(V): that is 15 months old and times change.

got any current stuff?

In an interview singer James Blunt recalled how in 1999 he was ordered to attack 200 Russian troops (who had captured a politically important airfield first) by an American general.... The word "destroy" was used in the command. Thankfully he was saved from a court martial offence by telling the general "no" by a British general who stated his troops were not going to start WWIII.

He commanded them to just encircle them.. soon the Russians asked them if they had any spare water and food in exchange for sharing the airfield.

A president without vanity is like a wagon without wheels. Any 'moron' knows that.

In a recent edition of "Have I got news for you" a discussion came up over the use of torture by the USA after 9/11...

A distinguished guest commentated "It doesn't work"..... quoting examples from various previous incidents by the UK in such as Northern Ireland he stated "the information is so unreliable, they will say what they think you want to hear for it to stop."

On the subject of Global Warming, one of the biggest CO2 generators in the world are pets. The industry involved in making the pet food means one dog is the equivalent to 2 normal cars per year.

... yet one of the best most ecological insulators to use in the construction of houses is straw.

...... If you are selling a house in the USA do not say it's haunted. Such a statement is likely to reduce the price of your house by a third.

Strange world!!

Übergeek 바둑이: CHINA....next world leader....

Artful Dodger:

> We have a serious problem when the leader of the free world carries no weight.

The question is: what would Sarah Palin (or another Republican) do? Can Republicans do better on international trade, and if so, how?

Or is this symptomatic of a long term trend in the World economy? Has the United States "run its course" and now finds itself in the unavoidable decline of its power? After all, all empires (even unwilling ones like the US) eventually come to an end.

Lone parents in employment
Rate at 56.3%

Lone Parent Poverty
Lone parents under the age of 25 account for just one in eight of all young adults in poverty and just a fifth all the lone parents in poverty. The stereotypical image of a lone parent in poverty as a young, teenage mum, is quite wrong. Rather, most lone parents in poverty are aged 25 or over and there are as many over 40 as under 25.5

Among children in poverty in 2005/06, half live in working families and half in workless ones. Three-fifths live in couple families while two-fifths live with a lone parent. Clearly, many families are now headed by a lone parent and millions of children live in a one parent family. However, the negative portrait of lone parenthood painted in the press and media is based on the fiction rather than the facts around being a lone parent. Nevertheless, lone parents need specific types of support in order to ensure that they do not experience exclusion from
employment and training opportunities. Support for lone parents is also key to the Government’s pledge to cut child poverty.

...less likely to live in an area of low deprivation (20% of mothers in couple families lived in an area in the least deprived quantile of the deprivation index compared with just 2% of lone mothers who did not live with other adults).....

Lone parents now enter employment at the same rate as comparable groups; the real challenge lies in their ability to maintain jobs. Research suggests that if lone parents’ job retention rate could be raised to that of other groups, the Westminster Government’s target for 70 per cent of lone parents to be in employment by 2010 could be met without further increasing job entry rates.

http://www.opfs.org.uk/files/one-parent-families_a-profile_2009.pdf


*excerpts taken from the above 7 page document.. which includes links to the stats they base their figures on.

............... you wanted figures ...............

Bernice: ... More millionaires are becoming millionaires outside the USA these days than in the USA. You can say 1% of the USA population holds 24% of the wealth, but worldwide that figure is 40%

Artful Dodger: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1207241.stm

It's a report nearly 10 YEARS OLD.

what did you say about old WHO facts..

Since then... we've had 10 YEARS of changes including hikes in the minimum wage, tax credits, more support for crèches and flexi jobs either allowing single parents to work in parallel to school hours (schools operating breakfast clubs for those needing to goto work earlier) and of course... as with one person I know.

... The ability thanks to the internet of people to work from home.

.......... I thought you were not talking to me, or was that just a pout?

Artful Dodger: I pointed out he was wrong but he said he was still right LOL.....hahahahahaha

Bernice: .. That it maybe.. but I was quoting from memory world figures.. I forgot a "0" though.. it's 10% owning about 90%.

1% it seems own 40% of the worlds wealth... .... ....

GTCharlie: I did...LOL...and loving it hahahahaha.....

Bernice: Thats the group you want to marry into, I tried but missed

1% of the population get to earn 24% of the wealth is the correct figures, as I posted below.

Benefits system overhaul 'to make work pay'

The biggest welfare shake-up since the 1940s will make going out to work pay and see benefit cuts for those who refuse to take jobs, ministers say.

Work Secretary Iain Duncan Smith plans to bring in a single Universal Credit to replace work-related benefits.

Claimants moving into work will keep more of their income than now, but face losing benefits if they refuse a job.

Labour said it backed moves to make work pay but warned about the possible lack of available jobs.

