# £500 a week benefit cap shocker lol



## Matt B

THey have just been talking about this on the news and there was a young girl with three kids saying that she got £615 in benefits a week and the government were gonna cut this down to £500 a week.
I mean ffs I can see why the country may be struggling to get people into work.

615 x 52 weeks = 31980 per year.

Now thats obviously tax free, so lets say she was in work and wanted that as a take home salary. I would roughly say she would need to earn about 38 grand a year. Bloody hell no wonder she would rather not work.


----------



## chassmash

Matt B said:


> THey have just been talking about this on the news and there was a young girl with three kids saying that she got £615 in benefits a week and the government were gonna cut this down to £500 a week.
> I mean ffs I can see why the country may be struggling to get people into work.
> 
> 615 x 52 weeks = 31980 per year.
> 
> Now thats obviously tax free, so lets say she was in work and wanted that as a take home salary. I would roughly say she would need to earn about 38 grand a year. Bloody hell no wonder she would rather not work.


Yea I saw that got to agree matt bit of a joke ,but I bet she got the best iPhone money can buy and did ya notice the tats and the tan she gets pampered whilst the kids get beans on toast bitch :evil:


----------



## simno44

And this.... Is why I find a starting salary cut of 4k per annum for a probationary police officer. A down right disgrace. 
Along side many other abominations.


----------



## mighTy Tee

How many (average) £30k salaries worth of PAYE does it take to support these leaches?

All benifit should be in the form of "food/essentials" hand outs with a small amount cash, thus preventing spending on luxuries such as mobiles, **** and booze. There is certainly no way a woman like the above is going to earn a take home £600+ per week


----------



## Gazzer

mighTy Tee said:


> How many (average) £30k salaries worth of PAYE does it take to support these leaches?
> 
> All benifit should be in the form of "food/essentials" hand outs with a small amount cash, thus preventing spending on luxuries such as mobiles, **** and booze. There is certainly no way a woman like the above is going to earn a take home £600+ per week


unless she was on the game Richard lol, i would give child benefit for first child only and then.........PAY FOR YA OWN KIN BRATS


----------



## Mark Davies

Gazzer said:


> i would give child benefit for first child only and then.........PAY FOR YA OWN KIN BRATS


Sounds simple, but it's never that straight-forward. If it's the same item I saw the woman in question had not been on benefits when she'd had the children and found herself in the situation she was in following a divorce. It's an uncertain world and with the economy in the state it is in at the moment any one of us can find ourselves kneck-deep in the shite almost over night. I imagine when that happens our views on benefits will take a substantial shift.

However, there is a very real question to ask about the disinsentive to work. Getting the equivalent to a £38k salary without having to get out of bed is not good. It's way over the average national salary and so quite probably more than she could expect to earn when working. It does raise the question of if the benefits system thinks this is what someone in her position needs as a minimum to get by then how come employers are getting away with paying so much less? Clearly you can survive on less - people do it all the time. It does add some strength to the 'living wage' argument though.

I hate to accept that there may be something in a Tory policy but no doubt there is a great deal of support for capping benefits to average salary levels, however I'm not sure capping housing benefits is a great idea. The result, surely, is that all the unemployed get shifted out of the more expensive and affluent areas and dumped wherever housing happens to be cheaper. We then get rich areas with virtually no unemployment while other areas are swamped with people out of work. With only so much employment available in those areas (and presumably limited in the first place) then how do we get those people back into work?

Okay, the tax payer shouldn't be paying thousands of pounds per week housing people in homes most of us who work could never afford, but a simplistic monetary cap is a lazy solution. The real answer is to provide affordable housing in these areas in the first place - and here is where the Tory 'right to buy' policy is exposed as the disaster it was always going to be.


----------



## c15 ttt

Matt B said:


> THey have just been talking about this on the news and there was a young girl with three kids saying that she got £615 in benefits a week and the government were gonna cut this down to £500 a week.
> I mean ffs I can see why the country may be struggling to get people into work.
> 
> 615 x 52 weeks = 31980 per year.
> 
> Now thats obviously tax free, so lets say she was in work and wanted that as a take home salary. I would roughly say she would need to earn about 38 grand a year. Bloody hell no wonder she would rather not work.


if that is true,im disgusted. :x .the benefits system is a joke.how on earth can that be so.maybe the reason why i pay a fortune in tax whilst working my socks off for the privelidge.give over.


----------



## Matt B

Mark Davies said:


> Gazzer said:
> 
> 
> 
> i would give child benefit for first child only and then.........PAY FOR YA OWN KIN BRATS
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds simple, but it's never that straight-forward. If it's the same item I saw the woman in question had not been on benefits when she'd had the children and found herself in the situation she was in following a divorce. It's an uncertain world and with the economy in the state it is in at the moment any one of us can find ourselves kneck-deep in the shite almost over night. I imagine when that happens our views on benefits will take a substantial shift.
> 
> However, there is a very real question to ask about the disinsentive to work. Getting the equivalent to a £38k salary without having to get out of bed is not good. It's way over the average national salary and so quite probably more than she could expect to earn when working. It does raise the question of if the benefits system thinks this is what someone in her position needs as a minimum to get by then how come employers are getting away with paying so much less? Clearly you can survive on less - people do it all the time. It does add some strength to the 'living wage' argument though.
> 
> I hate to accept that there may be something in a Tory policy but no doubt there is a great deal of support for capping benefits to average salary levels, however I'm not sure capping housing benefits is a great idea. The result, surely, is that all the unemployed get shifted out of the more expensive and affluent areas and dumped wherever housing happens to be cheaper. We then get rich areas with virtually no unemployment while other areas are swamped with people out of work. With only so much employment available in those areas (and presumably limited in the first place) then how do we get those people back into work?
> 
> Okay, the tax payer shouldn't be paying thousands of pounds per week housing people in homes most of us who work could never afford, but a simplistic monetary cap is a lazy solution. The real answer is to provide affordable housing in these areas in the first place - and here is where the Tory 'right to buy' policy is exposed as the disaster it was always going to be.
Click to expand...

Mark, that is the point I was making. I wasn't questioning her right to financial support but as you say it's the lack of any incentive to do any sort of value adding activity.
In this case she was paying 300 a week in rent for what looked like a pretty small flat in London that's 1200 a month which could frankly pay a sizeable mortgage. When questioned about moving out of London where less money would be required to house her she responded saying she could not move as this is where her extended family live who support her with the kids. Now I hate to be a sceptic but these people could also be potentially in a similar situation claiming thousands to house them. There are plenty of people who work in London but can't afford to live there, so why people who do not work think they have the right to live there is hard to fathom.
I would suggest there is plenty of time where the kids are in school that she could be gainfully employed, maybe helping out in public service or something, as a sort of qualifying criteria for retaining the benefits. I am not pretending this is an easy situation but if this country is ever to climb from the doldrums then folks can't just be propped up like this on their own terms.
Working for a living should never be a less attractive option.


----------



## c15 ttt

Sounds simple, but it's never that straight-forward. If it's the same item I saw the woman in question had not been on benefits when she'd had the children and found herself in the situation she was in following a divorce. It's an uncertain world and with the economy in the state it is in at the moment any one of us can find ourselves kneck-deep in the shite almost over night. I imagine when that happens our views on benefits will take a substantial shift.

However, there is a very real question to ask about the disinsentive to work. Getting the equivalent to a £38k salary without having to get out of bed is not good. It's way over the average national salary and so quite probably more than she could expect to earn when working. It does raise the question of if the benefits system thinks this is what someone in her position needs as a minimum to get by then how come employers are getting away with paying so much less? Clearly you can survive on less - people do it all the time. It does add some strength to the 'living wage' argument though.

