# Benefits street



## Matt B (Apr 8, 2007)

OMFG!


----------



## YELLOW_TT (Feb 25, 2004)

Only seen the advert and that looked bad enough


----------



## PaulS (Jun 15, 2002)

YELLOW_TT said:


> Only seen the advert and that looked bad enough


So did I, and I made a mental note to avoid it.

The trouble is programs like this probably encourage the feral scum breeding at the bottom of our society to act in the same way as their TV hereos. Who actually watches this shit? What's the point? Other than CH4 getting some advertising revenue from those watching the program. What were the adverts in between? Poundland, Cash converters, Wonga loans?

Oh well, there are only another 4 episodes to avoid.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

Is it as bad as "the scheme" from a few years back?


----------



## Shug750S (Feb 6, 2012)

Saw it on catch up...

Camera crew even went on a shoplifting trip with one of the 'stars', watched him prepare his bag with foil to avoid setting off alarms, then filmed him showing nicked gear and smasing security tags off before reselling... If that isn't being an accomplice then what is it...

If I didn't know it was a documentary I would have thought it was a spoof program


----------



## thenewguy (Oct 4, 2012)

If the Daily Mail made TV...............


----------



## mwad (Oct 11, 2013)

I daren't watch it to be honest - I'll end up bring totally pissed off


----------



## Matt B (Apr 8, 2007)

mwad said:


> I daren't watch it to be honest - I'll end up bring totally pissed off


That pretty much sums it up. I was kind of expecting to see a few normal folks down on their luck but was treated to a selection of the most delinquent people i have ever seen

However in the midst of it all the 50p man made me smile.


----------



## YELLOW_TT (Feb 25, 2004)

I see one of them has been arrested on drugs charges what a surprise


----------



## Fab 4 TT (Sep 28, 2004)

Uk income tax for 2010-2011 came in at approx £150 Billion

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/apr/25/tax-receipts-1963

Benefit Payments accounts for half of this. That's approx £75 Billion.

However it's demonstrated, portrayed, articulated, a proportion of that £75 Billion pounds is going to the residents of benefits street. Whether you think it's merited or not. They are receiving this.

How people can give such a socialist, left wing bile defence for the actions of the residents of benefits street is beyond me?

If you care about these people so much. You pick up the fucking bill.

I'll support the disabled, the unemployed, those who genuinely need support. I have no problem with allocating some of my private sector pay to help those who can't help themselves. What I can't tolerate is people who defend them, and maintain that there is a moral obligation to keep furnishing their lives when one just doesn't exist.

If I couldn't find employment within my sector I'd have to look for a less qualified, less remunerated position, and work back over until you found me serving you popcorn at cineworld.

These fuckers are dead from the feet up. Nothing will ever change that. That doesn't mean I need to keep paying.


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

I don't think anyone has defended them, have they? The episode mostly focused on two career criminals, stealing to feed their drug and alcohol addictions and it's hard to imagine even the most "socialist, left wing bile" producing people will be saying that's fine.


----------



## Fab 4 TT (Sep 28, 2004)

Spandex said:


> I don't think anyone has defended them, have they? The episode mostly focused on two career criminals, stealing to feed their drug and alcohol addictions and it's hard to imagine even the most "socialist, left wing bile" producing people will be saying that's fine.


You thought wrong.

http://order-order.com/2014/01/07/8-loony-left-over-reactions-to-benefitsstreet/


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

Fab 4 TT said:


> Spandex said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think anyone has defended them, have they? The episode mostly focused on two career criminals, stealing to feed their drug and alcohol addictions and it's hard to imagine even the most "socialist, left wing bile" producing people will be saying that's fine.
> ...


No, you missed the point of their complaints. They're claiming the programme encourages hatred of people on benefits by showing the worst they can find (planting the seed in the mind of the public that this is what all benefit claimants are like). So, they weren't defending the people on the programme - quite the opposite in fact.


----------



## Fab 4 TT (Sep 28, 2004)

Spandex said:


> Fab 4 TT said:
> 
> 
> > Spandex said:
> ...


