So Tottenham burns!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Laudrup said:
If you take away that safety net it is going to send us back to those days. We've moved on from workhouses, capital and corporal punishment. You'll always get people abusing the system, but like your taxi driver example you can always report these people anonymously.
Click to expand...

Where it's going is worse.

You're happy with a break down of law and order, decent people afraid to walk the streets? Drug dealers, pimps and gangs controlling the streets and the liberal element saying they're not really bad is fine? Never mind that the guy has just had his business torched, they're just misunderstood. That's what happens when the liberal element advocate lighter sentences, approving of less accountability, recommending "engagement".
 
Garry Edwards said:
.....................As an example, there's a Jobcentre round here that frequently has loads of taxis and minicabs parked outside it, while the drivers go inside to sign on. ........................ - because I've seen drivers go in there who don't even bother to take off their badges!
Click to expand...

EDIT -- comment removed.... implies you are wrong - which you are not

the issue of South Lanarkshire Private Hire licenses [ like mine] are cross-checked [and also before each renewal] with..........

the Strathclyde Police for outstanding fines/convictions
the Council Tax Offices for overdue payments
and the Benefits Office - for signing on

seems your Council is missing the boat somewhere.......:D
 
Last edited:
well there we go.. a guy interviewed on BBC news saying they "needed" to do it because of all of the "****ing poles coming and taking the jobs".

if i said what i want to about that guy and that comment i'll likely be banned.

needless to say i think that is so much "rubbish".
 
Manchester quiet allegedly but kicking off again in Salford.
 
fracster said:
Yes.

Stop sending all and sundry to University to gain a worthless degree.

Anyone of any nationality,race or religion who enters this country cannot claim any benefit of any type until they have paid into the system for five whole years.

Anybody able to work, who does not gain employment within six moths get thier benefits stopped.

Child benefit for the first child only.You want more, pay your own way, especially young "ladies" who are on the CBS and housing benefit jaunt for life.

All the other spongers,hangers on and general dossers should receive no benefit. The benefit system is a fantastic thing for those who need it, unfortunately the system is being taken advantage of.The system needs a general overhaul and update.

The majority of us have had jobs we loathe, but we do them to make a living whilst we look for something better.We do not resort to looting and robbery, arson or riot.

No matter how you prattle on, no matter how many lily livered do gooders spout off in the media, no matter how many left wing namby pamby council/social workers try to justify what these feral scumbags have done.

There is no justification for their actions, none whatsoever.
Click to expand...

I agree with every single word.



To those taking about child benifts , it rather simple. If you can afford them then don't have them, it's not up to the rest of us to fund your lifesyle choice.
 
gramps said:
I don't know him or his philosophies, the words I quoted are on the nail but in reality the opposite is the case today, everyone goes on about rights ... but nobody considers responsibilities!
Click to expand...

Well, he was a liberal, probably an arch-liberal or a libertarian by today's standards. Amongst other things, he argued that adult individuals have the right to do as they please, providing they do no harm to others, and that neither the state nor society have the right to interfere. This is the antithesis of the socialist - authoritarian nonsense we have to put up with now.
 
neil_g said:
well there we go.. a guy interviewed on BBC news saying they "needed" to do it because of all of the "****ing poles coming and taking the jobs".

if i said what i want to about that guy and that comment i'll likely be banned.

needless to say i think that is so much "rubbish".
Click to expand...

well its been covered before, but the reason Poles are taking some of the jobs, is because they start on time, leave on time and work hard, unlike our 'i deserve more' underclass of slackers. the attitude is all wrong.

Laudrup...are you playing devils advocate, trolling, or do you really believe what you are saying, or just dont get it? I cant decide...
 
fracster said:
Read , read again and digest. Or at least try.
Click to expand...

But you said those who decided to have more than one child wouldn't receive benefit for the second, third child etc, so I am asking what happens to them in your model of reform. What is a single parent of 3 children supposed to feed and clothe their kids with if they are receiving benefit for one?

I mean trying to take a hard line with long term claimants is one thing, but cutting off kids?
 