I hate to accept that there may be something in a Tory policy but no doubt there is a great deal of support for capping benefits to average salary levels, however I'm not sure capping housing benefits is a great idea. The result, surely, is that all the unemployed get shifted out of the more expensive and affluent areas and dumped wherever housing happens to be cheaper. We then get rich areas with virtually no unemployment while other areas are swamped with people out of work. With only so much employment available in those areas (and presumably limited in the first place) then how do we get those people back into work?

Okay, the tax payer shouldn't be paying thousands of pounds per week housing people in homes most of us who work could never afford, but a simplistic monetary cap is a lazy solution. The real answer is to provide affordable housing in these areas in the first place - and here is where the Tory 'right to buy' policy is exposed as the disaster it was always going to be.[/quote]

Mark, that is the point I was making. I wasn't questioning her right to financial support but as you say it's the lack of any incentive to do any sort of value adding activity.
In this case she was paying 300 a week in rent for what looked like a pretty small flat in London that's 1200 a month which could frankly pay a sizeable mortgage. When questioned about moving out of London where less money would be required to house her she responded saying she could not move as this is where her extended family live who support her with the kids. Now I hate to be a sceptic but these people could also be potentially in a similar situation claiming thousands to house them. There are plenty of people who work in London but can't afford to live there, so why people who do not work think they have the right to live there is hard to fathom.
I would suggest there is plenty of time where the kids are in school that she could be gainfully employed, maybe helping out in public service or something, as a sort of qualifying criteria for retaining the benefits. I am not pretending this is an easy situation but if this country is ever to climb from the doldrums then folks can't just be propped up like this on their own terms.
Working for a living should never be a less attractive option.[/quote]

+1.well said.


----------



## Gazzer

Mark Davies said:


> Gazzer said:
> 
> 
> 
> i would give child benefit for first child only and then.........PAY FOR YA OWN KIN BRATS
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds simple, but it's never that straight-forward. If it's the same item I saw the woman in question had not been on benefits when she'd had the children and found herself in the situation she was in following a divorce. It's an uncertain world and with the economy in the state it is in at the moment any one of us can find ourselves kneck-deep in the shite almost over night. I imagine when that happens our views on benefits will take a substantial shift.
> 
> However, there is a very real question to ask about the disinsentive to work. Getting the equivalent to a £38k salary without having to get out of bed is not good. It's way over the average national salary and so quite probably more than she could expect to earn when working. It does raise the question of if the benefits system thinks this is what someone in her position needs as a minimum to get by then how come employers are getting away with paying so much less? Clearly you can survive on less - people do it all the time. It does add some strength to the 'living wage' argument though.
> 
> I hate to accept that there may be something in a Tory policy but no doubt there is a great deal of support for capping benefits to average salary levels, however I'm not sure capping housing benefits is a great idea. The result, surely, is that all the unemployed get shifted out of the more expensive and affluent areas and dumped wherever housing happens to be cheaper. We then get rich areas with virtually no unemployment while other areas are swamped with people out of work. With only so much employment available in those areas (and presumably limited in the first place) then how do we get those people back into work?
> 
> Okay, the tax payer shouldn't be paying thousands of pounds per week housing people in homes most of us who work could never afford, but a simplistic monetary cap is a lazy solution. The real answer is to provide affordable housing in these areas in the first place - and here is where the Tory 'right to buy' policy is exposed as the disaster it was always going to be.
Click to expand...

Mark I didn't just mean on benefit peeps, in general I mean. If a man and woman decide to have more than one child that is up to them I think and not our taxes to pay for it. If they split up due to marital or relationship problems then they should have their tax codes increased to pay for the benefits paid.


----------



## YoungOldUn

Matt B said:


> THey have just been talking about this on the news and there was a young girl with three kids saying that she got £615 in benefits a week and the government were gonna cut this down to £500 a week.
> I mean ffs I can see why the country may be struggling to get people into work.
> 
> 615 x 52 weeks = 31980 per year.
> 
> Now thats obviously tax free, so lets say she was in work and wanted that as a take home salary. I would roughly say she would need to earn about 38 grand a year. Bloody hell no wonder she would rather not work.


Gaz by the time income tax, national insurance etc are taken into account, she would have to be earning well over 40k per annum to be able to take home £615 per week. I agree with some of what has been said, she was in a particular circumstance due to divorce but there must be others who fall into the 'Lets just have more children and then the state will provide' category.


----------



## Guest

YoungOldUn said:


> Matt B said:
> 
> 
> 
> THey have just been talking about this on the news and there was a young girl with three kids saying that she got £615 in benefits a week and the government were gonna cut this down to £500 a week.
> I mean ffs I can see why the country may be struggling to get people into work.
> 
> 615 x 52 weeks = 31980 per year.
> 
> Now thats obviously tax free, so lets say she was in work and wanted that as a take home salary. I would roughly say she would need to earn about 38 grand a year. Bloody hell no wonder she would rather not work.
> 
> 
> 
> Gaz by the time income tax, national insurance etc are taken into account, she would have to be earning well over 40k per annum to be able to take home £615 per week. I agree with some of what has been said, she was in a particular circumstance due to divorce but there must be others who fall into the 'Lets just have more children and then the state will provide' category.
Click to expand...

how about the couple from derby, who was on the tv sometime ago bragging about how its not worth working as he gets more from benefits.also the woman with 11 children who is having a house specially built for her costing the taxpayers £400,000 who then says she's not sure she will accept it because of the publicity she's got.
then on the other hand we have someone who's worked all their life and is not entitled to social housing when they retire.where's the equality in that !
makes my blood boil.


----------



## CWM3

Not commenting on this particular case, but this country is full of lazy, thieving benefit scroungers, who knock out kids on a regular basis....in effect that is their job. Basically just watering down the gene pool.

If they are not prepared to keep their legs shut and behave responsibly then they should be sterilised.

Plenty of decent hard working peeps who through no fault of their own are out of work and get fook all while this poncing underclass thrive.


----------



## Gazzer

CWM3 said:


> Not commenting on this particular case, but this country is full of lazy, thieving benefit scroungers, who knock out kids on a regular basis....in effect that is their job. Basically just watering down the gene pool.
> 
> If they are not prepared to keep their legs shut and behave responsibly then they should be sterilised.
> 
> Plenty of decent hard working peeps who through no fault of their own are out of work and get fook all while this poncing underclass thrive.


+1 but what do we do about it bud?


----------



## Canis

I am going back a long way with this tale, but it is still relevant today. I once had to do an investigation into mortgage indemnity payments (those policies you used to have to take out if your mortgage was over 75% of the property value) as well as payment insurance policies. As part of that got to go and visit various people who were facing having to make a claim due to loosing their jobs (mid 90s). I went to visit one man who had been a mid level manager prior to loosing his job and fairly well paid for the time (paying higher rate tax on his PAYE income). As he was obviously well qualified for his job role I had to ask him why he was finding it so difficult to get another job and looking like he would have to make a claim for someone else to pay his mortgage. He was very honest and told me that if the insurance paid on on his claim so he got to live in his £800,000 house without fear of loosing it (house probably now worth well over the £1m mark) then there was no incentive to take a job any more as he made more take home in benefits than he ever did working. This came from someone who had been employed for over 30 years by the same company and was well used to working life, but the revelation to him that he could now be paid the same or more to relax and enjoy his life just meant he had no incentive to find work.

Now if you consider the benefit system hasn't really changed that much since then (names have changed, values have increased, if that was his situation then why would someone who was looking at being paid around £25-30k at most want to get a job? Until benefits are put at a level where it is an advantage to find work then people will milk the system with no incentive to find another way to support themselves.


