Meet The Scummers

[tahoma]

you may become disabled one day. perhaps you would rather live in a society where disabled people do not live in the gutter, and have a basic level of dignity. Or perhaps you buy the daily mail...

the man was in the army for christ sake, probably getting some army pension. have you daily mail reading scum no shame?

[Lone_Twin]

you may become disabled one day. perhaps you would rather live in a society where disabled people do not live in the gutter, and have a basic level of dignity. Or perhaps you buy the daily mail...

the man was in the army for christ sake, probably getting some army pension. have you daily mail reading scum no shame?

You are very funny if a little tragic.

1) Having been in the army does not buy you a life without work.

2) Disability encompases a range of conditions no all of which mean you are unable to work.

3) She is clearly not that disabled if she can procreate quite so voraciously.

4) I have never bought the Daily Mail. not that this has any bearing on the vailidity or not of my arguments.

I know quite a lot of disabled people (I won't say how for the purposes of anonimity) I know of people who are both deaf and blind (at the same time) who manage to go to work. Having a wonky back, but not so severe that you can sprog out a ton of kids, and expecting the world to owe you a living is a p1ss-take in the face of what genuinely disabled people go through in order to work.

You are not arguing from any position of logic. You are clinging to preconceptions and offering no counter arguments except that anyone who doesnt want to pay for this family is "scum".

Could we raise the level of debate above that of the playground?

[sleepwello'nights]

because you are part of a society - and if you want to enjoy the fruits of that society you need to make your contribution. otherwise **** off.

Missed the point haven't you.

I do contribute to the fruits of society.

The intention behind the welfare state was to provide a safety net in case you fell on hard times. Hard times didn't include demanding benefits to bring up more and more children whilst you were suffering those hard times. If you can't provide for your family then contraception is cheap and readily available. Why have more and more children if you can't provide for them?

And by the way go and have a look at the accounts of Phillips Green's companies. Then tell me he doesn't pay tax. But then lets not let the facts get in the way of a good ol' rant.

[Bloo Loo]

Good to see no sympathy in the comments for that story

Why should they even get an average WORKING income for doing no work.

I wonder how many people are exploiting this blag where one partner goes on sick with a "bad back" which as every scum bag knows is practically impossible to medically disprove and the other partner goes onto benefits as their "full time carer"

FFS

I want my beans, tomatos and eggs delivered every morning, hotel style....and I want them HOT and dished up proper....

Edited October 23, 2010 by Bloo Loo

[sharpe]

You are very funny if a little tragic.

1) Having been in the army does not buy you a life without work.

2) Disability encompases a range of conditions no all of which mean you are unable to work.

3) She is clearly not that disabled if she can procreate quite so voraciously.

4) I have never bought the Daily Mail. not that this has any bearing on the vailidity or not of my arguments.

I know quite a lot of disabled people (I won't say how for the purposes of anonimity) I know of people who are both deaf and blind (at the same time) who manage to go to work. Having a wonky back, but not so severe that you can sprog out a ton of kids, and expecting the world to owe you a living is a p1ss-take in the face of what genuinely disabled people go through in order to work.

You are not arguing from any position of logic. You are clinging to preconceptions and offering no counter arguments except that anyone who doesnt want to pay for this family is "scum".

Could we raise the level of debate above that of the playground?

The tone of the debate has been set by the title - those joining in kicking an ex-army veteran and a disabled woman can expect like treatment.

My point is that transfer payments to the needy are very small relative to payments to the non-needy. I am less unhappy about paying money to people who need it rather than those who do not. Although I would naturally rather pay as little as possible.

- The bankers do not need 7 billion in tax payers money in bonuses this year.

- The Royal family do not need the billions of pounds in assets they have; which if passed to the treasury would solve a large part of the deficit.

After WW2 this country was flattened, utterly bankrupt, hundreds of thousands of its best men dead. Yet it managed to build the NHS and make payments to those most in need. This was done by taxing the idle rich. The parasites who need nothing and take enormous resources whilst doing no work and contributing nothing.

