A slag
06 February 2014, 09:20 PM
#121
Back on topic.. it does stand out that some would rather the DM hadn't published this story. The heifer in the story might be an isolated case or might be one of thousands. Who knows? But why the censorship?
I'm reminded of Thatcher and her idea of no rights unless you fulfil your obligations. Having 8 kids whilst on the dole is just taking the p1ss of course. But some seem to think its a non-issue and want the story censored. Why?
I'm reminded of Thatcher and her idea of no rights unless you fulfil your obligations. Having 8 kids whilst on the dole is just taking the p1ss of course. But some seem to think its a non-issue and want the story censored. Why?
06 February 2014, 10:21 PM
#122
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back on topic.. it does stand out that some would rather the DM hadn't published this story. The heifer in the story might be an isolated case or might be one of thousands. Who knows? But why the censorship?
I'm reminded of Thatcher and her idea of no rights unless you fulfil your obligations. Having 8 kids whilst on the dole is just taking the p1ss of course. But some seem to think its a non-issue and want the story censored. Why?
I'm reminded of Thatcher and her idea of no rights unless you fulfil your obligations. Having 8 kids whilst on the dole is just taking the p1ss of course. But some seem to think its a non-issue and want the story censored. Why?
No matter which way you cut it people like her are a tiny tiny percentage of the populatation. Doing some maths there are 7.7 miillion families in the UK, just under 1 in 7 have more than 3 kids so that's 1 million roughly. Of those with more than three kids 9 out of 10 were working fmaillies so that's 100,000 with 3 kids or more not working.
Families with 4 kids were about 32% of those with 3 or more and families of 5 were about 10% and families of 6 about 4% .... after which the figures are so small they aren't published so even being generous families with 8 kids must be less than 1% meaning that is less than 1000 people with 8 kids not working.
Out of a population of 65 million. that is 0.00155%.
Or even if each of them are on £2000 per month benefits out of a total welfare spend of £202bn per annum that's 0.001%! That is why it is a non-story compared to the likes of education, the NHS, the wider issues of the benefits system or HS2 the budget for which is nearly 20 million times more than this woman gets in benefits a year!
06 February 2014, 10:56 PM
#123
It's not a case of rather they wouldn't publish it, but more a case of rather they wouldn't put so much emphasis on the trivial rather than the more serious matters at hand.
No matter which way you cut it people like her are a tiny tiny percentage of the populatation. Doing some maths there are 7.7 miillion families in the UK, just under 1 in 7 have more than 3 kids so that's 1 million roughly. Of those with more than three kids 9 out of 10 were working fmaillies so that's 100,000 with 3 kids or more not working.
Families with 4 kids were about 32% of those with 3 or more and families of 5 were about 10% and families of 6 about 4% .... after which the figures are so small they aren't published so even being generous families with 8 kids must be less than 1% meaning that is less than 1000 people with 8 kids not working.
Out of a population of 65 million. that is 0.00155%.
Or even if each of them are on £2000 per month benefits out of a total welfare spend of £202bn per annum that's 0.001%! That is why it is a non-story compared to the likes of education, the NHS, the wider issues of the benefits system or HS2 the budget for which is nearly 20 million times more than this woman gets in benefits a year!
No matter which way you cut it people like her are a tiny tiny percentage of the populatation. Doing some maths there are 7.7 miillion families in the UK, just under 1 in 7 have more than 3 kids so that's 1 million roughly. Of those with more than three kids 9 out of 10 were working fmaillies so that's 100,000 with 3 kids or more not working.
Families with 4 kids were about 32% of those with 3 or more and families of 5 were about 10% and families of 6 about 4% .... after which the figures are so small they aren't published so even being generous families with 8 kids must be less than 1% meaning that is less than 1000 people with 8 kids not working.
Out of a population of 65 million. that is 0.00155%.
Or even if each of them are on £2000 per month benefits out of a total welfare spend of £202bn per annum that's 0.001%! That is why it is a non-story compared to the likes of education, the NHS, the wider issues of the benefits system or HS2 the budget for which is nearly 20 million times more than this woman gets in benefits a year!
As for the "nine out of ten working families of more than 3 children" statistic (don't really care where you got it from), do you not think extrapolating with significantly larger families will skew? Do you believe that only 10% of families with eight children receive benefits? Do you think the welfare system discourages larger families in some way? Less money, smaller house, that sort of thing?
It is easy for us of comfortable station in life to insulate ourselves from the sometimes perverse incentives of the social welfare system. We are well off enough not to begrudge the money and we can live where we like.
Spare a thought for the little man, who works for much less than we earn and who lives cheek by jowl with people who are basically "having a laugh".
06 February 2014, 11:05 PM
#124
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you believe this family only costs "society" £2000 a month? I'm not so sure. You mention education and the NHS in your post. Fair enough if we get the product at the end of the day, but surely only the most optimistic of Bollinger Bosheviks would see a positive outcome for this family in the long run.