----------



## Gazzer

Gives food for thought, thanks for that but we already knew the rich we're thieving gifts lol.


----------



## CWM3

Gazzer said:


> +1 but what do we do about it bud?


Thats a problem I cannot see an answer too. The benefits culture is too entrenched for some people, and the poor sprogs are influenced by what they see, which is a parent/parents if they know both of them, laying on their fat arses and reproducing more and more sprogs and poncing of the rest of us....its no wonder we have the sink estates and social issues we face...just waters down the gene pool to its lowest common denominator. For some of these young women, its a choice of going out, using thier brain and working, or laying on their backs with their legs in the air with an equally mentally challenged male and reproducing as many little bastards as possible...then letting the rest work our knackers off to support their putrid lifestyle.


----------



## BrianR

CWM3 said:


> Gazzer said:
> 
> 
> 
> +1 but what do we do about it bud?
> 
> 
> 
> Thats a problem I cannot see an answer too. The benefits culture is too entrenched for some people, and the poor sprogs are influenced by what they see, which is a parent/parents if they know both of them, laying on their fat arses and reproducing more and more sprogs and poncing of the rest of us....its no wonder we have the sink estates and social issues we face...just waters down the gene pool to its lowest common denominator. For some of these young women, its a choice of going out, using thier brain and working, or laying on their backs with their legs in the air with an equally mentally challenged male and reproducing as many little bastards as possible...then letting the rest work our knackers off to support their putrid lifestyle.
Click to expand...

+1. The shamless scenario is alive and well and in some cases getting bigger. Trouble is that when millions are losing their jobs, left with little hope, then we all have to accept some responsibility for what is happening. 2500 more people from Thomas Cook just about to enter the fray


----------



## roddy

CWM3 said:


> Not commenting on this particular case, but this country is full of lazy, thieving benefit scroungers, who knock out kids on a regular basis....in effect that is their job. Basically just watering down the gene pool.
> 
> If they are not prepared to keep their legs shut and behave responsibly then they should be sterilised.
> 
> Plenty of decent hard working peeps who through no fault of their own are out of work and get fook all while this poncing underclass thrive.


" poncing underworld class thrive ",, jeez man,, what world do you live in ????? :? ,,,,,,,,,, sorry, maybe you are refering to the 400 barclays bangsters or the 250 BoS staff etc who ruined this country and for their services received over 1 million , and in some cases over 5 mil, pounds reward,,,yes sure,,,,,,,,


----------



## CWM3

I live in the same fucking world as you pal, so you should be aware of the scum ripping the rest of us off, but of course you know that don't you?

If your pissed off with their pay then start a thread about it, sure it will run and run.


----------



## roddy

for sure pall you live in the same ( fkn ? ) world as i do,, also for sure ( pall ) is that if you think our problems are going to be solved by taking the benefits from a couple of fat useless spongers from Scunthorp then we are in very different places,, far from highlighting , daily mail / mirror style , some extreme exceptions it would be far more productive to focus on the real theives in our society and not be conned by the " weapons of mass distraction " into victimising the vulnerable of our society,,,, incase you are mistaken, i have no sympathy for the " fat useless spongers in scunthorp " , but when you look at the 3.5k million pounds paid out in bonuses to only one of the banks which led us all into this shit house condition it focuses my mind in a very different direction to yours,,, pall............ [smiley=book2.gif]


----------



## Gazzer

chances are Roddy if you added up the benefit paid to all of the benefit fraudsters and general lazy don't want to work folks in the uk.....the bankers bonuses wouldn't even be 10% of the number. don't forget bud our social bill is billions per annum not millions m8.
i'm not condoning the banks, as i feel the same way in reality but it is at least legal in what they do is it not?


----------



## roddy

yes i have often wondered what a total of all bank bonus payments , i only mentioned Barclays , would be,, added to to profits of armaments companies , some of whom do not even have to disclose the names of their share holders ( huh ! ) along with other embedded self interesred burdens on the tax trough,,, i dont know for sure but i seem to remember a figure that showed the total expense of fraud on the welfare budget was amere 1 or .1 % ,,,,, i would like to know for sure,,,, spandy ?????


----------



## CWM3

Roddy, wow you really are a bitter guy ain't you, still with a good following wind you will get your own little utopia in the next couple of years, I am sure it will be as good as the Garden of Eden, and everything will be fair and equitable and no one will take the piss, not those at the top or those at the bottom, you'll all be equal, how nice would that be?


----------



## BrianR

spandy ?????[/quote]

:lol: :lol:

Come on Spandy lets have the facts [smiley=book2.gif] , even I want to hear these


----------



## roddy

come on then brian,, why dont you do a bit of research yourself,, my request to Spandy was genuine as he seems to be the one who can come up with relevant facts,,, when he wants


----------



## roddy

CWM3 said:


> Roddy, wow you really are a bitter guy ain't you, still with a good following wind you will get your own little utopia in the next couple of years, I am sure it will be as good as the Garden of Eden, and everything will be fair and equitable and no one will take the piss, not those at the top or those at the bottom, you'll all be equal, how nice would that be?


well well,, no surprise there then, when you have no argument then try character assination, i suppose that makes you normal, well normal in a sort of leming type of way,,,,,,,i dont know why you should call me bitter, is that because i focus on the rich fraudesters, unlike your self who seems to think that is clever to attack the vulnerable of our society,, unfortunatly i do not hold your optimisim of there being any sort of nirvana or " garden of eden " in the near future, especially while the " weapons of mass distraction ' continue to guide gullable souls like your self down the cull de sac.


----------



## Spandex

Information given on the DWP site:
http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd2/index.php?page=fraud_error

The figure given there rolls fraud and error (both claimant and official) into the same number, so you need to look in the actual report for the correct figures. So, according to this document, 0.7%, or £1.2bn, of total benefit expenditure is overpaid due to fraud (over the 2011/2012 period).

You can see how that fraud is split amongst the different benefit types below. Again, this data contains error as well as fraud, so the actual figures aren't relevant, but if you assume error rate is equal in all departments, you can get a reasonable idea of the split by just looking at the percentages:



> Key estimates for the individual benefits that are measured on a continuous basis are that:
>  4.4%, or £310m, of Income Support expenditure (£7.2bn) was overpaid;
>  4.6%, or £230m, of Jobseeker's Allowance expenditure (£5.0bn) was overpaid;
>  5.7%, or £460m, of Pension Credit expenditure (£8.2bn) was overpaid;
>  4.9%, or £1,130m, of Housing Benefit expenditure (£22.8bn) was overpaid.
>  0.9%, or £70m, of Income Support expenditure (£7.2bn) was underpaid;
>  0.3%, or £20m, of Jobseeker's Allowance expenditure (£5.0bn) was underpaid


There is also a significant amount of underpayment due to claimant and official error, so the government actually make money from incompetence, as well as lose money. That's not related to the fraud stats though.


----------



## Gazzer

Government spending on social security benefits
In 2011-12, over £200 billion was spent on social security benefits in Great Britain
(henceforth GB).4 This amounts to approximately £3,324 for every man, woman and
child in the country, or 13.5% of GDP. At 29%, expenditure on social security
represents by far the largest single function of government spending.

that is taken from the report for fiscal studies from nov 2012, and blows any amount of bankers bonuses argument out of the water Roddy

ifs.org.uk if you want to have a read.