The new system will mostly be administered through the internet, with people expected to make claims online and check their payments like they would an online bank account - even though an estimated 1.5 million unemployed people do not currently have internet access, according to government figures. The DWP says a "minority" of cases will still be dealt with face-to-face.

Unveiling his white paper on welfare reform in the Commons, Mr Duncan Smith said the current system was hugely complex and costly to administer, vulnerable to fraud, and deterred people from finding a job or extending their hours.
'Real time'

Mr Duncan Smith, who campaigned for root-and-branch welfare reform while in opposition, said millions of people had become "trapped" on benefits and long-term unemployment had become entrenched in communities where generations of families had not worked for years.

There will be tougher penalties for people fit to work but unwilling to do so. A sliding scale of sanctions will see those refusing work on three occasions having their benefits taken away for three months. Those repeatedly convicted of benefit fraud could have their benefits stopped for three years.

Mr Duncan Smith insists no one will experience a reduction in the benefit money they receive as a result of the introduction of the Universal Credit.

Universal Credit claimants will receive a basic personal amount with additional sums for disability, caring costs, housing costs and children, with single people and couples getting different rates and, as now, the under 25s receiving less. Unlike now, people will not have to claim separately for different benefits.

**BBC website**

Artful Dodger: Mmmmm You seem to forget that being a single parent means that you have a job already.. Being a parent. But that single significant FACT OF LIFE seems to have been lost.. maybe a dud bit somewhere.

Also that only 1% of the whole population gets to earn 99% of the wealth.. so all millionaires/billionaires are an exception.

.. If a single mum raising 1 or more children gets a job it means she has two jobs. While a married man (or woman) doing a 9 to 5 only has one job, some may have a disabled child which makes the ability to work even harder.. that is a fact of life.

Picking on single parents seems a bit of a fallacy, rather sexist and outdated. If (as you think is right) education gets privatised all it'll do is create an even greater poverty trap as good education gets to be a privilege rather than a right.

http://www.mumsrock.com/articles/the-mag/interviews/leila-wilcox-mumpreneur-millionaire

She’s a youthful 28 but Leila Wilcox is something of an old-timer when it comes to business. Hailed as one of the original mumpreneurs, she combined single motherhood to Troy - now 5 - and getting her brain-child off the ground. With Ivan Massow as a mentor she won Channel 4’s Make Me A Million in 2005 with Halos n Horns chemical-free children’s toiletries. Leila is already on to her third venture, with a seat on many entrepreneurial panels and awards after her name. She talks to MumsRock about her latest business start-up:

http://www.tmspp.org/

The Mobile Single Parent's Project

Here at The Mobile Single Parent's Project our view of single mothers & fathers is a positive one. As we view you as an individual and one can not be determined upon marital status. Instead we focus upon inspiring you to attain your goals, in the attempt to raise society's perception of single parents.

TMSPP encourage you to dream, because dreaming is where the magic begins....

The Millionaire Bootcamp For Women 26th, 27th & 28th November 2010 in London:

The Speakers

GILL FIELDING

Star of ‘Secret Millionaire’ and ‘The Apprentice – You’re Fired’ used to play in the gutter and left school at 16 with just two CSEs.

RACHEL ELNAUGH

Is the former 'Dragons Den' entrepreneur and mother of five who built up a business turning over £100 million in the 16 years she ran it.

CAROLINE MARSH

Grew up in poverty in Zambia... but went on to become a property expert and star in TV’s ‘Secret Millionaire’.
TRACY REPCHUK increased her income to 6 figures in just 6 months... despite having no contacts and no idea what she was doing.

The first multi-millionaire that was featured on The View this morning was a single mom who was broke and desperate. She was ringing out her mop one afternoon and was annoyed because her hands kept getting wet and filthy. She invested a mere $250 dollars and created her own self-ringing "Miracle Mop" prototype. She sold the mops at trade shows and eventually was featured on QVC where she sold 20 thousand mops in 20 minutes. Since creating the Miracle Mop, she has invented numerous other "problem solving products" and has sold over 20 billion of them on the Home Shopping Network.

Oprah interviewed another millionaire mom who invented "Jibbitz". If you are a mother of a school-aged child or teenager, I am sure you are familiar with Croc shoes. (They are the lightweight, rubbery clogs with all of the little air holes). This stay-at-home mom of three young girls was working on a craft activity when one of her girls stuck a silk flower in the hole of her Croc shoe. They thought it was cute, so they started making more Croc decorations out of buttons, rhinestones and other items. When all was said and done, this mother-daughter craft project turned into a business worth millions.

How many times have you had a brilliant idea but not followed through with it? Have you ever used a product and thought, "if only it looked like this, or worked like this...". We all have, haven't we?