Laudrup said:
But you said those who decided to have more than one child wouldn't receive benefit for the second, third child etc, so I am asking what happens to them in your model of reform. What is a single parent of 3 children supposed to feed and clothe their kids with if they are receiving benefit for one?

I mean trying to take a hard line with long term claimants is one thing, but cutting off kids?
Click to expand...

she could try asking the fathers
 
MartynK said:
Well, he was a liberal, probably an arch-liberal or a libertarian by today's standards. Amongst other things, he argued that adult individuals have the right to do as they please, providing they do no harm to others, and that neither the state nor society have the right to interfere. This is the antithesis of the socialist - authoritarian nonsense we have to put up with now.
Click to expand...

I don't care who he was, what he believed or his views, those words that I quoted are on the nail - I didn't say his life's philosophy was right, just that, in a nutshell his statement that there are rights and responsibilities is correct.
 
matty said:
well its been covered before, but the reason Poles are taking some of the jobs, is because they start on time, leave on time and work hard, unlike our 'i deserve more' underclass of slackers. the attitude is all wrong.
Click to expand...

exactly why im angry. the poles/other european immigrants are extremely hard working, more so than our scrotes. if they want work they need to earn the reputation, not decide that being a bin man or a bus driver isnt worthy of their time.

/rant
 
dod said:
she could try asking the fathers
Click to expand...

I'll qualify that because it is a gross generalisation.

There will always be genuine cases of hardship where for whatever reason a woman may find herself cut off from any income. Divorce, death, abuse all result in situations where there should be a support network and the children should not be disadvantaged.
 
gramps said:
I don't care who he was, what he believed or his views, those words that I quoted are on the nail - I didn't say his life's philosophy was right, just that, in a nutshell his statement that there are rights and responsibilities is correct.
Click to expand...

Oh dear, are you feeling uncomfortable because a liberal said something sensible, and that you agree with? Rather goes against the trend of this thread, doesn't it?
 
Laudrup said:
But you said those who decided to have more than one child wouldn't receive benefit for the second, third child etc, so I am asking what happens to them in your model of reform. What is a single parent of 3 children supposed to feed and clothe their kids with if they are receiving benefit for one?

I mean trying to take a hard line with long term claimants is one thing, but cutting off kids?
Click to expand...

There is NO excuse for getting pregnant these days.

So she either uses contraception....NO EXCUSE, or learn to keep her legs together, then do what a lot of people do in her situation....GET A FRIGGIN JOB.
 
Laudrup said:
But you said those who decided to have more than one child wouldn't receive benefit for the second, third child etc, so I am asking what happens to them in your model of reform. What is a single parent of 3 children supposed to feed and clothe their kids with if they are receiving benefit for one?

I mean trying to take a hard line with long term claimants is one thing, but cutting off kids?
Click to expand...

FFS.

Scenario one.

Mother with three kids under the age of six. Husband ****es off and leaves her for some blonde bint downtown, she needs help, she gets benefits. Due to no fault of her own she is on her own and needs help. No problem, that is what the benefits system is for.

Scenario two.

Sixteen year old kid has child by somebody, she ain`t sure who the dad is and it probably would be of no use anyway. She gets benefits for te first kid, we all make mistakes ,right?

She then has another kid to get on the housing benefit scam and more child benefit. Realising that this is good money, she then has another. That is not what the benefit system is for.

Do you now understand? Or should I get an ABC book out for you?
 
MartynK said:
Oh dear, are you feeling uncomfortable because a liberal said something sensible, and that you agree with? Rather goes against the trend of this thread, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Grow up, it's got nothing to do with liberal or non-liberal views, or how I feel or don't feel about such views ... I repeat it's because it's a statement about responsibilities, something thats not popular today.
 
that's it ....wasted too much time here

see you in TALK Photography.........:wave:
 
ding76uk said:
It is a list of practices that grab attention but are useless in real terms. Do you think that if you stop people from having money via benefits then crime will reduce?

Surely you must be able to see that that will lead to crime to fund food. What about the children? Put them on the street too? Anything like that will increase crime figures.

The issue that should be looked into is the fact the when any work is done benefits are cut to a level that make it financially unviable. If someone works part time, her benefits should be used to allow a small increase in living standards, you would still pay less, but cutting benefits for part time work to a level where it actually leads to a lower standard of living will give no motivation to work.