As for the "nine out of ten working families of more than 3 children" statistic (don't really care where you got it from), do you not think extrapolating with significantly larger families will skew? Do you believe that only 10% of families with eight children receive benefits? Do you think the welfare system discourages larger families in some way? Less money, smaller house, that sort of thing?
It is easy for us of comfortable station in life to insulate ourselves from the sometimes perverse incentives of the social welfare system. We are well off enough not to begrudge the money and we can live where we like.
Spare a thought for the little man, who works for much less than we earn and who lives cheek by jowl with people who are basically "having a laugh".
As for the "nine out of ten working families of more than 3 children" statistic (don't really care where you got it from), do you not think extrapolating with significantly larger families will skew? Do you believe that only 10% of families with eight children receive benefits? Do you think the welfare system discourages larger families in some way? Less money, smaller house, that sort of thing?
It is easy for us of comfortable station in life to insulate ourselves from the sometimes perverse incentives of the social welfare system. We are well off enough not to begrudge the money and we can live where we like.
Spare a thought for the little man, who works for much less than we earn and who lives cheek by jowl with people who are basically "having a laugh".
) it is still only 0.0155%. My post is based on what figures I can find and assumes they are correct (although most are from the census so should be), but is at least an attempt to appraoch this factually whereas your argument is based on supposition with a little bit of bitterness and bigotry thrown in frankly!No, I'm not especially impressed that she can knock out 8 kids and my taxes are paying for that, but then again I'm not that impressed with child benefit full stop. Why should I pay for people to sprog working or not? If you can't afford them keep it in your pants!
But leaving all that aside I come back once again to the point that nearly everyone reads but ignores as it does not suit their agenda (one that, ironically, has generally been installed by the media) ... and that is that the suibject matter is small fry.
Take HS2 for example - pledging £47bn while half of Somerset is under water and gets £100 million only after Cameron was embarrassed into making a payment! Surely we should sort out are exisitng infrastructure before wasting money on some pipe dream? That to me is a much bigger issue as are many others!
Last edited by f1_fan; 06 February 2014 at 11:06 PM.
07 February 2014, 10:21 PM
#125
Scooby Regular
It's throwing its toys out of the pram and hurling the usual insults around 
Look I don't buy this rubbish about you having your identity cloned. It may have happened, but it is not the reason you don't want your original username revealed.
More like you don't want to be found out for the hypocrisy between your posts as your new username and your original!
I wouldn't have cared less if a few months ago you hadn't responded with your usual venom to me criticising the UK for being lawless by calling me this and that and the next thing for criticising your great nation. The annoying thing to me was that you did so from your high horse while under your old username are a myriad of posts about making your house more secure including the gem 'I want to turn my house into a fortress'. Now why would you want to do that if you thought all was just wonderful with UK law and order?
I have no problem with being insulted or argued against, just not by a complete hypocrite!
As for calling people things like girly boy, the constant anti-gay jibes, the casual misogyny and criticising people for things such as having cats, as I have said before, you really need to grow up.
It staggers me that someone of your personality could be a doctor and I can only hope you are a lot different in real life! .. whichever identity that may be this week
Now I have tried ignoring you, but you make a point of making jibe after jibe on any thread you can. I know it's a sport for you and that is fine, but if you see sense and just do what you would do in real life with someone you don't like and don't engage then I will do likewise. Sadly I know you are not adult enough to manage that so I guess that leaves us here.
Sad for everyone else in NSR, but then you always do come across like you think you're a bit above most other people so I guess you don't really care about that!
Look I don't buy this rubbish about you having your identity cloned. It may have happened, but it is not the reason you don't want your original username revealed.
More like you don't want to be found out for the hypocrisy between your posts as your new username and your original!
I wouldn't have cared less if a few months ago you hadn't responded with your usual venom to me criticising the UK for being lawless by calling me this and that and the next thing for criticising your great nation. The annoying thing to me was that you did so from your high horse while under your old username are a myriad of posts about making your house more secure including the gem 'I want to turn my house into a fortress'. Now why would you want to do that if you thought all was just wonderful with UK law and order?
I have no problem with being insulted or argued against, just not by a complete hypocrite!
As for calling people things like girly boy, the constant anti-gay jibes, the casual misogyny and criticising people for things such as having cats, as I have said before, you really need to grow up.
It staggers me that someone of your personality could be a doctor and I can only hope you are a lot different in real life! .. whichever identity that may be this week
Now I have tried ignoring you, but you make a point of making jibe after jibe on any thread you can. I know it's a sport for you and that is fine, but if you see sense and just do what you would do in real life with someone you don't like and don't engage then I will do likewise. Sadly I know you are not adult enough to manage that so I guess that leaves us here.