We do this every time Spandex. We are at different ends of the spectrum. We never agree.

Have you read the replies on order order? They run the same theme as my post.

By virtue of the fact they are criticising the producers of the show they are defending the actions of these residents. Which incidentally my post was directly aimed at. This street isn't unique. It is a reflection of what exists in some capacity in many towns and city's in the UK.

To note, there are no criticisms of the actions of the residents by any of the 'tweet's? Where's the balance? Surely one of these tweet's would criticise the actions of the 'few' of Benefits Street?

So they weren't defending them? Completely the opposite? I see no evidence.


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

Fab 4 TT said:


> We do this every time Spandex. We are at different ends of the spectrum. We never agree.


I'm not making a political point. I'm just saying I've yet to see anyone defending *the actions of the people in this episode*, and you've not provided links to anyone defending them either.


Fab 4 TT said:


> Have you read the replies on order order? They run the same theme as my post.


I've not read the comments section, no. I don't see what it will prove, other than that there are other people in the world who agree with you. As I've not tried to claim you're alone in your views, I don't see what either of us have to gain from me reading the comments section.


Fab 4 TT said:


> By virtue of the fact they are criticising the producers of the show they are defending the actions of these residents. Which incidentally my post was directly aimed at. This street isn't unique. It is a reflection of what exists in some capacity in many towns and city's in the UK.


That makes no logical sense. They can criticise the camera work without defending the action of the residents, they can criticise the production values without defending the actions of the residents and they can criticise the effect of making such a documentary (which is what they're doing) without defending the actions of the residents.

Of course this street isn't unique, but that's hardly relevant. The point is, is this street representative of people on benefits in general? Personally, I doubt it is.


Fab 4 TT said:


> To note, there are no criticisms of the actions of the residents by any of the 'tweet's? Where's the balance? Surely one of these tweet's would criticise the actions of the 'few' of Benefits Street?


Do you mean there's no balance in the tweets that have been carefully selected by that site you linked to, or that there's no balance in all the tweets ever posted about the program? Do you think that site just picked a random sample of tweets about #benefitsstreet?



Fab 4 TT said:


> So they weren't defending them? Completely the opposite? I see no evidence.


It's a logical conclusion. If I were to believe that Channel 4 are trying to make benefits claimants *in general *look bad by showing specific benefits claimants behaving badly, then it follows that I must agree that the benefits claimants shown in the Channel 4 documentary were behaving badly.


----------



## kevbeans (Jun 14, 2013)

I accidentally saw half of this crap because I walked in the room while the other half had it on. They all looked like scum who had never even looked for a job and never would, just like those couples who have kids but expect us all to pick up the bill. Stop all their benefits, if they need to steal to eat then stick the offenders in big cold secure barns with the cheapest food needed to survive and let them sort their own problems out. Streets like the one featured might become less common.


----------



## zltm089 (Jul 27, 2009)

kevbeans said:


> I accidentally saw half of this crap because I walked in the room while the other half had it on. They all looked like scum who had never even looked for a job and never would, just like those couples who have kids but expect us all to pick up the bill. Stop all their benefits, if they need to steal to eat then stick the offenders in big cold secure barns with the cheapest food needed to survive and let them sort their own problems out. Streets like the one featured might become less common.


Plus one...

I didn't bother watching it, as it would piss me off too much.


----------



## NickG (Aug 15, 2013)

Having watched Benefits street, it's not much different to Sesame Street.

Both have a big bird, a bloke living out of a bin, and people trying to learn the alphabet.


----------



## mstew (Mar 17, 2012)

NickG said:


> Having watched Benefits street, it's not much different to Sesame Street.
> 
> Both have a big bird, a bloke living out of a bin, and people trying to learn the alphabet.


HAHAHA quality! :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

NickG said:


> Having watched Benefits street, it's not much different to Sesame Street.
> 
> Both have a big bird, a bloke living out of a bin, and people trying to learn the alphabet.


Win!