If a system was looked at that if you took on part time work you saw the benefit, more would be encouraged into working part and then full time reducing the benefits being paid out.

Threats and making it worse for someone to work 20 hours a week are ludicrous and although there are a few exceptions, the rule is that it is not a lush life these people lead. Positive motivation is a powerful factor that many overlook. Bullying and threats are never a motivator that works long term as has been proven. For example the Short Sharp Shock tactic that the Tories were voted in on '79 did nothing as crime increased throughout the decade of the 80's where these idealogical principles proved that they did not work in practice.
Click to expand...

Excellent post.
 
fracster said:
Scenario two.

Sixteen year old kid has child by somebody, she ain`t sure who the dad is and it probably would be of no use anyway. She gets benefits for te first kid, we all make mistakes ,right?
Click to expand...

My favourite quote from a benefits claim form (from my time at the then DHSS)

Q: Can you tell us the identity of the child's father?

A: No, he was wearing a crash helmet

:lol:
 
I hope those pictures are being submitted to the police?

Plus, like many other people I'm not impressed with people stood there watching and taking picture
 
Laudrup said:
I'm sure they've tried.
Click to expand...

Can I live in your world? It must be full of cotton wool and fluffy bunnies.

:cuckoo: :bonk: :bang:

Maybe when the "rioters" are kicking your door in like they were very close to doing to my house yesterday you might open your eyes and see whats actually happening and what needs to happen to solve it.
 
dcash29 said:
I hope those pictures are being submitted to the police?

Plus, like many other people I'm not impressed with people stood there watching and taking picture
Click to expand...

It's a difficult one isn't it ... whether you chose to take pictures or not is a moot point, (not a place I would even be!), but interfering with the looters? If the police aren't there to prevent the looting it's a brave person who would step in and act to stop them!
 
fracster said:
FFS.

Scenario one.

Mother with three kids under the age of six. Husband ****es off and leaves her for some blonde bint downtown, she needs help, she gets benefits. Due to no fault of her own she is on her own and needs help. No problem, that is what the benefits system is for.

Scenario two.

Sixteen year old kid has child by somebody, she ain`t sure who the dad is and it probably would be of no use anyway. She gets benefits for te first kid, we all make mistakes ,right?

She then has another kid to get on the housing benefit scam and more child benefit. Realising that this is good money, she then has another. That is not what the benefit system is for.

Do you now understand? Or should I get an ABC book out for you?
Click to expand...

Yes I was aware that was what you were driving at, what I wanted to know was what happened to the 16 year old and her 'mistake' after she had another child or another child? What does she feed and clothe the other children with if your system was introduced?

Also £13.40 per week for an additional child is 'good money' is it?
 
It was Margaret Thatcher who made child benifit available for more than the first child.

One big mistake she made.


Also from yestrdays bolton news

A BENEFIT fraudster “invented” a fake child and claimed nearly £50,000 for childcare costs — even though she did not have a job, a court was told.

Michaela Bartlett’s two young children were not even living with her, as they had been taken into care, and she made up a pretend child to swindle more money from HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC).

Bolton Crown Court heard yesterday that the drug addict from Tonge Moor told HMRC she was working 30 hours a week and she was receiving £165 in tax credits a week for childcare costs. The claim started in May, 2008, and the children were taken off her in September that year.

Yet she kept up the pretence and, in June, 2010, she contacted the HMRC helpline and said she had had a baby the month before.

Barbara Webster, prosecuting, said the child, named Mark, was fictitious.

The total overpayment was £49,734 and she pleaded guilty to four counts of fraud at Bolton Crown Court at an earlier hearing.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
The graduated benefits system is already in place. It isn't a pound for pound exchange of benefits vs working. Once working people can get working tax credits. The issue is that the benefits system allows people to live in places they cannot afford if they actually had to work. The capping of them to minimum wage levels is essential to stop it being an easy option. Work should pay. If it doesn't then a) wages are too low or b) benefits are too high or c) both. Too many people are claiming benefits when they are already working. Jobs should pay. Tax allowances need to be raised and so does the minimum wage so that you can actually live on a basic wage. We the tax payer should not be subsidising cheap skate employers via the benefits system. It is expensive and inefficient. I am pretty certain the rowntree foundation said a salary of £15k a year was needed to live a reasonable life. Minimum wage is only about £12k a year so there is quite a gap.