----------



## roddy

nice one spandy,, i have just found the figure my self,,, ( which proves that anyone who is interested can find these figures  ) ,,, .08% to fraud , a total sum of 1.2 bill ,,,, more is actually lost to incompitence,,,,,, unfortunatly this figure does not suit the daily mail / mirror distortion,,, but it seems some people want to believe their distortions., 
now i will try to work out how this compares to bangsters bonus, multinational tax avoidence/ fraud, armament companies and other embedded self interest pigs in the trough,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ( this might take some time,  ,, any help is welcome !! )


----------



## roddy

gaz,, i thot the issue was welfare FRAUD,, or are we now suggesting that we stop all welfare payments


----------



## Gazzer

roddy said:


> gaz,, i thot the issue was welfare FRAUD,, or are we now suggesting that we stop all welfare payments


Roddy, be realistic bud......what percentage of those figures may be down to actual fraud? how many guys from your past that are unemployed still manage to go to the pub several times a week?
i have a document at work that temp staff/labourers must sign before they can be employed that basically states that they will take care of their own tax and NI. now when my daughter does her accounts many of those cheques are cashed at cash a cheque shops lol. wonder why that is? of course it is due to benefit fraud and their names are on my records sent to accountant for my yearly accounts for tax to be judged. they don't care as they can't pay back what they havn't got can they.


----------



## roddy

this maywell be the case,, but if you are going to broaden the paramiters and bring in other areas of fraud then where do we end,, how many companies are frauding on employment grants etc,,, the whole country exhists on some sort of grants / aid packages


----------



## Gazzer

roddy said:


> this maywell be the case,, but if you are going to broaden the paramiters and bring in other areas of fraud then where do we end,, how many companies are frauding on employment grants etc,,, the whole country exhists on some sort of grants / aid packages


ah oh no they DONT, in five years of trading i have not been given any help in any form from the government at all. that is the same for all sole traders m8ee. how many thousands of small companies around the uk like mine offer a service and have to pay tax ni vat etc but get bugger all in return, i dread to think tbh.
it isn't just benefit fraud it is the whole system is flawed and failing badly!!!! i am lucky tbh as i have no debts in life, not even a mortgage.....no credit cards bugger all. if i did then i would have gone under three years ago i think, as i couldn't survive on what i take home monthly.

will it change? not for a good while i think as it needs bold sweeping changes to our very structure of society and expenditure. what government will make those changes? none as they know they will be voted out at the next gen election. if someone wants to drop sprogs out like a production line.......fantastic for them!!! now pay for them or starve. unemployed? ok you have six months to find work and then all the money stops.......and you starve!!!

come to our country and want to get free health care? ok cough up 10k before you enter and its yours.....what you don't use you get back when you leave. in the meantime if you work it is at a higher rate of tax and NI contributions to offset what our own residents have paid for their whole lives.........have a nice day xxx


----------



## BrianR

> come to our country and want to get free health care? ok cough up 10k before you enter and its yours.....what you don't use you get back when you leave. in the meantime if you work it is at a higher rate of tax and NI contributions to offset what our own residents have paid for their whole lives.........have a nice day xxx


and goodbye! well said chap!


----------



## YELLOW_TT

BrianR said:


> come to our country and want to get free health care? ok cough up 10k before you enter and its yours.....what you don't use you get back when you leave. in the meantime if you work it is at a higher rate of tax and NI contributions to offset what our own residents have paid for their whole lives.........have a nice day xxx
> 
> 
> 
> and goodbye! well said chap!
Click to expand...

I like the sound of that


----------



## Gazzer

BrianR said:


> come to our country and want to get free health care? ok cough up 10k before you enter and its yours.....what you don't use you get back when you leave. in the meantime if you work it is at a higher rate of tax and NI contributions to offset what our own residents have paid for their whole lives.........have a nice day xxx
> 
> 
> 
> and goodbye! well said chap!
Click to expand...

i actually thought....fuck i hope Brian doesn't think i am meaning his lad!!!! it is a very emotive subject and i will be honest i am struggling at present in this climate and opening my eyes to the whole situation in the uk m8


----------



## BrianR

and goodbye! well said chap![/quote]
i actually thought....fuck i hope Brian doesn't think i am meaning his lad!!!! it is a very emotive subject and i will be honest i am struggling at present in this climate and opening my eyes to the whole situation in the uk m8[/quote]

Actually Gaz, whilst their is a long line of immigrants wanting jobs, then it makes it much harder for kids like my lad. And so I want fewer immigrants and more jobs available to local people born here.


----------



## roddy

Gaz, and anybody else who may be interested in something more than what can be read in the mail / mirror / sun,,,i am sure we are all concerned about the way things are going,, but it is not going to be sorted by beating up on the poor, the sick, the unemployed, including the .8 percent of scroungers, or the immigrants / refugees in our society,,, much is said of the cost of the welfare state and yes it is the major expense of the government,,,actually a small amount goes to the people whon you are all picking on,,, take a look at these figures before you start taking away what little the claimants have,,,,,, 17 bil goes on housing benef,,, 12 bil on dissability allow,, and a paltry 4 bil goes on jobseekers allowance ( dole money ), a total of 33 bil pounds,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, strange coincidence,, that is 1 b more than the amount that the inland revenue calculate is being swindled / defrauded by large companies in tax avoidence,,, and further, Gaz, that is not even touching on the bangsters bonuses for causing all the trouble ,


----------



## Gazzer

figures from where Roddy? let me see and have a read mucker


----------



## roddy

Gazzer said:


> figures from where Roddy? let me see and have a read mucker


i am not talking to you anymore ,, you have just made me miss half of top gear !!!!!!!!!!


----------



## roddy

ok,, it is easy,,, google " total budget for welfare ',,,,,,,,,,, 2nd down,," how much does each benefit actually cost ',,,,,,,,,, read on ,, i forgot to add 12b for child benefit,,,


----------



## Gazzer

official figures not just google dude


----------



## roddy

Gazzer said:


> official figures not just google dude


yes sure of course , they are from the Guardian so they must be lies,,,,,,,,,,, hey !!!!!!!!!   you can cross reference them if you can be bothered


----------



## Gazzer

roddy said:


> Gazzer said:
> 
> 
> 
> official figures not just google dude
> 
> 
> 
> yes sure of course , they are from the Guardian so they must be lies,,,,,,,,,,, hey !!!!!!!!!   you can cross reference them if you can be bothered
Click to expand...

Nucking fumpty.....at least do some homework and not just leave it to the daily paper then say it's google


----------



## roddy

i beg your pardon sir,, you do me a disservice, :? ,,, it did come from Google,,ref from the Guardian,,  now read it and stop fkn around !!!!!!!


----------



## BrianR

I read over the wekend that Pontins group had sent a delegation to Poland to recruit cheap labour staff for this years holiday season. What a f#cking disgrace while we have millions needing and wanting jobs here. That shitty operation should be closed down and I genuinely hope that they go f#cking bust! I urge anyone deranged enough to want to go their shit holes of holiday parks, to tell them to f#ck right off. :evil:


----------



## c15 ttt

its all wrong mate.thats going too far.its one thing to employ people who have been arsed to travel to this country but to go over there and entice them out of their own nest is taking the piss.things cant be that bad here surely


----------



## roddy

this has been happening in the oil /gas, costruction, hotel / catering / tourist , shipping , market gardening / agriculture etc industries for years,, nothing new,, just another aspect of the capitalist human exploitation establishment which gets its mandate from an ever increasingly dumbded down and gullable populace/ eloctrate,,, ok so lets jump on and punish the poor , the immigrants, the unemployed who are unable to respond,, no no lets not do anything about blaming the real culprets of the world wide banking collapse


----------



## BrianR

roddy said:


> this has been happening in the oil /gas, costruction, hotel / catering / tourist , shipping , market gardening / agriculture etc industries for years,, nothing new,, just another aspect of the capitalist human exploitation establishment which gets its mandate from an ever increasingly dumbded down and gullable populace/ eloctrate,,, ok so lets jump on and punish the poor , the immigrants, the unemployed who are unable to respond,, no no lets not do anything about blaming the real culprets of the world wide banking collapse


Agreed; its the poor here who are sufferring because they are unable to get jobs because the poor in Poland are being exploited and brought over to do menial work that everyone here could do and most would do given the circumstances. This isnt about the polish being better workers, this is about the fact that when here the polish will allow themselves to be exploiued working twice the hours uncomplaining. I would hang these capatalist f#ckers who exploit human beings to fund their own f#cking ends.


