The Political Thread

[Robin Low]

Something I've never understood is how come I didn't get that kind of money when I was unemployed.

Having spent several years unemployed and then experiencing life in a job centre during my first full-time job, I find it amazing that anyone would choose benefits as a lifestyle - the money was pitiful, the forms endless and often incomprehensible, and the whole process was patronising and demeaning. It was both amusing and sad seeing the people who were used to working hard for a living suddenly discovering what it's like to treated as dole scum, how little they were entitled to, and all the hoops they had to jump through to get any of it.

Incidentally, when I worked for the benefits agency, I conducted a survey of all our long-term claimants. They were characterised by two features: absolutely nothing in the way of worthwhile qualifications and back problems. I just can't wait to see them all out working in the community, because they're going to be the thickest, sickest workforce imaginable.

Regards

Robin

[House of Usher]

The only people I have ever known to do well out of state benefits had children or mental health issues or both, like the single mother with 5 kids and bipolar disorder I know. She's quite partial to a bit of the skunk as well as it happens. I can't say I approve, but it's not my lookout that she gets a free pass from paid work for life.

If the only benefits you're getting are Jobseeker's Allowance plus housing benefit, you're going to be quite hard up unless you also have some sort of criminal sideline like burglary or drug dealing to tide you over. £950 a month housing benefit is really quite a lot, but probably reflects the going rate in the neighbourhood. Imagine working for living and handing over almost £12,000 a year for a house you're not even buying! No wonder the only tenants some landlords can get are people who aren't paying the rent themselves. There are limits to what the council will pay for a rental property. The Area Reference Rent means that the local authority won't pay full rent above a certain limit based on some sort of local private sector average, which may or may not be up to date, compiled by the rent officer service.

When I had a housing benefit claim in Swansea the council refused to pay as much as £80 a week for a 3-bedroom house in a run-down estate on the edge of town because the reference rent was £75 a week, but they would have gladly paid upwards of £80 a week for a cramped and shabby 2-bedroom flat in the town centre. In Leicester I rented a damp studio flat for £65 a week because I couldn't get definite word from the council if they would pay £75 a week for a 2-bedroom house. I really didn't have the other £10 a week to make up the difference, so opted for the damp place to save money rather than take a gamble on it. There are not blank cheques for everyone.

When people on benefits rent fantastically expensive properties it's either because they are living somewhere where private rents are very, very high and housing benefit will cover the full amount (most private rents are more than mortgage payments, naturally), or because they can afford to make up a shortfall in housing benefit out of some other benefit they get due to kids or disability, to which people who are merely out of work are not entitled.

[Peter Wolf]

Now we have another family in and it looks like it's all starting again  



I suppose I'll be accused of being a Daily Mail reader (yawn), shall we continue until everyone decides to just jack it all in and live on benefits!

So lets have some decent ideas on how to sort this mess out instead....

Over to the forum  

p.s. I'm not having a go at people who fall on hard times, are injured, have diasbilities, etc.. as that is what benefits are for![/color]

Your neighbour is worthless trash just like her tenants when you think about it.

What does she contribute to society ?

Not a lot but each month she takes 950 quid off the taxpayer to pay for her investment as that is all she is interested in.She is not interested in you and how her tenants adversely affect your life and how her rental property would have an adverse effect on yours if you tried to sell it.She obviously is only interested in herself and she is also useless selfish trash and a parasite as well as the tenants.


anyway one size fits all policies dont and wont work and unless this proposal profiles those that abuse the system and those that dont i cant support it but i do get sick and tired of layabouts as well and theres times when i do think that cutting their benefits would taech them a lesson as they make a career out of cheating and exploiting the system.

I am sick of liberal type attitudes that promotes this kind of thing.

Heres a good example:

I was reading about a Lesbian who chose to have a child outside of a relationship with a sperm donor and then decides that she cant earn a living because she has to stay at home and look after a child and when the child goes to school she can sit around all day while the kid is at school and on and on it goes  

She knew only too well that she would have everything paid for before she *chose* to have a child and this is wrong.