We all need to remember the stories of these "millionaire moms" the next time we think of an invention or business idea
and decide to shrug it off as impossible. These moms were not wealthy and they had absolutely no clue what they were getting into when they started their money-making adventures. They were simply determined, enthusiastic...and often simply desperate to make it work.

They don't call moms "domestic engineers" for nothing!

http://home-business.families.com/blog/millionaire-moms-on-oprah

Artful Dodger: Quite frankly, much of the UK would consider the American right wing "rational" thought process as illogical and irrational. Especially as it is based on 'tradition' and political bias.

Artful Dodger: now if I have of said that it would have been deleted by now lOL

"If the world were a logical place, men would ride side saddle."

- Rita Mae Brown

Artful Dodger: If logic is your God... when are you moving to Vulcan?

Artful Dodger:Like you were right about France!!

Here is some reading material for you. As Lord Sugar said, being a good entrepreneur is something you are born with, not something money can buy.

This is the type of speech that your grandkids look back on with pride, clearly Harper is less shy than Obama in standing his ground.........the speech picks up steam about halfway through

http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/media_gallery.asp?media_category_id=2&media_id=6856

Let's say that a church (Christian, for example) decides to give charity to poor people somewhere, say Afghanistan. Then they send missionaries to convert the locals to Chistianity. Is it acceptable to give help on the understanding that those being helped by the church will convert to the Christianity?

Now, let's say that a Moslem organization decides to help homeless people somewhere closer to home, let's say Detroit. Then that Moslem organization sends their Imam among the homeless to try to convert them to Islam. Is it acceptable to give help on the understanding that those being helped will covert to Islam?

Does religion have a place in charity when those being helped are expected to convert?

I say it because in many develkoping countries aid organizations work that way. "We will help you, but only if you come to our church." What if the religion was other than Christianity? Would it be acceptable?

Are there poor people who abuse the welfare system to get money? For sure.

Just as there are bankers who abuse the financial system to get rich. (I recall a certain former president bailing out banks as his last act in the presidency.)

Just as there are politicians who abuse donations and lobbying to fatten their pockets with money. (I recall a certain vicepresidential hopeful getting thousands of dollars in clothing and travel expenses. Let alone congressmen and senators having their palms greased by lobbyists.)

Just as there are businessmen who abuse the government "outsourcing" system to ensure their companies get lucrative contracts. (I recall a certain vicepresident ensuring that Hali-something got overpaid in Iraq.)

As long as there is easy moeny to be made, there will be people who abuse some system or another. It is all a matter of scale. A poor devil on welfare takes thousands, a rich devil in office takes millions, an even richer devil in business takes billions.

Artful Dodger: Absolute rubbish. Some surveys were done on self made millionaires a time back, more came from those who came from an impoverished background then those who came from normal/rich backgrounds.

Artful Dodger: You know, I TOTALLY agree with what you say, especially when you say : " Only the most needy and unable to work would get a lifetime of help. Others would only get temporary help and then they would be charged for paying back the government ". I don't imagine myself to ask something and I work since the end of my studies (I had to pay myself) and I've always paid taxes for others !
But it's perhaps (we read it, I don't know if it's true !?), to avoid that these persons have illegal jobs, and they don't steal (or less).

Artful Dodger: Yes, there's assistance for people who have incomes lower than 460 Euros for a single, 690 Euros for a couple, and this increases with children : example : 828 Euros for a couple with a child (under 18 years old) : it's the RSA.
But all the incomes of the family are in this amount. Example : a couple and the man earns 490 Euros, so they will receive 200 Euros but not 690 Euros.
For people who don't work (except if they are very ill), they have to look for a job and to prove it, a insertion contract is signed, and they have a personal adviser. Every 3 months, the situation of the person is studied.
People under 26 years old can't have this assistance except if they are alone with children.
Do you have the same in your country ?

Artful Dodger: To receive the " green " card (for 75 %), you have to work about 6 months minimum, and for the other (for 25 %), you receive it as soon as you have paid your contribution.

Artful Dodger: I'm not payed back, because I don't pay : I've 2 cards (one for the 75 % and the other for the 25 %) that I give and the pharmacist puts the cards in a device and then he receives money.

Übergeek 바둑이: I totally agree with what you said : the 2 systems are necessary.
And, as you said, in every case, we have to pay : either a tax or a contribution to a private company.

Artful Dodger: I'll go ahead and take that statement at face value...How will poor kids receive education in a system where education is privatized?

What is so great about American healthcare? We pay more by a bighugegiant amount than everyone else, and our life expectancy is 49th in the world.

Bernice, did you also Google efficiency of health insurance companies? People here are dying because health insurance companies think they know better than doctors what is best for a patient. It's tragic. For-profit health insurance corporations have their own best interest in mind, not anyone else's.

