avoid some).

Tax avoidance generally is a rich issue, if you are not rich you obviously aren't avoiding that much so there is no point going after them. No different to anything else in life, you punch someone once its not that bad, you do it 50 times and its a major crime. Its obviously wrong to punch someone once but its not as bad as 50. Same rule applies here.

This demonstrates that it isn't a rich issue.

It costs billions in lost revenue.

Lower earners paying no tax is worse than richer people paying less tax, IMO.
 
I suppose you have to say yes it is morally wrong, but there are different levels.

Jimmy Carr avoided millions in tax, how much is a gardener avoiding ? If Carr had been less greedy he wouldnt have been criticised that much (plenty of people avoid some).

Tax avoidance generally is a rich issue, if you are not rich you obviously aren't avoiding that much so there is no point going after them. No different to anything else in life, you punch someone once its not that bad, you do it 50 times and its a major crime. Its obviously wrong to punch someone once but its not as bad as 50. Same rule applies here.

I would counter that argument by saying just because a small number of people rob banks for millions, it doesn't mean it's acceptable for many people to steal a couple quid from your local shops
 
Are you working class?

I'm not judging just can't get my head around someone sending their kids to a private school!

The results ain't much better tan a good state school. If you're bright you'll get on. We can't afford private tuition but just couldn't to it to my kid.

That's a tough one to answer.

I was certainly born into a working class home, but nobody meeting me would ever guess that. I speak with a regionless accent without glottal stopping, I work as an accountant, I went to university, I spend good chunks of my spare time in proper restaurants (where I use cutlery correctly) or at the theatre, etc. I suspect one of the few things that would betray my upbringing would be that I lack the sense of entitlement many of those born in the better classes have instilled in them.

So what's the measure of one's class? The upbringing or the current lifestyle/behaviour? Whilst my class may be harder to define, that of my children will (barring a disaster) be be middle or upper-middle.

I can understand the pride most people have of their class background, but unless there's the possibility of transition across classes then what's the point in a class system? If there's no opportunity to better oneself then we may as well not bother mentioning class at all.

As for private schooling, those of my friends who went to good private schools are all in very good jobs with resonably successful academic backgrounds (edit: One of them's a slacker that fcuked off to Australia to doss but he was beyond helping even at 12), those who went to state schools are a mixture. I realise that this is skewed by the fact that I grew up near Portsmouth which is pretty much the worst educational distric in the country, but it also has one of the country's best private schools and those who go there almost invariably succeed.

I understand your point about how determined and able kids will succeed at any school, but I don't want to take that risk - I started off determined and able but finished school stoned and able. The route this led to meant an ex-poly uni education rather than the Oxbridge one that I should have had.

Much will obviously depend on the schools in your area - there's only one really good school in Chichester and it's a religious one. Unless the school are happy with me telling my child that when they start talking about Jesus stuff it's just story time like Harry Potter or Narnia then my child won't be going there. In which case the only options are:
a: Move to Winchester for the nearest really good state school
b: Pay for my child to go to Portsmouth Grammar

Despite seeming expensive, b is the cheaper overall option with far less upheaval for the whole family.
 
That's a tough one to answer.

I was certainly born into a working class home, but nobody meeting me would ever guess that. I speak with a regionless accent without glottal stopping, I work as an accountant, I went to university, I spend good chunks of my spare time in proper restaurants (where I use cutlery correctly) or at the theatre, etc. I suspect one of the few things that would betray my upbringing would be that I lack the sense of entitlement many of those born in the better classes have instilled in them.

So what's the measure of one's class? The upbringing or the current lifestyle/behaviour? Whilst my class may be harder to define, that of my children will (barring a disaster) be be middle or upper-middle.

I can understand the pride most people have of their class background, but unless there's the possibility of transition across classes then what's the point in a class system? If there's no opportunity to better oneself then we may as well not bother mentioning class at all.

As for private schooling, those of my friends who went to good private schools are all in very good jobs with resonably successful academic backgrounds (edit: One of them's a slacker that fcuked off to Australia to doss but he was beyond helping even at 12), those who went to state schools are a mixture. I realise that this is skewed by the fact that I grew up near Portsmouth which is pretty much the worst educational distric in the country, but it also has one of the country's best private schools and those who go there almost invariably succeed.

I understand your point about how determined and able kids will succeed at any school, but I don't want to take that risk - I started off determined and able but finished school stoned and able. The route this led to meant an ex-poly uni education rather than the Oxbridge one that I should have had.

Much will obviously depend on the schools in your area - there's only one really good school in Chichester and it's a religious one. Unless the school are happy with me telling my child that when they start talking about Jesus stuff it's just story time like Harry Potter or Narnia then my child won't be going there. In which case the only options are:
a: Move to Winchester for the nearest really good state school
b: Pay for my child to go to Portsmouth Grammar

Despite seeming expensive, b is the cheaper overall option with far less upheaval for the whole family.

I think you stay what you are born, it's a mindset.

I am underclass.......my dad fudged off and my Mum never worked, hardly working class!!

By earnings, education level, etc I’m middle class apparently....but I’ll always be a council estate boy in my head. I love 5 star hotels and nice restaurants......but I think I enjoy them more than others as I know it's not a right but a privilege.

I've said many times this sends you one of two ways, either you wallow in self-pity and use the bum cards dealt you in life to validate failure. Or you use it is inspiration to attain a better life for yourself.

I went to an ex-Poly....and I’m proud of the fact I did. Oxbridge takes kids from states schools as well......a private education means nothing and will probably give your kid the same self of self-entitlement that I actually despise in posh qunts.

So what if the decent school is CoE........just tell the kid it's all gonad*s and play along.

13 years of private schools will cost what? £80-250k? I'd rather spend the money on quality holidays and family time.
 
I think you stay what you are born, it's a mindset.

I am underclass.......my dad fudged off and my Mum never worked, hardly working class!!

By earnings, education level, etc I’m middle class apparently....but I’ll always be a council estate boy in my head. I love 5 star hotels and nice restaurants......but I think I enjoy them more than others as I know it's not a right but a privilege.

Same here; but I always find a local shop to stock up the minibar :-$
 
Mini cab drivers are just as bad (potentially)

They could be non stop yet only declare 1/4 of their actual work.
 
Back