Sad for everyone else in NSR, but then you always do come across like you think you're a bit above most other people so I guess you don't really care about that!
You do live in your own little world don't you? It doesn't matter how many times you mention the word hypocrite or misogynist or anti gay it doesn't make me any of those things.
Do I criticize you for calling the UK lawless? Absolutely yes because it is NOT lawless. However does that mean crime does not occur or I don't lock my door and have a burglar alarm? Of course not, only a one dimensional personality like you would think that the two things are mutually exclusive.
However, most sane, balanced individuals would realise that relatively speaking the UK is one of the safest places to live in the world.
And my previous comment stands. If you feel the world is so bad that you wouldn't want to bring children into it then it begs the question; why are you still here?
Is it purely out of loyalty to your cats?
Btw, don't bother replying I'm not interested. Comprendez?
Listen, keep out of my way and you get your wish, mouth off again and you don't! The choice is yours! Comprendez?
07 February 2014, 11:09 PM
#126
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You do live in your own little world don't you? It doesn't matter how many times you mention the word hypocrite or misogynist or anti gay it doesn't make me any of those things.
Do I criticize you for calling the UK lawless? Absolutely yes because it is NOT lawless. However does that mean crime does not occur or I don't lock my door and have a burglar alarm? Of course not, only a one dimensional personality like you would think that the two things are mutually exclusive.
However, most sane, balanced individuals would realise that relatively speaking the UK is one of the safest places to live in the world.
And my previous comment stands. If you feel the world is so bad that you wouldn't want to bring children into it then it begs the question; why are you still here?
Is it purely out of loyalty to your cats?
Btw, don't bother replying I'm not interested. Comprendez?
Listen, keep out of my way and you get your wish, mouth off again and you don't! The choice is yours! Comprendez?
Do I criticize you for calling the UK lawless? Absolutely yes because it is NOT lawless. However does that mean crime does not occur or I don't lock my door and have a burglar alarm? Of course not, only a one dimensional personality like you would think that the two things are mutually exclusive.
However, most sane, balanced individuals would realise that relatively speaking the UK is one of the safest places to live in the world.
And my previous comment stands. If you feel the world is so bad that you wouldn't want to bring children into it then it begs the question; why are you still here?
Is it purely out of loyalty to your cats?
Btw, don't bother replying I'm not interested. Comprendez?
Listen, keep out of my way and you get your wish, mouth off again and you don't! The choice is yours! Comprendez?
I can just see you shouting at your screen and pounding your fists on the desk like an enraged baboon that's just had its food stolen The real laugh is I only posted about your alter ego after your simpering PM in the hope it would p1ss you off as you need taking down a peg or two with your constant childish snipes at me. Thing is I really didn't think it would be this easy, I'm quite disappointed in you actually... you're no match for me!
My work here is done! Next!
08 February 2014, 01:07 AM
#128
the point people are to scared to post is this in simple terms,
dress this up however the hell you like, but passengers breed passengers,
posh breed posh, rich breed posh, working class breed working class, and don't often mix, so that woman has now bred 8 more passengers who will rely on the state for thier whole live's, i am working hard every month for £72 quid more than i would get sat at home on my ****, and had to think long and hard how many kid's we could afford, the only reason we have 3 is because i have no mortgage to speak of as i inherited mum n dads house, worked long and hard for by my father, i hardly saw him untill about age 10 because he worked so many hours. her on the other hand was born to passengers and has bred 8 passengers and has been given a large house paid for by us daft ****'s paying tax, DO SOME OF YOU LOT ON HERE ACTUALLY THINK THAT IS OK,
i live in a small place and know of 5 families of passengers with 4 or more children, 3 are single mum's 1 of which is my sister inlaw.
it's not now that it's hurting the tax payer just think that woman's 8 pair up with another 8 and have 5 each that's 40 passenger family's in about 16 -20 years THAT'S WHEN IT WILL HURT THE TAXPAYER BIG TIME
dress this up however the hell you like, but passengers breed passengers,
posh breed posh, rich breed posh, working class breed working class, and don't often mix, so that woman has now bred 8 more passengers who will rely on the state for thier whole live's, i am working hard every month for £72 quid more than i would get sat at home on my ****, and had to think long and hard how many kid's we could afford, the only reason we have 3 is because i have no mortgage to speak of as i inherited mum n dads house, worked long and hard for by my father, i hardly saw him untill about age 10 because he worked so many hours. her on the other hand was born to passengers and has bred 8 passengers and has been given a large house paid for by us daft ****'s paying tax, DO SOME OF YOU LOT ON HERE ACTUALLY THINK THAT IS OK,
i live in a small place and know of 5 families of passengers with 4 or more children, 3 are single mum's 1 of which is my sister inlaw.
it's not now that it's hurting the tax payer just think that woman's 8 pair up with another 8 and have 5 each that's 40 passenger family's in about 16 -20 years THAT'S WHEN IT WILL HURT THE TAXPAYER BIG TIME
08 February 2014, 01:16 AM
#129
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Epsom
Posts: 5,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well you didn't try very hard, we have an ignore feature here...