She doesnt like men but she has a child by a man purely because she decides she wants a child and then because she has a child she has a sense of entitlement.In the meantime she is now allowed to study for a qualification in horticulture where she has to do something once or twicew a week because this was the easier option as aversed to working and finding a job now the kid is at school.

Studying for her is just a cop out and she probably wont get a job as she has no work history or experience and now there is less chance of getting a job so she will most likely be on benefits for the rest of her life as she is totally useless.Apart from being forced to study part time she has done nothing else to improve her chances of finding work or even teach herself something at home.

Totally useless and whats more in the old days she would live with her parents who would look after herself and the child instead of the state.

Children equals free cash.

Useless Trash.

I would force her to work in an all male enviroment or do voluntary work with men as its men that go to work and pay taxes so she can sit around all day with a chip on her shoulder along with her sense of entitlement.

[Roger Godpleton]

They can all come and work for me in my Death-gyro factory. This way they can all contribute to society on multiple fronts, including the war effort. They will help win hearts and minds, and in some cases they will have to help to literally win hearts and minds, and also some blood (more on that later, specifically the next paragraph).

And anyone who doesn't pull their weight can be infected with my newly developed infectioning (air-infectioning) version of diabetes so they can help in the fight against diabetes so that I be assured that I need to pee because two litres of cola is two litres of liquid and not because it's two litres of sugar.

Also they will be needed to help in the fight of finding a cure for airborne diabetes when it is inevitably weaponized* because my scientists have nothing else to do and I don't really like the idea of paying people retainers. *(sic(?))

All the children will become my wards, but they will all have varying numbers of n's at the end of their names so they can be ranked. This will teach them to be competitive and that effort is rewarded. Sure being Robinnnnnnnnnn is cool, but wouldn't you rather be Robinnnnnnnn?

[Robin Low]

In the meantime she is now allowed to study for a qualification in horticulture

Apart from being forced to study part time she has done nothing else to improve her chances of finding work or even teach herself something at home.

Pardon the snippage, but in one paragraph she is allowed to study and in the next she's forced to study. It's handy to know which is correct, as it has some bearing on the claim that she's done nothing to improve her chances of finding work.

I would force her to work in an all male enviroment or do voluntary work with men as its men that go to work and pay taxes so she can sit around all day with a chip on her shoulder along with her sense of entitlement.

Just read that one back to yourself, Peter, and let us know if you're really prepared to stand by it.

Regards

Robin

[Robin Low]

They can all come and work for me in my Death-gyro factory.

Has anyone actually met Roger in real life, or is he just some bizarre A.I. spawned by the Internet itself?

Regards

Robin

[House of Usher]

Pardon the snippage, but in one paragraph she is allowed to study and in the next she's forced to study. It's handy to know which is correct, as it has some bearing on the claim that she's done nothing to improve her chances of finding work.

I think the implication is that it's the part-time mode of study that's forced on her, rather than having to study at all, because it's difficult to get benefits while studying full time, but I'm willing to be wrong on that.

its men that go to work and pay taxes so she can sit around all day with a chip on her shoulder along with her sense of entitlement.

[Peter Wolf]

In the meantime she is now allowed to study for a qualification in horticulture

Apart from being forced to study part time she has done nothing else to improve her chances of finding work or even teach herself something at home.

Pardon the snippage, but in one paragraph she is allowed to study and in the next she's forced to study. It's handy to know which is correct, as it has some bearing on the claim that she's done nothing to improve her chances of finding work.

I would force her to work in an all male enviroment or do voluntary work with men as its men that go to work and pay taxes so she can sit around all day with a chip on her shoulder along with her sense of entitlement.

Just read that one back to yourself, Peter, and let us know if you're really prepared to stand by it.

Regards

Robin

She has to either study which extends her benefits or find work that is part time.Its been a while since i read the article but she had to either do one or the other.It was something to do with a reduction in benefits.My point was she wouldnt have gone on the course otherwise as previously she had done nothing to attempt to find work and there was no need to do so.No incentive.She had to be prompted to do something which was my point instead of being motivated to do it herself since its all provided.