----------



## roddy

i will second that


----------



## Gazzer

BrianR said:


> roddy said:
> 
> 
> 
> this has been happening in the oil /gas, costruction, hotel / catering / tourist , shipping , market gardening / agriculture etc industries for years,, nothing new,, just another aspect of the capitalist human exploitation establishment which gets its mandate from an ever increasingly dumbded down and gullable populace/ eloctrate,,, ok so lets jump on and punish the poor , the immigrants, the unemployed who are unable to respond,, no no lets not do anything about blaming the real culprets of the world wide banking collapse
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed; its the poor here who are sufferring because they are unable to get jobs because the poor in Poland are being exploited and brought over to do menial work that everyone here could do and most would do given the circumstances. This isnt about the polish being better workers, this is about the fact that when here the polish will allow themselves to be exploiued working twice the hours uncomplaining. I would hang these capatalist f#ckers who exploit human beings to fund their own f#cking ends.
Click to expand...

Brian it's history bud, they tried filling the shit vacancies no Brits would do.....so found a source that would fill them. I personally will do any job and if that doesn't pay enough a part time one......but that's me.

Prob is the polish or any other country in Eastern Europe don't care about conditions or hours, they just want to work and earn bucks.


----------



## BrianR

> Prob is the polish or any other country in Eastern Europe don't care about conditions or hours, they just want to work and earn bucks.


[/quote]

Gaz thats the myth that they want everyone to believe. There is a theme park here called Gullivers world. As you know my lad doesnt start his apprenticeship until May and so he is still looking for work. Any way Gullivers world had an open day last Saturday to which he went along; the jobs ranged from everything from gardening to selling burgers etc all minimum wage. 3500 turned up, wanting a job and willing to work. So the people here want a job, they want to work for minimum wage; they dont work any less than their polish counterparts and to suggest that they do, allows those exploiting them to continue to get away with that. How can Butlins (sorry I said Pontins earlier) expect British people to give them their pounds when they are effectively telling other british people that they are not good enough to work for them? Its a total disgrace and like I said earlier, now the cats out of the bag I genuinely hope that they go bust.


----------



## CWM3

Well thats a shocker about Butlins Brian.....I did not think anyone went their for their holidays who actually paid out their own pocket , I thought its where they sent the benefit scroungers and we were picking up the tab...............

Tick tock, tick tock........


----------



## roddy

well there you go,, it is run by the type of people that are causing our problems, not the vulnerable people that you are encouraged to attack


----------



## Spandex

That Butlins article has more holes in it that Gaz's socks. It seems Butlins have what they call the 'dream 20' jobs which I'm assuming are more senior than their usual minimum wage roles and they did initially advertise in the UK. They either received only 12 applicants, or only 12 were suitable for interview (we don't know which) and of those 12, 6 have been asked back for a second interview. They then went to Poland to talk to some recruitment firms there because they needed more applicants.

The rest of the article is just inflammatory gibberish. They seem to make some mental leap between these 'dream 20' jobs and the hundreds of minimum wage jobs that Butlins must also have and assume they're all the same thing, leading to drummed up outrage from various people in job centres who can't understand why Butlins are going to Europe when these jobs aren't advertised in the UK (these jobs patently *were* advertised here because Butlins interviewed UK people for them first).

Whatever the truth is of that situation, I think it's safe to say very little of it is contained in that article.


----------



## CWM3

roddy said:


> well there you go,, it is run by the type of people that are causing our problems, not the vulnerable people that you are encouraged to attack


wow Butlins management now implicated in the WMD issue and bankers bonuses, where will it all end?


----------



## BrianR

Spandex said:


> That Butlins article has more holes in it that Gaz's socks. It seems Butlins have what they call the 'dream 20' jobs which I'm assuming are more senior than their usual minimum wage roles and they did initially advertise in the UK. They either received only 12 applicants, or only 12 were suitable for interview (we don't know which) and of those 12, 6 have been asked back for a second interview. They then went to Poland to talk to some recruitment firms there because they needed more applicants.
> 
> The rest of the article is just inflammatory gibberish. They seem to make some mental leap between these 'dream 20' jobs and the hundreds of minimum wage jobs that Butlins must also have and assume they're all the same thing, leading to drummed up outrage from various people in job centres who can't understand why Butlins are going to Europe when these jobs aren't advertised in the UK (these jobs patently *were* advertised here because Butlins interviewed UK people for them first).
> 
> Whatever the truth is of that situation, I think it's safe to say very little of it is contained in that article.


Ok, so where is your supporting info Spandy? How do you know what you say is correct? They would say that wouldn;t they? Why go to Poland for 20 people, why not say France or Germany or Ireland? And what does it say about their firm that they cannot find 20 people here? What ever way you look at it there is scullduggery afoot here and it sounds to me like they are doing their best to cover their bare arses from a kicking come summer. Have they filed a law suit for slander or libel then? If not why not, because this could cost their business? No they have been caught out good and proper.


----------



## BrianR

> wow Butlins management now implicated in the WMD issue and bankers bonuses, where will it all end?


[/quote]

I dread to think; ask anyone who has been in the position of these people, I dont think you will find many who enjoyed it mate. Fsct is that this is potentially the short end of the wedge and it needs to stop. Not for me or you or the others here lucky enough to be making a living, but for the millions who are looking for a job and are willing to do anything. Sure this is only Butlins, but there are about 500,000 Polish people here already, doing the menial jobs that our own youth and unemployed ued to do. Careful, because unless you work for yourself you may just be next; and if you do work for yourself someone going and getting staff from Poland just may undercut you. I am not anti Polish people, the ones I have met have been warm genuine down to earth people (I worked with many in my last role; I liaise with many in my current; I just dont want any more here whilst we have 2.5 million unemployed.


----------



## CWM3

BrianR said:


> I dread to think; ask anyone who has been in the position of these people, I dont think you will find many who enjoyed it mate. Fsct is that this is potentially the short end of the wedge and it needs to stop. Not for me or you or the others here lucky enough to be making a living, but for the millions who are looking for a job and are willing to do anything. Sure this is only Butlins, but there are about 500,000 Polish people here already, doing the menial jobs that our own youth and unemployed ued to do. Careful, because unless you work for yourself you may just be next; and if you do work for yourself someone going and getting staff from Poland just may undercut you. I am not anti Polish people, the ones I have met have been warm genuine down to earth people (I worked with many in my last role; I liaise with many in my current; I just dont want any more here whilst we have 2.5 million unemployed.


Brian, you are preaching to the converted, my own business was totally undermined by Eastern Europeans bidding for work at totally unsustainable rates, the difference is that myself and many like me have costs and overheads they do not, and in the end it is impossible to compete, the short term is that the punters get a cheap job, the long term is that more legal businesses fall by the wayside as they cannot compete with some of the 'working practices' of our foreign competitors, its same old story, once your legal the revenue know where to find you, you cannot afford to fall foul.
The bottom line is that jobs are lost to the grey market forever, the revenue loses out, the legal businsses and employees lose out, good hard working people end up claiming benefits, so we all lose out except the guys doing the work at impossible rates for cash.
People need to wake up and smell the coffee, rather than keep peddling the same old line that we are racists and scaremongerers.

