1 in 5 children is living below the poverty line in every part of Wales ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

I suppose it is, but you know as well as me that people say 'How much for cash' i always say that it's the same, they can pay however they want, but there is no discount based on cash as they're inferring that you're going to commit fraud. **** em', i'd rather not work for people like that, wanting you to be bent before a brick is laid.

---

I only have one price, i used to get about 75% cash from my domestic customers, i bet its down to under 25% since C19

Though i would often ( as i always had a fair bit of cash in the house ) if i was having work done ask for a " cash price " if it was cheaper then great, , it was not upto me to make the moral call if the person / company were declaring it, I have recently had a gas engineer move a gas pipe when i fitted a new hob, £100 was the price or £65 for cash, will he declare the 30 mins work ? ? ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blue matt

I only have one price, i used to get about 75% cash from my domestic customers, i bet its down to under 25% since C19

Though i would often ( as i always had a fair bit of cash in the house ) if i was having work done ask for a " cash price " if it was cheaper then great, , it was not upto me to make the moral call if the person / company were declaring it, I have recently had a gas engineer move a gas pipe when i fitted a new hob, £100 was the price or £65 for cash, will he declare the 30 mins work ? ? ?

---

Then in my opinion, you're indirectly encouraging them not to declare. Personally, i think that is wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

Then in my opinion, you're indirectly encouraging them not to declare. Personally, i think that is wrong.

---

fair enough :thumbup: i would have paid him cash anyway ( as i have cash ) so I could have paid him £100 and he still might not have declared it, If he was that way inclined, i could have paid via a BT and he could still not have declared it ( the amount of " online banks " mean its not that hard to do )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

Levels of child poverty rose in nearly every council area in Wales in the past five years, a new study has found, prompting charities to warn that low-income families' finances are being pushed to the brink.

At least one in every five children is living below the poverty line in every part of Wales, and the nation now has the worst child poverty rate of all the UK nations, according to research by Loughborough University for the UK End Child Poverty Coalition of charities.

https://www.thenational.wales/news/1...ales/?ref=ebln

---

Sad times but some parents don't help the situation either. There are to many four and five child families where the parents have never worked a day. Then there are some single mums who have have never worked having children they can't really afford.
As a kid i had two friends who wern't clothed properly and had bugger all but the parents continued to have more kids knowing the ones they had already had nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blue matt

fair enough :thumbup: i would have paid him cash anyway ( as i have cash ) so I could have paid him £100 and he still might not have declared it, If he was that way inclined, i could have paid via a BT and he could still not have declared it ( the amount of " online banks " mean its not that hard to do )

---

Yup, but what you're asking for when you say 'is there a cash price' is knock off the revenue or VAT. That's your shout and that of the tradesperson working for you. :thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

Yup, but what you're asking for when you say 'is there a cash price' is knock off the revenue or VAT. That's your shout and that of the tradesperson working for you. :thumbup:

---

If someone offers work cheaper for cash in hand then that's what i'll do and bollocks to the whiter than white do gooders on here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stan butler

If someone offers work cheaper for cash in hand then that's what i'll do and bollocks to the whiter than white do gooders on here

---

Fair enough but no different to those who manipulate the benefit system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hilts

Fair enough but no different to those who manipulate the benefit system.

---

Indeed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hilts

Fair enough but no different to those who manipulate the benefit system.

---

talking of the gas engineer i mentioned or the General builder, it is slightly different

doesnt pay tax on some earnings ( though will of course pay tax on most of it, at least £30 K of it )

cheats the system to live for life for free

Slightly different imho

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hilts

Fair enough but no different to those who manipulate the benefit system.

---

big difference.

some are not declaring tax on part of income they have earned, whereas others are claiming benefits that they are not entitled to.

in the former case, the taxpayer has worked, albeit isn't paying as much tax as he should. In the latter case, the recipient of benefits is swinging the lead, and can't even be arsed to work.

in one case an individual wants to keep more of what he has earned and in another case they want something for nothing without lifting a finger. you simply cannot equate the two

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feedback

big difference.

some are not declaring tax on part of income they have earned, whereas others are claiming benefits that they are not entitled to.

in the former case, the taxpayer has worked, albeit isn't paying as much tax as he should. In the latter case, the recipient of benefits is swinging the lead, and can't even be arsed to work.

in one case an individual wants to keep more of what he has earned and in another case they want something for nothing without lifting a finger. you simply cannot equate the two

---

I am only dipping into this thread but the comparison above was a trade charging less because they aren't going to pay tax Vs somebody who manipulates the benefit system by having kids so they don't need to work. The latter aren't 'claiming benefits they aren't entitled to'.