The problem with this story is not that its in the Daily Mail, sure they like to feature this type of story, but are not allowed to make things up, the problem is one of "fairness". Most people in this country are fairly happy to let other people live there lives the way they want to. The issue with this is that the woman expects the state to give her handouts as she busily procreates more and more children who statistically will have poorer and poorer life chances as they grow up. Its plain selfishness on her part that sticks in peoples throats, the wilful "taking the p1ss" element that people simply aren't prepared to accept.
A quick thought experiment. Would this woman have 8 children if there was a cap on benefits for the first 2 kids only, all other factors the same? My theory is "No", as I suspect the majority of people would also go with. The benefit system as it stands gives, as a previous poster has already said, perverse incentives. In this respect she is behaving perfectly rationally. The issue therefore is substantial reform of the benefits system, either the US or Swiss models where its time limited, more capping like Universal credit, or maybe more tied to contribution. It is simply unable to continue as it is, both for social and financial reasons, the country can't afford it
The problem with this story is not that its in the Daily Mail, sure they like to feature this type of story, but are not allowed to make things up, the problem is one of "fairness". Most people in this country are fairly happy to let other people live there lives the way they want to. The issue with this is that the woman expects the state to give her handouts as she busily procreates more and more children who statistically will have poorer and poorer life chances as they grow up. Its plain selfishness on her part that sticks in peoples throats, the wilful "taking the p1ss" element that people simply aren't prepared to accept.
A quick thought experiment. Would this woman have 8 children if there was a cap on benefits for the first 2 kids only, all other factors the same? My theory is "No", as I suspect the majority of people would also go with. The benefit system as it stands gives, as a previous poster has already said, perverse incentives. In this respect she is behaving perfectly rationally. The issue therefore is substantial reform of the benefits system, either the US or Swiss models where its time limited, more capping like Universal credit, or maybe more tied to contribution. It is simply unable to continue as it is, both for social and financial reasons, the country can't afford it
Last edited by warrenm2; 08 February 2014 at 01:17 AM.
08 February 2014, 01:48 AM
#130
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cas Vegas
Posts: 60,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's propaganda, diverting attention from the people who are truly bleeding this country. Tax evasion, bankers not held to account and the Old Boy Network are far more legitimate targets.
08 February 2014, 08:04 AM
#131
the point people are to scared to post is this in simple terms,
dress this up however the hell you like, but passengers breed passengers,
posh breed posh, rich breed posh, working class breed working class, and don't often mix, so that woman has now bred 8 more passengers who will rely on the state for thier whole live's, i am working hard every month for £72 quid more than i would get sat at home on my ****, and had to think long and hard how many kid's we could afford, the only reason we have 3 is because i have no mortgage to speak of as i inherited mum n dads house, worked long and hard for by my father, i hardly saw him untill about age 10 because he worked so many hours. her on the other hand was born to passengers and has bred 8 passengers and has been given a large house paid for by us daft ****'s paying tax, DO SOME OF YOU LOT ON HERE ACTUALLY THINK THAT IS OK,
i live in a small place and know of 5 families of passengers with 4 or more children, 3 are single mum's 1 of which is my sister inlaw.
it's not now that it's hurting the tax payer just think that woman's 8 pair up with another 8 and have 5 each that's 40 passenger family's in about 16 -20 years THAT'S WHEN IT WILL HURT THE TAXPAYER BIG TIME
dress this up however the hell you like, but passengers breed passengers,
posh breed posh, rich breed posh, working class breed working class, and don't often mix, so that woman has now bred 8 more passengers who will rely on the state for thier whole live's, i am working hard every month for £72 quid more than i would get sat at home on my ****, and had to think long and hard how many kid's we could afford, the only reason we have 3 is because i have no mortgage to speak of as i inherited mum n dads house, worked long and hard for by my father, i hardly saw him untill about age 10 because he worked so many hours. her on the other hand was born to passengers and has bred 8 passengers and has been given a large house paid for by us daft ****'s paying tax, DO SOME OF YOU LOT ON HERE ACTUALLY THINK THAT IS OK,
i live in a small place and know of 5 families of passengers with 4 or more children, 3 are single mum's 1 of which is my sister inlaw.
it's not now that it's hurting the tax payer just think that woman's 8 pair up with another 8 and have 5 each that's 40 passenger family's in about 16 -20 years THAT'S WHEN IT WILL HURT THE TAXPAYER BIG TIME
Scoobynet is mostly made up of owners who can afford to run at least one car themselves, let alone what their partners drive. A recent thread on savings revealed quite a lot about the users of scoobynet.