I am not for one minute suggesting that every immigrant is here working under the counter, but what is true, is that there are now significant numbers here purely for economic reasons that are flying under the radar and causing severe damage to the legitimate workforce.


----------



## roddy

i dont know how many illegal, or unemployed immigrants there are here,, but all the ones that i meet are working, legally, and predominatly, in my industry, getting the going rate and mostly doing a good job,,, but still there are plenty of guys saying that they cannot get starts,,,,,, and as for ' economic ' migrants,, everyday i am getting txts and emails from agencies for work in holland and norway , and australia, any swinging dick can get welding /associated and many other construction building work in australia , new zealand and canada just now. how many of my colleagues are working in africa brazil india etc just now,, would that make me some sort of undesireable immigrant in those countrys,, also with my E111 i would be eligeable to medicare in all these , or any other, counries,


----------



## BrianR

roddy said:


> i dont know how many illegal, or unemployed immigrants there are here,, but all the ones that i meet are working, legally, and predominatly, in my industry, getting the going rate and mostly doing a good job,,, but still there are plenty of guys saying that they cannot get starts,,,,,, and as for ' economic ' migrants,, everyday i am getting txts and emails from agencies for work in holland and norway , and australia, any swinging dick can get welding /associated and many other construction building work in australia , new zealand and canada just now. how many of my colleagues are working in africa brazil india etc just now,, would that make me some sort of undesireable immigrant in those countrys,, also with my E111 i would be eligeable to medicare in all these , or any other, counries,


No Roddy because you are offerring a skill, specialist work that is required in the countries of origin. The difference here is that the immigrants are doing menial work, that anyone can do and that many already here need to survive in the face of an all out assault on the benefits; homes and services of people who would normally be in work.


----------



## Spandex

BrianR said:


> Ok, so where is your supporting info Spandy? How do you know what you say is correct? They would say that wouldn;t they? Why go to Poland for 20 people, why not say France or Germany or Ireland? And what does it say about their firm that they cannot find 20 people here? What ever way you look at it there is scullduggery afoot here and it sounds to me like they are doing their best to cover their bare arses from a kicking come summer. Have they filed a law suit for slander or libel then? If not why not, because this could cost their business? No they have been caught out good and proper.


The info is all in that article. It doesn't even make sense. You can't say Butlins are lying about the jobs and the article is true, because the article uses Butlins as its only source, apart from some circumstantial comments from people in job centres (who will have had to base their opinions on information presented to them by the reporter). As for why they went to Poland, it's clear they already have recruitment companies working for them over there, so it makes sense that they visited them.

Apart from the obvious contradiction in the article, it makes no sense as a concept. Butlins admit they pay minimum wage for a lot of the lower end jobs, so why would they care if they get British or Polish people to fill the roles. They don't save any money by getting non-UK candidates. They might as well advertise here as well as over there.

As for slander, I doubt there is any in there. Butlins are quoted (probably accurately) and the rest is all interpreted from that. The article presents very few actual facts, so there's not much Butlins can do about it. Like most of the 'news' in those papers, it's more of an editorial opinion piece than actual journalism.


----------



## Spandex

Actually Brian, where is YOUR supporting info? You believe that article without requiring further evidence because it's consistent with your views. When I suggest it's not true, you need evidence.

I'm sure I don't have to explain cognitive dissonance to you.


----------



## roddy

so a well paid economic migrant is ok but a poorly paid one is not,,,,,,i dont quite get the logic of that,,,,once again smacks of inequality and victimisation of the dissadvantaged who are being hardest hit by so called austerity measures in this post financial crises caused by fraudulent bankers, who incidentaly are coining in bigger and bigger bonuses every day


----------



## Matt B

Not sure how this thread got so badly off the original point.

My observation was merely that we need to incentivise working again or even ask people to do voluntary work in order to qualify for their benefits.

Migrant workers and bankers bonuses ain't to blame for this crazy situation. We have generations of families who have never worked........great Britain ..... I think not


----------



## roddy

how much insentive do you need to give to people to get a job that is not there because the whole place is fkd by fraudilent bankgster


----------



## BrianR

Spandex said:


> Actually Brian, where is YOUR supporting info? You believe that article without requiring further evidence because it's consistent with your views. When I suggest it's not true, you need evidence.
> 
> I'm sure I don't have to explain cognitive dissonance to you.


TBH great response Spandy and I respect it. Except that I only hold one view. Your original post suggested that you had researched and could prove that it was rot (as is your norm). I was simply asking where that info came from. My research was taken from a news paper (as I pointed out in my initial post) who I believe had carried out reseacrh in order that they publish the story in the first place (as you do when you come up with your own theories; they result from something you have read somewhere eh and all sources are open to challenge). 
On top of all that, I personally believe it because it is consistent with the selfish I have become accustomed to in this country. Could an organisation ignore those unemploted in its own country, to find cheaper labour from another country? Yes that sounds more than feasable to me.


----------



## BrianR

> Migrant workers and bankers bonuses ain't to blame for this crazy situation. We have generations of families who have never worked........great Britain ..... I think not


I agree in part, but you appear to lump in the 2 million who have been thrown onto the dole through no fault of their own. I would sympathise with your position if you could diseminate between the two groups and demonstrate a level of empathy towards those millions who want to work but have no choice but to rely on benefits. Working for nothing doesn't pay the gas, electricity, food bill, room tax, fuel costs, school uniforms, inflated food prices etc etc what people need in a capaitalist society that requires them to have money to survive, is a job that pays them to do so.


----------



## Spandex

BrianR said:


> Spandex said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually Brian, where is YOUR supporting info? You believe that article without requiring further evidence because it's consistent with your views. When I suggest it's not true, you need evidence.
> 
> I'm sure I don't have to explain cognitive dissonance to you.
> 
> 
> 
> TBH great response Spandy and I respect it. Except that I only hold one view. Your original post suggested that you had researched and could prove that it was rot (as is your norm). I was simply asking where that info came from. My research was taken from a news paper (as I pointed out in my initial post) who I believe had carried out reseacrh in order that they publish the story in the first place (as you do when you come up with your own theories; they result from something you have read somewhere eh and all sources are open to challenge).
> On top of all that, I personally believe it because it is consistent with the selfish I have become accustomed to in this country. Could an organisation ignore those unemploted in its own country, to find cheaper labour from another country? Yes that sounds more than feasable to me.
Click to expand...

My research came from the same newspaper article, except I read it looking for sources and quotes that could be verified and I found very little. I also searched for other articles about it and found none. I doubt you did either of those things because you saw no need - the article simply 'proved' what you already believed so you took it as fact.

I personally find the theories and evidence regarding cognitive dissonance very compelling, and I'm sure when I read articles which are aligned with my views, I'm less critical, but I know how the press works and I know that *any story* you read shouldn't be taken at face value. That's not to say they're *all* lies, just that the chance of them being misleading is large enough that it makes sense to look into them further if the subject matter is important to you.

What I suspect happened with that Mail/Mirror article is they got wind of a trip to Poland (lets face it, Butlins will have been recruiting there for a long time, but that's not dramatic enough to make an article) and decided to build an outrage piece around it. They found unemployed people who would say "there's no Butlins jobs being advertised here!", then they used that to imply that Butlins were actively recruiting in Poland whilst at the same time advertising nothing in the UK. In reality, there are 8 pages of Butlins jobs advertised on indeed.co.uk right now and the article offers no evidence other than some 'man on the street' comments to show Butlins are 'snubbing' UK workers.