One is tax evasion and the other is simply a moral issue not a legal one. It is a bit worrying that you seem so laissez-faire with tax evasion considering what you do for a living (or maybe it is just expected...).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feedback

big difference.

some are not declaring tax on part of income they have earned, whereas others are claiming benefits that they are not entitled to.

in the former case, the taxpayer has worked, albeit isn't paying as much tax as he should. In the latter case, the recipient of benefits is swinging the lead, and can't even be arsed to work.

in one case an individual wants to keep more of what he has earned and in another case they want something for nothing without lifting a finger. you simply cannot equate the two

---

So if a woman has two kids and gets a housing association flat .......it really isn't as easy as that and gets child benefit you are not OK with that but you are OK with a rich bloke not being charged 1000 quid on top of the cash price for his extension?

Its either immoral or it isn't

Stop being a shithouse ff sake

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

So if a woman has two kids and gets a housing association flat .......it really isn't as easy as that and gets child benefit you are not OK with that but you are OK with a rich bloke not being charged 1000 quid on top of the cash price for his extension?

Its either immoral or it isn't

Stop being a shithouse ff sake

---

if she is entitled to child benefit that is perfectly fine, I'm totally ok with that. that is not what was being discussed though.

in the VAT and income tax/NI element is £1k, this must be the worlds smallest rich man extension.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feedback

if she is entitled to child benefit that is perfectly fine, I'm totally ok with that. that is not what was being discussed though.

in the VAT and income tax/NI element is £1k, this must be the worlds smallest rich man extension.

---

Feedback is back :hehe::hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feedback

if she is entitled to child benefit that is perfectly fine, I'm totally ok with that. that is not what was being discussed though.

---

Yes it was

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

Because the posh git knows that if the builder is taking the cash and not declaring it which is why he offers the builder the option in the first place

If we ever become a cashless society a heck of a lot of people with wonga who pay cash to cleaners , gardeners and jobbing builders are going to be stuck

For the black economy to work it takes two to tango

---

Very hard to spend decent amounts of cash these days.

Big brother is watching you and what you spend on your debit card.

Cash is a nuisance for me , when people offer to pay by cash I generally say no thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

Yes it was

---

no it wasn't. I would suggest you re-read the thread because it was claimed much further up that there are people who abuse the benefits system, taking benefits they are not entitled to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feedback

big difference.

some are not declaring tax on part of income they have earned, whereas others are claiming benefits that they are not entitled to.

in the former case, the taxpayer has worked, albeit isn't paying as much tax as he should. In the latter case, the recipient of benefits is swinging the lead, and can't even be arsed to work.

in one case an individual wants to keep more of what he has earned and in another case they want something for nothing without lifting a finger. you simply cannot equate the two

---

Of course you can equate the two. They both deprive the taxpayer of funds. Unfortunately you appear to live in a world where depriving public services of funds through tax evasion is an entirely acceptable thing to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

I am only dipping into this thread but the comparison above was a trade charging less because they aren't going to pay tax Vs somebody who manipulates the benefit system by having kids so they don't need to work. The latter aren't 'claiming benefits they aren't entitled to'.

---

there are more benefits than just child benefit - housing benefit is one that immediately springs to mind

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

One is tax evasion and the other is simply a moral issue not a legal one. It is a bit worrying that you seem so laissez-faire with tax evasion considering what you do for a living (or maybe it is just expected...).

---

droll, you're going to have to try a lot harder to get a rise out of me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

Of course you can equate the two. They both deprive the taxpayer of funds. Unfortunately you appear to live in a world where depriving public services of funds through tax evasion is an entirely acceptable thing to do.

---

This is going to be good....how did you arrive at that conclusion?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feedback

This is going to be good....how did you arrive at that conclusion?

---

So, for the avoidance of all doubt, are you or are you not ok with any worker who decides to pull any fiddle to lower their tax bill?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

So, for the avoidance of all doubt, are you or are you not ok with any worker who decides to pull any fiddle to lower their tax bill?

---

He's okay with ejaculating over unsuspecting people in nightclubs so its hard to imagine that would cross a line.

Anyways back on track guess what ' 1 in 5 children are living below the poverty line in every part of Wales now how did that happen ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

Anyways back on track guess what ' 1 in 5 children are living below the poverty line in every part of Wales now how did that happen ?

---

Er no, it's just like you to focus only on poverty in one place when there is poverty everywhere, you must have some sort of agenda or bias.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

So, for the avoidance of all doubt, are you or are you not ok with any worker who decides to pull any fiddle to lower their tax bill?

---

I am very firmly of the opinion that an individual has an obligation to pay the taxes that the law says is due.