08 February 2014, 08:06 AM
#132
Just you lot wait until Riley, Jayden and their six siblings are on their one family crime wave, stealing your Japanese sh1tboxes and getting pregnant themselves. Just like NL and the open door immigration policy there's going to be regrets after the horse has run off and been turned into supermarket lasagne.
I'm surprised at Bubble bashing the bankers though. But not at his grammar pedantry. And I thought we woz mates?
I'm surprised at Bubble bashing the bankers though. But not at his grammar pedantry. And I thought we woz mates?
Last edited by Suresh; 08 February 2014 at 08:08 AM.
08 February 2014, 10:26 AM
#134
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Christ it's like a welfare version of 'Rivers of blood' in here.
You should listen to Bubba po, not be sucked in by the media. As for the DM not making stuff up don't make me laugh.
Read this for instance... one of many:
A True Story Of Daily Mail Lies
If you think that papers that behave like that are something worth taking notice of then may I suggest you get your heads examined!
You should listen to Bubba po, not be sucked in by the media. As for the DM not making stuff up don't make me laugh.
Read this for instance... one of many:
A True Story Of Daily Mail Lies
If you think that papers that behave like that are something worth taking notice of then may I suggest you get your heads examined!
08 February 2014, 11:04 AM
#135
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pleiades
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A recent thread about savings means F. A. to be honest.
Have you never noticed it's the same people on any thread that mentions wealth or savings AKA my dick is bigger than yours? The people who don't have any savings and aren't wealthy keep quiet, that doesn't mean that no one on here is working class and hasn't lived through hard times. Maybe those people like to sit back and laugh at total strangers doing their best to impress other total strangers. Because, let's face it, I could tell you right now I have £300k in the bank, it's completely up to you whether you believe that or not.
The Tory government likes to play Divide and Conquer, aided by the media. Don't let it increase your blood pressure
08 February 2014, 11:10 AM
#137
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Epsom
Posts: 5,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well the accuracy of the press is a whole different thread. I have seen no evidence that this particular story isn't true. Are you saying she doesn't have 8 kids? She is in fact in highly paid employment?
This is all a distraction. The issue is that the taxpayer is fed up with being taken for a ride and so your comments about attitudes hardening is a valid one. The fact of the welfare bill rising and rising is in not in dispute, and in a time of "cuts" (although if you look at the figures there haven't been any actual cuts, spending is still rising) people are fed up with people on the dole claiming more money in benefits then they actually earn themselves in work.
So my original point stands. The benefits system is broken and needs substantial overhaul. Its is CAUSING this situation of "rivers of blood - benefits stylee", it is incentivising people to not bother to work or be decent citizens and is unaffordable and bankrupting us.
This is all a distraction. The issue is that the taxpayer is fed up with being taken for a ride and so your comments about attitudes hardening is a valid one. The fact of the welfare bill rising and rising is in not in dispute, and in a time of "cuts" (although if you look at the figures there haven't been any actual cuts, spending is still rising) people are fed up with people on the dole claiming more money in benefits then they actually earn themselves in work.
So my original point stands. The benefits system is broken and needs substantial overhaul. Its is CAUSING this situation of "rivers of blood - benefits stylee", it is incentivising people to not bother to work or be decent citizens and is unaffordable and bankrupting us.
08 February 2014, 11:36 AM
#138
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well the accuracy of the press is a whole different thread. I have seen no evidence that this particular story isn't true. Are you saying she doesn't have 8 kids? She is in fact in highly paid employment?
This is all a distraction. The issue is that the taxpayer is fed up with being taken for a ride and so your comments about attitudes hardening is a valid one. The fact of the welfare bill rising and rising is in not in dispute, and in a time of "cuts" (although if you look at the figures there haven't been any actual cuts, spending is still rising) people are fed up with people on the dole claiming more money in benefits then they actually earn themselves in work.
So my original point stands. The benefits system is broken and needs substantial overhaul. Its is CAUSING this situation of "rivers of blood - benefits stylee", it is incentivising people to not bother to work or be decent citizens and is unaffordable and bankrupting us.
This is all a distraction. The issue is that the taxpayer is fed up with being taken for a ride and so your comments about attitudes hardening is a valid one. The fact of the welfare bill rising and rising is in not in dispute, and in a time of "cuts" (although if you look at the figures there haven't been any actual cuts, spending is still rising) people are fed up with people on the dole claiming more money in benefits then they actually earn themselves in work.
So my original point stands. The benefits system is broken and needs substantial overhaul. Its is CAUSING this situation of "rivers of blood - benefits stylee", it is incentivising people to not bother to work or be decent citizens and is unaffordable and bankrupting us.
I really don't think the media demonising indivdiuals is the answer, it breeds hatred for one, tars all benefit claimants with the same brush for another and also trivialises the bigger picture. If the papers really want the welfare system sorting out go and do some proper investigative jouralism and find out the bigger overall picture and present it to us in a detailed and analytical manner. The trouble with that is most of their readershop wouldn't read that as they have the attention span of a gnat!