The truth is, the majority of Butlins lower-rank jobs will be seasonal and that sort of temp work doesn't appeal to many people here. Someone coming over from another country will have different priorities though - they probably don't see it as a permanent move, so are fine with temporary positions. As I said before it makes no difference to Butlins what nationality their employees are, as they're paying minimum wage anyway, so they'll advertise here and abroad and take whoever can do the jobs.


----------



## roddy

mail / mirror,,,, what are reasoned ppl doing "reading" that sort of crap ,, you both surprise me !!!! at least spandy you have the good sense not to believe what crap you are looking at,,,,,,,,,,,, " too much time on your hands " :?


----------



## Spandex

roddy said:


> mail / mirror,,,, what are reasoned ppl doing "reading" that sort of crap ,, you both surprise me !!!! at least spandy you have the good sense not to believe what crap you are looking at,,,,,,,,,,,, " too much time on your hands " :?


I read it when Brian posted about it, as I wanted to see the full article.


----------



## roddy

did brian actually state that he "read ' it in the mail / mirror,,,,, good lord,, does the man have no shame !!!!


----------



## Spandex

roddy said:


> did brian actually state that he "read ' it in the mail / mirror,,,,, good lord,, does the man have no shame !!!!


No, but it's not reported anywhere else (a few small regional papers have reprinted it now, but the original article came from one of those two).


----------



## CWM3

Matt B said:


> Not sure how this thread got so badly off the original point.
> 
> My observation was merely that we need to incentivise working again or even ask people to do voluntary work in order to qualify for their benefits.
> 
> Migrant workers and bankers bonuses ain't to blame for this crazy situation. We have generations of families who have never worked........great Britain ..... I think not


2 points Matt

It got off topic because some members on here spew the same old worn out rhetoric day after day, they must get off on it.

Secondly, asking people to work for their benefits, jeez I suspect that caused a few of the apologists on here to have heart attacks. How could long term, never done a days work spongers be expected to get of their lazy fat arses and do something as demeaning as graft is beyond me, it would probably interfere with their reproductive schedules, which in term would have a knock effect on their benefit wealth, definite case of impinging on their human rights if ever I saw one.


----------



## roddy

sometimes there are such ludicrous short sighted ill thot out rhetoric it really make a joke of the term discussion,,,,,,,,, eg. work for benefit scheme,, if every unemployed person was to be given something to do,, presumably someone is already doing that so they then are not needed and will join the que at the unemployment office,,, oh yes,, thats a great idea !!huh !!! yes some peopl just go round in circles going up their own rea ends,, maybe theyy will find out that the sun does not shine there


----------



## pas_55

roddy said:


> sometimes there are such ludicrous short sighted ill thot out rhetoric it really make a joke of the term discussion,,,,,,,,, eg. work for benefit scheme,, if every unemployed person was to be given something to do,, presumably someone is already doing that so they then are not needed and will join the que at the unemployment office,,, oh yes,, thats a great idea !!huh !!! yes some peopl just go round in circles going up their own rea ends,, maybe theyy will find out that the sun does not shine there


Well you could get one of them to spell check your posts


----------



## roddy

pas_55 said:


> roddy said:
> 
> 
> 
> sometimes there are such ludicrous short sighted ill thot out rhetoric it really make a joke of the term discussion,,,,,,,,, eg. work for benefit scheme,, if every unemployed person was to be given something to do,, presumably someone is already doing that so they then are not needed and will join the que at the unemployment office,,, oh yes,, thats a great idea !!huh !!! yes some peopl just go round in circles going up their own rea ends,, maybe theyy will find out that the sun does not shine there
> 
> 
> 
> Well you could get one of them to spell check your posts
Click to expand...

that would be a full time job,, i cant afford that !!!


----------



## pas_55

roddy said:


> pas_55 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> roddy said:
> 
> 
> 
> sometimes there are such ludicrous short sighted ill thot out rhetoric it really make a joke of the term discussion,,,,,,,,, eg. work for benefit scheme,, if every unemployed person was to be given something to do,, presumably someone is already doing that so they then are not needed and will join the que at the unemployment office,,, oh yes,, thats a great idea !!huh !!! yes some peopl just go round in circles going up their own rea ends,, maybe theyy will find out that the sun does not shine there
> 
> 
> 
> Well you could get one of them to spell check your posts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> that would be a full time job,, i cant afford that !!!
Click to expand...

 :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## BrianR

[quote="Secondly, asking people to work for their benefits, jeez I suspect that caused a few of the apologists on here to have heart attacks. How could long term, never done a days work spongers be expected to get of their lazy fat arses and do something as demeaning as graft is beyond me, it would probably interfere with their reproductive schedules, which in term would have a knock effect on their benefit wealth, definite case of impinging on their human rights if ever I saw one.[/quote

Agreed, just as long as it is the fat lazy never worked bastards and not one of the poor f#ckers thrown on the dole through no fault of their own; so if I am one of those spewing rhetoric it is only in response to the same olld ill informed rhetoric that allows the status quo to continue and which is repeated time and time again in this place.


----------



## BrianR

roddy said:


> did brian actually state that he "read ' it in the mail / mirror,,,,, good lord,, does the man have no shame !!!!


I actually read it on line when it was brought to my attention, via a press website.

Spandy for once we agree and I appreciate the effort that you put in, but I simply dont have the time to think as you do I'm afraid. I am still waiting to hear about the law suit though, or a response by butlins explaining the mix up - it hasnt been forthcoming and I dont believe it will be. From that I will determine my own view.


----------



## Spandex

I doubt you'll hear any more about this story from Butlins or anyone else. It hasn't been widely reported, so even if Butlins put out a statement (and frankly, why would they as it would simply draw attention to a story that will be forgotten in days and make no difference to their bookings) who would print it? If you don't have the time to apply some logic to stories you read, I doubt you'll be monitoring the Butlins press office religiously.


----------



## Gazzer

i just booked a weeks holiday.........hoping to bag me a polish bird :roll:

ok i'll get me coat guys--------------------------->walks that way in shame


----------



## BrianR

Spandex said:


> I doubt you'll hear any more about this story from Butlins or anyone else. It hasn't been widely reported, so even if Butlins put out a statement (and frankly, why would they as it would simply draw attention to a story that will be forgotten in days and make no difference to their bookings) who would print it? If you don't have the time to apply some logic to stories you read, I doubt you'll be monitoring the Butlins press office religiously.


I didn't say that I didnt have time to apply logic to the stories I read. Between the lines and respectfully I was saying that I dont have the time to analy research every piece of information I read. I also dont feel the need to do that. I dislike the fact that some people would expect me to. It suprises me that some people do do that. I am too busy living my life most of the time to do that. That doesnt make me worng or worse or bad Spandex, it just makes me different than you - and I am happy to be so. Also happy for you to be any way you wish to, because it takes all sorts to make the world go around.


----------



## BrianR

Gazzer said:


> i just booked a weeks holiday.........hoping to bag me a polish bird :roll:
> 
> ok i'll get me coat guys--------------------------->walks that way in shame


 :lol: :lol: If she has a mate can you give me a call please :lol:


----------



## Spandex

Just to be clear Brian, I spent the same amount of time reading the article as you did and it was obvious to me immediately that it had no substance and was full of contradiction. The only reason I had to do any 'anal' research at all is because you wanted 'supporting info'.