(V): OK :)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/jul/31/healthcare-barack-obama-nhs-childbirth

Cleaning up US healthcare's mess
I know first-hand the difference between healthcare in the US and UK. My experience shows why the profit motive isn't healthy

Bernice: As one greatly respected news presenter said. "good news does not make good news".

And when things do go wrong, at least (unlike in the USA) it can't be brushed under the carpet.

(V): can you tell us why then when we "google" NHS competancy/efficiency etc there is nothing but bad news....or is it different on your computer?

Artful Dodger: really!! You have proof of this?

And yes.. believe it or not we have A&E as well.. also 24/7 GP services. And also there is not a single medical need that I've not had covered.. with NO having to pay 1000's of $ before the tab is picked up by an insurance company.

As for privatisation of the NHS..... they tendered out the prep of surgery kits to private sector companies. What a joke that was. Essential operations had to be cancelled as the kits were wrong, incomplete or not upto standard regarding sterilisation.

The private companies put profit first above quality control.

Artful Dodger: And if the government backs out of certain areas (such as education) ..... how much more paperwork and administration costs do you think you'll have to pay for.

N' from what Rod has said regarding what you get for your $ in terms of healthcare...

... it's pretty crap compared to our NHS system. Plus.. one point. Even if you have a private health insurance plan here in the UK, you can still use the NHS GP's...

.. just you have to declare you have a private health scheme so the cost of the GP visit is charged to your scheme.

Übergeek 바둑이: over here the bludgers on the Govt. assistance get everything for nothing, but must pay $5.40 per script for medication. The working man/woman pays a total of 3% of their total earnings , but must pay full price for scripts, some of which are exorbitant prices. You can have private health care if you pay for it but it doesn't cover everything. If you have served your country in any way militarily in combatitive service you get a gold card which entitles you to EVERYTHING.
Retirees get all medications for $5.40 and can choose whether they go public which is free or private, which is paid for by themselves,

Lets see if this post is left here, as my last 2 posts have dissapeared for some reason..

Mélusine:

> My government pays nothing : every month a part is taken from my wage.

This is true everywhere. Here in Canada most essential medical services are "free" meaning that the government "pays" for them. In reality it is tax dollars that pays for the services. I pay income tax every month, and that tax pays for everything that the government does.

If people have private health insurance, ultimately it is really the same thing. People pay either taxes, or a private company. The difference is in who makes a profit. If one pays private companies to cover healthcare costs, those companies operate by making a profit. If one pays the government, the government operates without making a profit.

Different countries range from purely private healthcare systems to systems run completely by the government. In reality both systems are needed. Countries where the government has little or no involvement in the healthcare system are usually the worst to live in in the world. Those where the government (tax dollars) pays for everything often have problems with very high costs and high taxation rates.

No system is purely capitalist or purely socialist. Much of it has to do with preception. What to one person looks like socialism, to another looks like capitalism.

Bwild: My government pays nothing : every month a part is taken from my wage. All the salaried employees have to pay every month, even they are ill or not. And if you don't work, so don't contribute, you have no insurance at all (not 75 % and not 25 %). Children are with their parents under 18 years old. After, they have to pay a part, even they work or not, so you see, actually, I have to pay for my son 18 years old who is student at the University.

Mélusine: so your government pays 75% and you pay 25%,unless you have supplemental insurance?

Artful Dodger: I've forgotten to answer to this question.
Not exactly. The general rate for paying back is 75 % for a visit to the Doctor. If you don't want to pay the 25 %, you have to suscribe a private insurance you pay every month. Most of people do that. Anyway, you always pay 1 Euro in a visit, it's an obligation, with insurance or not.
But in reality, it's more complcated : all the medecine aren"t payed back at the same level : some at 20 %, others at 40 %, other at 75 %. And it's the same for the Doctors who are " specialist ", according to the category they belong. It's the reason why people pay a private insurance in order to get 100 %.
And if you decide to go and see a " specialist " and that your " general " Doctor doesn't agree, you won't be payed back at all.
When you go to hospital, it's the same, but if someone has no money for paying, he's sure to get a treatment.

Artful Dodger: The tax care depends on the product (or the service charge) sold. It's more important for luxury products.
And income tax depends on your wage and the number of your children (children when they can't provide for themselves and under 20 years old), tax about the house depends where you live (a big city or not for example).
And don't speak about tax on petrol !

And for you ?

Artful Dodger: When you say it like that, it's better. But political men say that but don't really do it. Here, there will be always some help for people who have difficulties, even the government isn't socialist (as actually).
And don't believe the decrease in the statutory working hours (we spoke about before) was only for the salaried employees. Many companies have made this to their advantage : for example, a member of my family doesn't works 35 h/week but 30 h when the
production is low and 40 h when it's high, and no possibility of vacation during this period.