As for the second comment i shouldnt have said "force" as i wouldnt force anyone to do anything *generally* speaking but otherwise it wouldnt do her any harm to work with men but the all male enviroment was a bit much but her comments wound me up.Reactionary Hyperbole.

I am sure you have typed or said things you dont mean before.



@Roger is real as he went to the HI-EX where i met him as i travelled in a minubus there and back.Roger isnt his real name and he is not like he comes across online.He just types that kind of thing.No idea why.

[Peter Wolf]

In the meantime she is now allowed to study for a qualification in horticulture

Apart from being forced to study part time she has done nothing else to improve her chances of finding work or even teach herself something at home.

Pardon the snippage, but in one paragraph she is allowed to study and in the next she's forced to study. It's handy to know which is correct, as it has some bearing on the claim that she's done nothing to improve her chances of finding work.

I would force her to work in an all male enviroment or do voluntary work with men as its men that go to work and pay taxes so she can sit around all day with a chip on her shoulder along with her sense of entitlement.

Just read that one back to yourself, Peter, and let us know if you're really prepared to stand by it.

Regards

Robin

She has to either study which extends her benefits or find work that is part time.Its been a while since i read the article but she had to either do one or the other.It was something to do with a reduction in benefits.My point was she wouldnt have gone on the course otherwise as previously she had done nothing to attempt to find work and there was no need to do so.No incentive.She had to be prompted to do something which was my point instead of being motivated to do it herself since its all provided.



As for the second comment i shouldnt have said "force" as i wouldnt force anyone to do anything *generally* speaking but otherwise it wouldnt do her any harm to work with men but the all male enviroment was a bit much but her comments wound me up.Reactionary Hyperbole.

I am sure you have typed or said things you dont mean before.



@Roger is real as he went to the HI-EX where i met him as i travelled in a minubus there and back.Roger isnt his real name and he is not like he comes across online.He just types that kind of thing.No idea why.

It was part time study not full time.


Ush:no need to be so shocked as it was a reaction to her comments and its certainly no more ridiculous than her anti-men statements.

[Robin Low]

I am sure you have typed or said things you dont mean before.

Quite possibly, but I'm damned if I can remember any examples. I tend to preview and rewrite posts several times, and often scrap them altogether to avoid getting bogged down in follow-up. I'm more likely to get in trouble for saying things I do mean, and I try to avoid that, too - saves a lot of hassle at work.

Regards

Robin

[Peter Wolf]

I am sure you have typed or said things you dont mean before.

I'm more likely to get in trouble for saying things I do mean
Regards

Robin

So am i.

[Robert Frazer]

After today's escapade at the student fees protest, and as someone who has recently left university, allow me to say that I find it difficult to sympathise with rioting students, irrespective of the issue at hand.

-Why are French students rioting about the retirement age? Most of them are barely twenty! They haven't done a day's work in their indolent lives! And the French retire earlier than most places in Europe as it is, so their petulant bleating (and smashing up of streets) completely fails to move me.

-It's all very well to talk about the halcyon Avalon of free university grants, but back in the 1970s 14% of British school leavers went on to university. Now it has more than trebled to 43%. Something's got to give somewhere. 

-For ****'s sake, for the umpteenth ****ing time, fees are not a barrier to entry[/u]. Under the student loan system you only have to pay once the degree is completed, and then only once you've reached a certain income level, so your background is irrelevant - and before you leap down my throat condemning me as the typical insensitive Tory, you should know that Vince Cable said the exact same thing.

We currently have what is misleadingly called a system of 'tuition fees'. Many people believe, wrongly that when students arrive at university they or their parents are required to get out their chequebooks, or wallets, and pay more than £3000 for a year's tuition.

The idea that students are repelled from higher education by fees owes much to this erroneous belief.

In reality of course most students meet these costs by taking a student loan, payable direct from income after graduation when earning a reasonable salary.