I honestly don't expect you to research *any* story you read, but if you choose not to, then you're choosing to be less informed and you're putting yourself in a position where you have no choice but to just believe a bunch of people who are more interested in selling newspapers than giving you facts. Taking a suspicious, critical approach to reading the news doesn't take any more time than it takes to read the article.


----------



## Matt B

roddy said:


> sometimes there are such ludicrous short sighted ill thot out rhetoric it really make a joke of the term discussion,,,,,,,,, eg. work for benefit scheme,, if every unemployed person was to be given something to do,, presumably someone is already doing that so they then are not needed and will join the que at the unemployment office,,, oh yes,, thats a great idea !!huh !!! yes some peopl just go round in circles going up their own rea ends,, maybe theyy will find out that the sun does not shine there


I have to laugh at that. So if people were made to work for benefits then that would put someone else out of work. That is an ill thought out response.

Why do you think china is the worlds biggest manufacturer? Cheap labour. We don't have cheap labour, no. We have a load of people that we pay quite a lot to do fuck all.

Now imagine the government built a factory that made something that no one else in the uk made, but was made in china. Lets say lithium ion batteries. The Japanese used to dominate this market but used expensive robots then the Chinese came in and just used people, lots of em. Why can't we use the people to go to this factory and make batteries? Would it put people on the dole? No, cos we don't have a battery factory and we are only competing with the Chinese.

Ok, maybe the battery scenario won't work, but you get the idea. Use people that collect benefits to work in government owned factories to make some stuff. It was manufacturing that made this country great in the first place, so why not again? The reason probably lies with narrow minded folks who believe handouts are sustainable.


----------



## Gazzer

Spandex said:


> Just to be clear Brian, I spent the same amount of time reading the article as you did and it was obvious to me immediately that it had no substance and was full of contradiction. The only reason I had to do any 'anal' research at all is because you wanted 'supporting info'.
> 
> I honestly don't expect you to research *any* story you read, but if you choose not to, then you're choosing to be less informed and you're putting yourself in a position where you have no choice but to just believe a bunch of people who are more interested in selling newspapers than giving you facts. Taking a suspicious, critical approach to reading the news doesn't take any more time than it takes to read the article.


ok it had no substance to you!, that is your own beliefs and does not make it so tbh spandy.

i have to agree that if Brian choses not to research a papers "quotes" then how can you actually tell if it is the full truth and not just the glamorised sensational crap they normally spew out.


----------



## Gazzer

Matt B said:


> roddy said:
> 
> 
> 
> sometimes there are such ludicrous short sighted ill thot out rhetoric it really make a joke of the term discussion,,,,,,,,, eg. work for benefit scheme,, if every unemployed person was to be given something to do,, presumably someone is already doing that so they then are not needed and will join the que at the unemployment office,,, oh yes,, thats a great idea !!huh !!! yes some peopl just go round in circles going up their own rea ends,, maybe theyy will find out that the sun does not shine there
> 
> 
> 
> I have to laugh at that. So if people were made to work for benefits then that would put someone else out of work. That is an ill thought out response.
> 
> Why do you think china is the worlds biggest manufacturer? Cheap labour. We don't have cheap labour, no. We have a load of people that we pay quite a lot to do fuck all.
> 
> Now imagine the government built a factory that made something that no one else in the uk made, but was made in china. Lets say lithium ion batteries. The Japanese used to dominate this market but used expensive robots then the Chinese came in and just used people, lots of em. Why can't we use the people to go to this factory and make batteries? Would it put people on the dole? No, cos we don't have a battery factory and we are only competing with the Chinese.
> 
> Ok, maybe the battery scenario won't work, but you get the idea. Use people that collect benefits to work in government owned factories to make some stuff. It was manufacturing that made this country great in the first place, so why not again? The reason probably lies with narrow minded folks who believe handouts are sustainable.
Click to expand...

great idea Matt, but would never work as any party that put that in its manifesto would never be voted in. if once in they introduced it it would be dropped by the next party promising to axe it bud. the only real way is to sort out immigration and kick out al of the illegals we have and open up jobs to our own folks...............here is a job accept it or lose all benefits.


----------



## roddy

well now that is a pretty unusual solution to our capitalist created post banking collapse financial crises,, turn us into a state socialist economy,,,, ok i will go with that, good enough for china it should be good enough for us...


----------



## Matt B

roddy said:


> well now that is a pretty unusual solution to our capitalist created post banking collapse financial crises,, turn us into a state socialist economy,,,, ok i will go with that, good enough for china it should be good enough for us...


They are quite happy to take money from the state, then work for the state!


----------



## Gazzer

roddy said:


> well now that is a pretty unusual solution to our capitalist created post banking collapse financial crises,, turn us into a state socialist economy,,,, ok i will go with that, good enough for china it should be good enough for us...


says comrad Roddisky :lol: made me giggle bud


----------



## BrianR

> I honestly don't expect you to research *any* story you read, but if you choose not to, then you're choosing to be less informed and you're putting yourself in a position where you have no choice but to just believe a bunch of people who are more interested in selling newspapers than giving you facts. Taking a suspicious, critical approach to reading the news doesn't take any more time than it takes to read the article.


[/quote]

How do you know how informed I am? You take a lot for granted chap; oh yes sorry; of course Spandy, as usual you are correct and you can now wallow in your correctness and well informedness chap and obviously you are not anal, I was mistaken. There you go mate you can climb down from that ivory tower of yours now where only the righteous deserve to be. Give me one last barrage and I promise not respond so that you can have the last word too. Getting De Ja Vu from a couple of weeks ago here Spandy -echo echo echo. Jee and I thought we were getting somewhere with me trying so hard and all not to offend you by simply breathing


----------



## Spandex

BrianR said:


> Spandex said:
> 
> 
> 
> I honestly don't expect you to research *any* story you read, but if you choose not to, then you're choosing to be less informed and you're putting yourself in a position where you have no choice but to just believe a bunch of people who are more interested in selling newspapers than giving you facts. Taking a suspicious, critical approach to reading the news doesn't take any more time than it takes to read the article.
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know how informed I am? You take a lot for granted chap; oh yes sorry; of course Spandy, as usual you are correct and you can now wallow in your correctness and well informedness chap and obviously you are not anal, I was mistaken. There you go mate you can climb down from that ivory tower of yours now where only the righteous deserve to be. Give me one last barrage and I promise not respond so that you can have the last word too. Getting De Ja Vu from a couple of weeks ago here Spandy -echo echo echo. Jee and I thought we were getting somewhere with me trying so hard and all not to offend you by simply breathing
Click to expand...

I don't know how informed you are. I'm saying by doing research you make yourself better informed (than you were before you did the research) which has to be a good thing, surely?

The whole point of my post is that while I don't expect you to do it (it's up to you, of course), I'm just suggesting you do as most articles (from most sources, not just the Mail) will have inaccuracies in them at best, and will be deliberately misleading at worst. The chances of you (or me, before you take offence again) knowing instantly that an article contains inaccuracies are pretty slim unless you're an expert in the subject, so research is the only option.


----------



## E3 YOB




----------



## sixohsixone

Is there any politician that could take the country by the scruff of the neck and bloody sort out some simple basic faults !!! 
Instead of standing on their soapboxes moaning saying this n that.

No I didn't think so. 
Too busy lining their own pockets.


----------



## sixohsixone

Is there any politician that could take the country by the scruff of the neck and bloody sort out some simple basic faults !!! 
Instead of standing on their soapboxes moaning saying this n that.

No I didn't think so. 
Too busy lining their own pockets.


----------



## roddy

E3 YOB said:


>


sometimes a few words is all it takes,,, but some people will not read :?


----------