The thing is it's very easy to sit of the sidlines slinging mud, but a lot harder to get to the bottom of the real problem. The welfare state has grown in into the mess it is now in in this country as result of several fundamental government policies over the last 30 - 40 years. You reap what you sow and that is what is happening now.
Fixing it is going to take some very harsh decisions by any government that wants to do it and it will also take a very long time (decades). Sadly there isn't anyone out there prepared to do that aside from UKIP (and I do wonder if push comes to shove whether they will be any different) and anyway they will get voted out as soon as the changes start to bite as the opposition parties will just promise more benefits to get elected. There in a nutshell is what is wrong with the UK poliitical system!
All that said I think there are many other issues in the UK right now that are as or more important than the welfare system. Educaton, healthcare, the aging population, transport infrastructure, another recovery being built on a housing boom and consumer spending rather than any solid foundations, taxation (or lack of it for many large companies), the EU, banking issues, Sottish independence etc. etc.
It's a pity the likes of the Daily Mail don't take to these with the same lust for sensation that they do to benefit claimants and immigration issues!
P.S. I am not saying the story in the DM is completely unture, but I will bet you a dime to a dollar it isn't wholly factually accurate!
Last edited by f1_fan; 08 February 2014 at 11:37 AM.
08 February 2014, 11:41 AM
#139
I must have missed the Scoobynet Users Survey, perhaps you could point it out to me?
A recent thread about savings means F. A. to be honest.
Have you never noticed it's the same people on any thread that mentions wealth or savings AKA my dick is bigger than yours? The people who don't have any savings and aren't wealthy keep quiet, that doesn't mean that no one on here is working class and hasn't lived through hard times. Maybe those people like to sit back and laugh at total strangers doing their best to impress other total strangers. Because, let's face it, I could tell you right now I have £300k in the bank, it's completely up to you whether you believe that or not.
The Tory government likes to play Divide and Conquer, aided by the media. Don't let it increase your blood pressure
A recent thread about savings means F. A. to be honest.
Have you never noticed it's the same people on any thread that mentions wealth or savings AKA my dick is bigger than yours? The people who don't have any savings and aren't wealthy keep quiet, that doesn't mean that no one on here is working class and hasn't lived through hard times. Maybe those people like to sit back and laugh at total strangers doing their best to impress other total strangers. Because, let's face it, I could tell you right now I have £300k in the bank, it's completely up to you whether you believe that or not.
The Tory government likes to play Divide and Conquer, aided by the media. Don't let it increase your blood pressure
When it comes to wealth, class and scoobynet I think if you don't use the savings thread as a guide, albeit flawed, then threads like this depict just how there is a social divide.
Those who live or have grown up on council estates know full well Ladies like the one in the OP exist, and there are many of them. The number of kids she has is irrelevant. The fact she is perfectly healthy, can work and chooses not to, and instead breeds like its going out of fashion and pretends the Father isn't present to get more money from the state is the problem.
I can quite easily tell you of 5 people I know who cheat the benefit system. Morally I think most of us are on the verge of letting the powers that be know but know full well the "system" will find nothing wrong with their circumstances and continue to pay them ridiculous amounts each week.
You can also tell a lot about someone's background by the language people use , OK not 100% accurate but it's not that I don't know the meaning of big words, its just not used in my social circles so not part of my vocabulary. Again, some of that is people trying to look or sound more intelligent than they are.
How the middle class want to ignore and oppress the working classes opinions says a lot about the state of the UK.
08 February 2014, 11:47 AM
#140
Although, as stupid as this Lady is in the OP, she has managed to do something 8 times that you haven't managed in your whole sad existence. (sorry, please tell me again how not having children was a "choice")
08 February 2014, 11:49 AM
#141
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That depends on how you look at it, for example Bankers taking massive bonus' could be a destraction portrayed or dressed up by other media outlets. Just because some choose to believe those instead of papers like the Mail, does that make it true. All journalists make stories more interesting by exaggerating, which paper they work for is irrelevant. You could even use that as a social guide, that the working class believe what they read in the Sun or Mirror, and those of a more privileged background believe what they read in the Express or the Guardian.
When it comes to wealth, class and scoobynet I think if you don't use the savings thread as a guide, albeit flawed, then threads like this depict just how there is a social divide.
Those who live or have grown up on council estates know full well Ladies like the one in the OP exist, and there are many of them. The number of kids she has is irrelevant. The fact she is perfectly healthy, can work and chooses not to, and instead breeds like its going out of fashion and pretends the Father isn't present to get more money from the state is the problem.