----------



## roddy (Dec 25, 2008)

hahahah,, very good nick,, :lol: 
I didn't watch the prog but read some things about it,, unfortunately it suits some bigoted " Andy Cap " type mentalities who then use this as a stick to beat on those who cannot defend themselves


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

Very good Nick :lol:

I saw about two minutes of it and am not defending any character featured but I did hear complaints were made by other residents that Channel 4 had told everyone that they were making a documentary on how people got on with each other - the provocative title was added later. Also, although the street was obviously chosen to be an extreme example the claim that 80% (was it?) of residents were "on benefits" was unsubstantiated and simply taken from a heresy quote - what does that mean anyway - collecting your pension or child benefit? It's obviously designed to provoke a reaction and it seems people were encouraged along certain lines. Not exactly representative of society in general so I wouldn't conclude the country is going to the dogs on the strength of this - I'd be more concerned with what certain programme makers think is justified as entertainment masquerading within a claim of balanced presentation amd worry about the quality of journalism.


----------



## Stampers (Sep 16, 2009)

Fab 4 TT said:


> I'll support the disabled, the unemployed, those who genuinely need support. I have no problem with allocating some of my private sector pay to help those who can't help themselves. What I can't tolerate is people who defend them, and maintain that there is a moral obligation to keep furnishing their lives when one just doesn't exist.
> 
> If I couldn't find employment within my sector I'd have to look for a less qualified, less remunerated position, and work back over until you found me serving you popcorn at cineworld.


Can't agree more with what has been said in the statements above.

I just don't understand those people who go to the jobcentre, year after year, claiming that they have made an effort to find a career when in all honesty, they can't be bothered. Are they setting their standards too high? Are they overqualified for all of the jobs available? Or are they just so idle-minded that the most they'll attempt is to go into the jobcentre to ensure they get their £40 a week? It just reminds me of that EMA payment that kids at Sixth Form College were receiving to go to lessons. Yeah, the kid gets money as an incentive to go to lessons, but it doesn't mean they'll bother to learn anything in the lesson itself. They're just going so they can get the money; quite similar with some adults who are addicted to the benefits lifestyle.

I was on jobseekers allowance for 3 months after I had finished University (during the time of "The Great Recession"), and before I started a full-time career. I have never been on it since, and I don't justify the fact that "because my parents have paid tax all of their life, I'm entitled to free money". I feel it is justified as I am now working full-time (and have been for the last 5 years) and I am now giving back to the government the money that I took whilst on that allowance (even though it belongs to the taxpayers).

Don't get me wrong, everyone has their own story, and I understand and respect that. It's when you see people that you went to school with, know their families and understand their situations, and you see them in the jobcentre every two weeks, making no effort to search for a career. They go in there, get a signature, and head straight to the bookies or the pub. THAT is the lifestyle that I refuse to support.

I'm more than happy to help those who are disabled/have been injured or incapacitated/or are in need of the extra funds for daily life. I am also happy to help those who require the funds to help find a career (as I know how difficult it can be). I'm less than happy to help people like this...


----------



## Stampers (Sep 16, 2009)

NickG said:


> Having watched Benefits street, it's not much different to Sesame Street.
> 
> Both have a big bird, a bloke living out of a bin, and people trying to learn the alphabet.


Haha! Very good!


----------



## mstew (Mar 17, 2012)

Erm :/ mother of the year award nominee?


----------



## rmart030 (Jan 27, 2014)

NickG said:


> Having watched Benefits street, it's not much different to Sesame Street.
> 
> Both have a big bird, a bloke living out of a bin, and people trying to learn the alphabet.


If only they were bothering to learn the alphabet, half of them wouldn't be on benefits street. But they're all too lazy and dependant on handouts to be bothered to try to make something better of themselves. Then the fat white woman makes her daughter feel stupid for wanting to do well in school and get a job! :x


----------



## NickG (Aug 15, 2013)

rmart030 said:


> NickG said:
> 
> 
> > Having watched Benefits street, it's not much different to Sesame Street.
> ...