Cable goes on to criticise the current system in that someone like me (an archaeologist) has to pay a similar amount to a stockbroker with a higher salary, but there is no financial barrier stopping a salt-of-the-earth blue-collar honest-crust flat-cap working-class person from applying for law or medicine or any other upwardly mobile degree should he so desire. To insinuate otherwise is fearmongering agitprop from people deliberately trying to provoke a false crisis. In short, lies.

[vzzbux]

Any student found guilty of antagonism, violence or criminal damage should be kicked out of uni altogether.
What started out as a good idea tuned into a disgrace and I was sickened and getting angry just looking at the events on the news. Don't get me started on the idiots that where throwing objects off the building onto the police. Attempted murder springs to mind.




V

[House of Usher]

I only briefly glimpsed the lunchtime news so I haven't got up yet. The most ludicrous tit I saw on the lunchtime news was the student who said something along the lines of:

"Education is a right. Everyone should have the right to go to university and get the kind of job they want."

I don't know where he heard that, and I don't know of any political party that promotes that as one of its core beliefs!

If one accepts that education is a right, then the principle is met by two resolutions: one is that everyone in Britain gets free education up to the age of 16; the other is that everyone gets to compete for a place to study at university on an equal basis regardless of income, and if you don't get a place then so be it.

Nobody has an automatic right to get the kind of job they want. Real life is a bit more complicated than that.

[Peter Wolf]

Any student found guilty of antagonism, violence or criminal damage should be kicked out of uni altogether.
What started out as a good idea tuned into a disgrace and I was sickened and getting angry just looking at the events on the news. Don't get me started on the idiots that where throwing objects off the building onto the police. Attempted murder springs to mind.




V

I am always very suspicious of the black clad black masked teenagers/young adults who appear at protests and whenever they do it always turns into a riot.They are like a Rent-A-Mob of Useful Idiots who are hired to sabotage protests.They are a convenient way to discredit legitimate peaceful protests as police often just stand and watch them and do nothing while peaceful legitimate protesters are often corralled and assaulted.I have seen this time and time again.

I would like to know exactly who hires and recruits them and why the police often just stand and watch them smash up property*.They need to be surrounded and have the shit kicked out of them after they have been de-masked and photographed and i dont mean by the police.If you smash up others property then you deserve it.
Rioting achieves nothing anyway.


*I have my suspicions.State sponsored Dis-Establishmentarianism.


While i was typing i was thinking that there are moves to audit and end the privately owned FEDRES Ponzi scheme operators before they buy enough Treasury bonds to forclose on the US not to mention at least 100 other reasons.They will wind down the operation to escape being seized and audited once the dollar collapses which is already happening 100 years more or less after it was established which is interesting because last weekend they were celebrating 100 years of financially and politically raping the US.

Crashing the dollar creates the right pretext to wind down the FED but it will be only for public consumption.

In the meantime there will be moves to end the FEDRES in as much as incorporating it into a centralised world bank owned and controlled by the same Ponzi scheme FEDRES operators - the solution to the current economic problems-the solution to the problem and the reaction they themselves caused.Their base of operations moves out of the US where they think they wont be scrutinised.They might think that removing the focus of all the attention will save themselves but that would be a miscalculation.

Another scenario is that they want to bankrupt the US before the FEDRES is able to be scrutinised to completely disable its people and its political system.Again this is a miscalculation as the FEDRES has gone way past the point of no return.

I think both of these will happen.

I say this because there is so much heat on the FEDRES that is growing by the day that something has to give and its simply a matter of who does what first.Anyway in the end the FEDRES will be very difficult to properly investigate as its activities are so convoluted and no doubt they have destroyed any evidence that would compromise them but again this is another miscalculation as the QE 2 is an act of economic terrorism in itself.Things will get a lot worse before they get any better unfortunately simply because its all accelerating so quickly which is an obvious strategy on their part.

The FEDRES financially rapes you and the TSA feels you up.



Keep the heat and the pressure on them as it is having a positive effect and tell others about this or else sit there and dont do anything while you sabotage your own future.