There are too many fat cats not paying their way as well as lazy scroungers at the other end. Both are as bad as each other.
 
Fed up feeding the troll.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Laudrup said:
Yes I was aware that was what you were driving at, what I wanted to know was what happened to the 16 year old and her 'mistake' after she had another child or another child? What does she feed and clothe the other children with if your system was introduced?

Also £13.40 per week for an additional child is 'good money' is it?
Click to expand...

She shouldn't be having any more bloody kids, all this nonsense about it being a 'right', [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER].

Oh and this policy of 'limiting' benefit claims to the average wage (currently £25k), another load of crap, the amount of benefit that can be claimed, including housing benefit, should be no more than the minimum wage, that way if you want to fire out kids left right and centre you either need to pay for their upkeep yourself, or sell them for medical experiments......
 
Last edited:
Laudrup said:
Yes I was aware that was what you were driving at, what I wanted to know was what happened to the 16 year old and her 'mistake' after she had another child or another child? What does she feed and clothe the other children with if your system was introduced?

Also £13.40 per week for an additional child is 'good money' is it?
Click to expand...

What about everything else that she claims?

Don`t answer that, I really am losing the will to live with you. When you have a second or two, try living on planet earth and see what is really going on. Speaking as an outsider,what do you really think of the human race?
 
AFC said:
There is NO excuse for getting pregnant these days.

So she either uses contraception....NO EXCUSE, or learn to keep her legs together, then do what a lot of people do in her situation....GET A FRIGGIN JOB.
Click to expand...

Nobody may have told you, or you may not have had the opportunity to use them yet, but no contraception is 100% effective. Even a vasectomy or female sterilisation is no guarantee.

I suppose you could go down the route of the Roman Catholic Church in Africa and preach abstinence, but it doesn't seem to be working too well.
 
gramps said:
Grow up, it's got nothing to do with liberal or non-liberal views, or how I feel or don't feel about such views ... I repeat it's because it's a statement about responsibilities, something thats not popular today.
Click to expand...

No, I don't think I need to grow up. Liberals have been slagged off throughout this thread as if they are the devil incarnate, and responsible for most of our current problems. I take exception to that. If you read Mill - and I strongly recommend him - you'll find that liberals believe in individual freedom, and don't excuse criminal behaviour or social irresponsibility. Don't confuse liberals with socialists.
 
Laudrup said:
Nobody may have told you, or you may not have had the opportunity to use them yet, but no contraception is 100% effective. Even a vasectomy or female sterilisation is no guarantee.
Click to expand...

last i read the pill is 99.something% effective, thats enough. likewise the injection, the implant etc etc etc. at least in however many years ive had partners ive not become a father.

there shouldnt be any excuse for "accidents" other than sheer ignorance or lazyness.
 
Laudrup said:
Nobody may have told you, or you may not have had the opportunity to use them yet, but no contraception is 100% effective. Even a vasectomy or female sterilisation is no guarantee.

I suppose you could go down the route of the Roman Catholic Church in Africa and preach abstinence, but it doesn't seem to be working too well.
Click to expand...

Well as a qualified nurse I DO know about contraception and I also know about vasectomies and steralisation. Now go and get your facts straight.
 
Laudrup said:
Nobody may have told you, or you may not have had the opportunity to use them yet, but no contraception is 100% effective. Even a vasectomy or female sterilisation is no guarantee.

I suppose you could go down the route of the Roman Catholic Church in Africa and preach abstinence, but it doesn't seem to be working too well.
Click to expand...

you have a pending question you havent answered.
 
Laudrup said:
Nobody may have told you, or you may not have had the opportunity to use them yet, but no contraception is 100% effective. Even a vasectomy or female sterilisation is no guarantee.

I suppose you could go down the route of the Roman Catholic Church in Africa and preach abstinence, but it doesn't seem to be working too well.
Click to expand...

No contraception is 100% effective is different to no contraception.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top