cycle to work.......... i dont get it!

[Norm]

Both . Depends on your financial status. If you is poor it is less attractive than if you is rich/middle class, a higher rate tax payer, then the scheme becomes good value. If you is unemployed the scheme is irrelevant, probably the group of people who could most benefit from getting a bike, according to right wing Tory Norman Tebbit. The retired can't take advantage of the scheme either which seems a bit rough.

But... but... but... they are called the Cycle To Work regulations. How and why would you expect that to favour unemployed and retired people? The scheme was to reduce commuting congestion and encourage activity in those who may have sedentary occupations.

There are other benefits available to unemployed and retired people which taxpayers cannot get, or should we be supporting a call for pensions and JSA to be available to all?

That's rhetorical, of course, the idea of working people getting Job Seeker's Allowance is as inane, IMO, as the idea of retired people getting a Cycle To Work benefit.

 

[marinyork]

There are other benefits available to unemployed and retired people which taxpayers cannot get, or should we be supporting a call for pensions and JSA to be available to all?

That's rhetorical, of course, the idea of working people getting Job Seeker's Allowance is as inane, IMO, as the idea of retired people getting a Cycle To Work benefit.

Do you never hang around in P&L? The tax credit system approximates what you are talking about. But like C2W would be for the public if they found out about it, tax credits are in incredibly uncomfortable topic for some.

I know you're trying to be awfully clever, but it's actually a completely open question as to whether there should be "pensions"/JSA/tax credits/universal benefits/whatever for all.

 

[Norm]

You denigrate the Cycle To Work regs by suggesting that they should be replaced by a complete overhaul of the UK tax system and suggest that I'm the one 'trying to be awfully clever'.

Would it be more acceptable to you if I were to say Whatever or should I suggest you check the Mirror Of Hypocrisy before attempting your mental masturbations?

 

[marinyork]

You denigrate the Cycle To Work regs by suggesting that they should be replaced by a complete overhaul of the UK tax system and suggest that I'm the one 'trying to be awfully clever'.

Would it be more acceptable to you if I were to say Whatever or should I suggest you check the Mirror Of Hypocrisy before attempting your mental masturbations?

I've posted on this before. They are merely regulations thought up on the cheap as I've said many times before, as you know. Now one might be amused by it or even regard it as devious and a clever implementation on the quiet, but other feelings - well not really. And as for denigrating them, there isn't anything sacred about them. They are regulations, not some actual entity that has feelings or a reputation. If it was to have a reputation if the public found out about it I suspect things would sadly be very different. If there was some other set of regulations in existence people would just get on with dealing with them instead.

It just sounded that you were trying to justify your view of the regulations based on the completely trivial argument that different groups get different things. Amusingly enough it was you that raised the issue of changing the tax system in such a way, for failing to realise that just like with C2W there are a lot of things out there people don't know about.

And it's not a mental masturbation. An open question means exactly what it says on the tin.

 

[Norm]

You denigrate the Cycle To Work regs by suggesting that they should be replaced by a complete overhaul of the UK tax system and suggest that I'm the one 'trying to be awfully clever'.

Would it be more acceptable to you if I were to say Whatever or should I suggest you check the Mirror Of Hypocrisy before attempting your mental masturbations?

I don't have much to add so do please excuse me for not typing it all out again. Especially the whatever thing. And the hypocrisy thing.

 

[marinyork]

I don't have much to add so do please excuse me for not typing it all out again. Especially the whatever thing. And the hypocrisy thing.

I know you don't have much to add having not much to begin with on that particular avenue of thought, that is abundantly clear I'm afraid. I'm afraid it's the old Norm coming back - the very macho, plain speaking and aggressive one .

 

[Norm]

Whilst we can all rest in the knowledge that hypocrisy never rests and never changes, eh?

Still, how does plain speaking (and since when has that been considered an insult) one compare to the 'trying to be awfully clever' one?

Bearing the 'Whatever' one is still very much in evidence when it comes to the value I give your opinion?

 

[Crankarm]

Hey guys, step back, pick up your toys and then step up and shake hands. We are all friends here. We all have valid if different POVs. I stand by mine. I like MY's and I also see Norm's POV. No point taking chunks out of each other for a system over which we have absolutely no influence.

 

[jaynana]

Hey guys, step back, pick up your toys and then step up and shake hands. .

truly golden words, here's all the support for that

suffices to say i guess - we are all now well educated on the strengths and weaknesses of the C2W scheme!

j