I can quite easily tell you of 5 people I know who cheat the benefit system. Morally I think most of us are on the verge of letting the powers that be know but know full well the "system" will find nothing wrong with their circumstances and continue to pay them ridiculous amounts each week.
You can also tell a lot about someone's background by the language people use , OK not 100% accurate but it's not that I don't know the meaning of big words, its just not used in my social circles so not part of my vocabulary. Again, some of that is people trying to look or sound more intelligent than they are.
How the middle class want to ignore and oppress the working classes opinions says a lot about the state of the UK.
When it comes to wealth, class and scoobynet I think if you don't use the savings thread as a guide, albeit flawed, then threads like this depict just how there is a social divide.
Those who live or have grown up on council estates know full well Ladies like the one in the OP exist, and there are many of them. The number of kids she has is irrelevant. The fact she is perfectly healthy, can work and chooses not to, and instead breeds like its going out of fashion and pretends the Father isn't present to get more money from the state is the problem.
I can quite easily tell you of 5 people I know who cheat the benefit system. Morally I think most of us are on the verge of letting the powers that be know but know full well the "system" will find nothing wrong with their circumstances and continue to pay them ridiculous amounts each week.
You can also tell a lot about someone's background by the language people use , OK not 100% accurate but it's not that I don't know the meaning of big words, its just not used in my social circles so not part of my vocabulary. Again, some of that is people trying to look or sound more intelligent than they are.
How the middle class want to ignore and oppress the working classes opinions says a lot about the state of the UK.
As for not 'dobbing in' the benefit cheats you know... in my opinion that pretty much means you are happy to moan about it, but not do anything about it.... I don't understand that!
Just saying and not looking to rekindle our spat
08 February 2014, 11:52 AM
#142
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This really confuses me. I genuinely cannot believe you can be this thick even for a working class type
Do I want kids? No! See what I did there, I made a choice.
08 February 2014, 11:59 AM
#143
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pleiades
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That depends on how you look at it, for example Bankers taking massive bonus' could be a destraction portrayed or dressed up by other media outlets. Just because some choose to believe those instead of papers like the Mail, does that make it true. All journalists make stories more interesting by exaggerating, which paper they work for is irrelevant. You could even use that as a social guide, that the working class believe what they read in the Sun or Mirror, and those of a more privileged background believe what they read in the Express or the Guardian.
When it comes to wealth, class and scoobynet I think if you don't use the savings thread as a guide, albeit flawed, then threads like this depict just how there is a social divide.
Those who live or have grown up on council estates know full well Ladies like the one in the OP exist, and there are many of them. The number of kids she has is irrelevant. The fact she is perfectly healthy, can work and chooses not to, and instead breeds like its going out of fashion and pretends the Father isn't present to get more money from the state is the problem.
I can quite easily tell you of 5 people I know who cheat the benefit system. Morally I think most of us are on the verge of letting the powers that be know but know full well the "system" will find nothing wrong with their circumstances and continue to pay them ridiculous amounts each week.
You can also tell a lot about someone's background by the language people use , OK not 100% accurate but it's not that I don't know the meaning of big words, its just not used in my social circles so not part of my vocabulary. Again, some of that is people trying to look or sound more intelligent than they are.
How the middle class want to ignore and oppress the working classes opinions says a lot about the state of the UK.
When it comes to wealth, class and scoobynet I think if you don't use the savings thread as a guide, albeit flawed, then threads like this depict just how there is a social divide.
Those who live or have grown up on council estates know full well Ladies like the one in the OP exist, and there are many of them. The number of kids she has is irrelevant. The fact she is perfectly healthy, can work and chooses not to, and instead breeds like its going out of fashion and pretends the Father isn't present to get more money from the state is the problem.
I can quite easily tell you of 5 people I know who cheat the benefit system. Morally I think most of us are on the verge of letting the powers that be know but know full well the "system" will find nothing wrong with their circumstances and continue to pay them ridiculous amounts each week.
You can also tell a lot about someone's background by the language people use , OK not 100% accurate but it's not that I don't know the meaning of big words, its just not used in my social circles so not part of my vocabulary. Again, some of that is people trying to look or sound more intelligent than they are.
How the middle class want to ignore and oppress the working classes opinions says a lot about the state of the UK.
I would love for you to guess my background based on my language here, go on have a go.
And don't start searching through my past posts because that is cheating
08 February 2014, 12:07 PM
#144
In broad terms I agree with you Warren in that the welfare system to some is seen as a lifestyle choice when it should be a safety net to those able to work and nothing more. That said I think the welfare issue in the UK is a lot lot more complex than 'look at this skanky slag with her 8 kids leaching off your taxes'.
I really don't think the media demonising indivdiuals is the answer, it breeds hatred for one, tars all benefit claimants with the same brush for another and also trivialises the bigger picture. If the papers really want the welfare system sorting out go and do some proper investigative jouralism and find out the bigger overall picture and present it to us in a detailed and analytical manner. The trouble with that is most of their readershop wouldn't read that as they have the attention span of a gnat!