 :lol: :lol: They could do with a visit from The Count!!


----------



## Beezaboi10 (Feb 5, 2013)

I watched half an episode and wanted to shoot myself in the face. Revolting people that do not deserve anything, disgraceful that we're all paying for it.


----------



## zltm089 (Jul 27, 2009)

It was kickin off yesterday!....bunch of chavs fighting for their right NOT to work.

Stop everything and let them cocktards starve. :x


----------



## egg1000 (Jan 3, 2014)

http://www.cas.org.uk/features/myth-busting-real-figures-benefit-fraud

Two wrongs don't make a right, but I'm far more furious about the hundreds of educated professional swindlers siphoning thousands and thousands for their own personal gain than the lazy daft ones who barely scrape together enough (even through fraud) for a barely comfortable living. Let them have their *** and tattoo money (for now) and let's turn our attention to the career criminals!

The Daily Mail and Channel 4 mindset has us squabbling about (by comparison) a trivial aspect of UK fraud, while turning a blind eye to the real issues that no political party seems to be able to solve. The filthy rich making SOCIETY significantly worse off, ironically, frequently through fraud like tax evasion.

Bring back the 83% tax bracket like we used to have in the 70's. Reduce the income for the high fliers, to encourage them to put it back in the pockets of the working classes. Then those lazy arses will get off their backsides and back into work anyway... because it will be worth it!


----------



## Fab 4 TT (Sep 28, 2004)

In reply to Spandex, the camera lens doesn't lie. This is part of British life.

To ignore it and claim otherwise just isn't credible. To claim the programmes motives as something else is just laughable. To then wish death on the produces just goes to illustrate what a truly evil and despicable group of people Labour supporters can really be.

For channel 4 to scratch at the surface of the benefit state is enough of a catalyst to fire that little pilot light in people's mind to ask, Where is the value of giving my money to them?

The state philosophy underpins the very existence of the Labour Party. So to expose its flaws to each and every voter is dangerous. Therefore it must be discredited at all cost.


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

Fab 4 TT said:


> In reply to Spandex, the camera lens doesn't lie.


Where's the facepalm smiley when you need it??


----------



## Fab 4 TT (Sep 28, 2004)

Where's the 'shit falls out of your mouth' smiley when you need it??


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

Fab 4 TT said:


> Where's the 'shit falls out of your mouth' smiley when you need it??


Shouldn't you be posting something irrelevant about the Labour party instead of wasting your time trying to write witty comebacks here? Quick! There might be someone out there who still cares what you think about politics!!


----------



## Fab 4 TT (Sep 28, 2004)

One thing I don't do is waste my time on this forum. When did you join?

This forum is a great place, full of value. I dip in, read some stuff, have a think, maybe ponder a little. Then add some value where I can.

I've been impartial and made it clear I want to support people out of work. Just stating you want to work isn't enough. You should demonstrate it so it substantiates that everyone in work should continue to support you. Why should everyone else who is working, enjoying their own life have to take a proportion of their wage off the kitchen table and give it to someone else with no actual inclination to work?

If they can exist in benefits street. They can exist everywhere. This most fuckingly is not isolated.

It has to stop, and benefits must only be paid to those who absolutely require it.

We just can't afford the £200 billion pound welfare and pension cost. We are borrowing this amount every year above our tax incomes. Ultimately our kids and grand kids will have to pick up the bill and or suffer from the diminishing quality of services because we are too busy furnishing the debt instead of advancing as a nation.

I'm off to make tea.


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

I have no problem with any of that. It's your opinion and I don't agree with all of it but at least it's a description of what you actually believe is the problem rather than a party political broadcast.

Politicians enjoy playing pointless games trying to distract everyone from the problem by blaming people instead of creating solutions. We shouldn't sink to their level. I don't really care what Labour did or what the Conservatives did before them, I just care what the current government are *actually doing*.


----------



## ronin (Sep 6, 2003)

Bunch of wonky fucks the lot of them.
Send them out to Taliban land and let them fend for themselves.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