The thing is it's very easy to sit of the sidlines slinging mud, but a lot harder to get to the bottom of the real problem. The welfare state has grown in into the mess it is now in in this country as result of several fundamental government policies over the last 30 - 40 years. You reap what you sow and that is what is happening now.
Fixing it is going to take some very harsh decisions by any government that wants to do it and it will also take a very long time (decades). Sadly there isn't anyone out there prepared to do that aside from UKIP (and I do wonder if push comes to shove whether they will be any different) and anyway they will get voted out as soon as the changes start to bite as the opposition parties will just promise more benefits to get elected. There in a nutshell is what is wrong with the UK poliitical system!
All that said I think there are many other issues in the UK right now that are as or more important than the welfare system. Educaton, healthcare, the aging population, transport infrastructure, another recovery being built on a housing boom and consumer spending rather than any solid foundations, taxation (or lack of it for many large companies), the EU, banking issues, Sottish independence etc. etc.
It's a pity the likes of the Daily Mail don't take to these with the same lust for sensation that they do to benefit claimants and immigration issues!
P.S. I am not saying the story in the DM is completely unture, but I will bet you a dime to a dollar it isn't wholly factually accurate!
I really don't think the media demonising indivdiuals is the answer, it breeds hatred for one, tars all benefit claimants with the same brush for another and also trivialises the bigger picture. If the papers really want the welfare system sorting out go and do some proper investigative jouralism and find out the bigger overall picture and present it to us in a detailed and analytical manner. The trouble with that is most of their readershop wouldn't read that as they have the attention span of a gnat!
The thing is it's very easy to sit of the sidlines slinging mud, but a lot harder to get to the bottom of the real problem. The welfare state has grown in into the mess it is now in in this country as result of several fundamental government policies over the last 30 - 40 years. You reap what you sow and that is what is happening now.
Fixing it is going to take some very harsh decisions by any government that wants to do it and it will also take a very long time (decades). Sadly there isn't anyone out there prepared to do that aside from UKIP (and I do wonder if push comes to shove whether they will be any different) and anyway they will get voted out as soon as the changes start to bite as the opposition parties will just promise more benefits to get elected. There in a nutshell is what is wrong with the UK poliitical system!
All that said I think there are many other issues in the UK right now that are as or more important than the welfare system. Educaton, healthcare, the aging population, transport infrastructure, another recovery being built on a housing boom and consumer spending rather than any solid foundations, taxation (or lack of it for many large companies), the EU, banking issues, Sottish independence etc. etc.
It's a pity the likes of the Daily Mail don't take to these with the same lust for sensation that they do to benefit claimants and immigration issues!
P.S. I am not saying the story in the DM is completely unture, but I will bet you a dime to a dollar it isn't wholly factually accurate!
With regards to these kinds of benefit claimants only being a small minority with the media misrepresenting everyone else on benefits, the same can be said at the other end of the scale; only a small minority of those in banking get the bonuses that you see in the papers, but most are happy to tar everyone else in the industry with the same brush.
08 February 2014, 12:12 PM
#145
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With regards to these kinds of benefit claimants only being a small minority with the media misrepresenting everyone else on benefits, the same can be said at the other end of the scale; only a small minority of those in banking get the bonuses that you see in the papers, but most are happy to tar everyone else in the industry with the same brush.
08 February 2014, 12:16 PM
#146
Well said. People assume as the stories on these type of situation are in a paper they dislike that they are in some way dressed up and sensationalized. It doesn't add up then that an entire series is dedicated to a street where only 5% of residents of 99 houses is aired every week.
It would really p1ss on their chips if they realised that we have children and grandchildren too and want nothing of the sort. And so they continue to believe in what they want to believe in and ignore all evidence that contradicts this belief.
Once again, the issue just isn't about an isolated case. Its about what happens when an underclass is subsidised to breed bad genes at the same time as the working population simply can't afford to do so.
On another forum I saw a post from an oil worker who was happy to pay his taxes but complained that he was subject to random alcohol and drug tests in order to ensure he is fit to work and wasn't happy that his taxes were subsidising the feckless and the lazy. He suggested benefit claimants be subject to the same alcohol and drug testing if they wanted to continue a subsidised existence. Sounds fair to me.
08 February 2014, 01:13 PM
#147
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08 February 2014, 01:15 PM
#148
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be fair, yes, you can choose not to have kids, and there's nothing wrong with that. All you need is a condom, or your GF on pills, or other contraception method- medically speaking.
God doesn't make it mandatory for humans to have babies.
God doesn't make it mandatory for humans to have babies.
08 February 2014, 01:37 PM
#150
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He rather encourages it in Genesis 9:7. I suspect users are alluding to this verse when they instruct f1 and others to go forth and multiply.