I do not want to see people starving in the streets in my local town - that is what would happen if you stop payments to disabled people or those suffering mentally.

It is really sad to hear otherwise intelligent people spouting stuff they read in the trash MSM.

[Bloo Loo]

The tone of the debate has been set by the title - those joining in kicking an ex-army veteran and a disabled woman can expect like treatment.

My point is that transfer payments to the needy are very small relative to payments to the non-needy. I am less unhappy about paying money to people who need it rather than those who do not. Although I would naturally rather pay as little as possible.

- The bankers do not need 7 billion in tax payers money in bonuses this year.

- The Royal family do not need the billions of pounds in assets they have; which if passed to the treasury would solve a large part of the deficit.

After WW2 this country was flattened, utterly bankrupt, hundreds of thousands of its best men dead. Yet it managed to build the NHS and make payments to those most in need. This was done by taxing the idle rich. The parasites who need nothing and take enormous resources whilst doing no work and contributing nothing.

I do not want to see people starving in the streets in my local town - that is what would happen if you stop payments to disabled people or those suffering mentally.

It is really sad to hear otherwise intelligent people spouting stuff they read in the trash MSM.

I dont think a family pulling 95K tax free is needy....do you?

And what has this to do with banker bailouts, which, IIRC, is just about 100% condemned as wrong too.

Edited October 23, 2010 by Bloo Loo

[sharpe]

Missed the point haven't you.

I do contribute to the fruits of society.

The intention behind the welfare state was to provide a safety net in case you fell on hard times. Hard times didn't include demanding benefits to bring up more and more children whilst you were suffering those hard times. If you can't provide for your family then contraception is cheap and readily available. Why have more and more children if you can't provide for them?

And by the way go and have a look at the accounts of Phillips Green's companies. Then tell me he doesn't pay tax. But then lets not let the facts get in the way of a good ol' rant.

this is a ranting thread - a pack of plebs attacking an army veteran and his disabled wife and children.

Philip Green: http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2006/06/19/sir-philip-green-the-rewards-of-tax-avoidance/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4763984.stm

Not one word against a man who avoids hundreds of millions in tax. A rant about two poor people trying to raise a large family.

[Bloo Loo]

this is a ranting thread - a pack of plebs attacking an army veteran and his disabled wife and children.

Philip Green: http://www.taxresear...-tax-avoidance/

http://news.bbc.co.u...ess/4763984.stm

Not one word against a man who avoids hundreds of millions in tax. A rant about two poor people trying to raise a large family.

start a thread on it then..this is about the abuse of taxpayers money for benefit scroungers, scroungers who had to be rehoused after they trashed the previous one so kindly provided FOC.

[sharpe]

I dont think a family pulling 95K tax free is needy....do you?

And what has this to do with banker bailouts, which, IIRC, is just about 100% condemned as wrong too.

was it 46k between 12 after housing. that is about 10 quid a day each for food, heating, cloths etc... so yes, that is needy.

[Lone_Twin]

The tone of the debate has been set by the title - those joining in kicking an ex-army veteran and a disabled woman can expect like treatment.

My point is that transfer payments to the needy are very small relative to payments to the non-needy. I am less unhappy about paying money to people who need it rather than those who do not. Although I would naturally rather pay as little as possible.

- The bankers do not need 7 billion in tax payers money in bonuses this year.

- The Royal family do not need the billions of pounds in assets they have; which if passed to the treasury would solve a large part of the deficit.

After WW2 this country was flattened, utterly bankrupt, hundreds of thousands of its best men dead. Yet it managed to build the NHS and make payments to those most in need. This was done by taxing the idle rich. The parasites who need nothing and take enormous resources whilst doing no work and contributing nothing.

I do not want to see people starving in the streets in my local town - that is what would happen if you stop payments to disabled people or those suffering mentally.

It is really sad to hear otherwise intelligent people spouting stuff they read in the trash MSM.

A parasite is a parasite is a parasite.

If it is wrong to be stolen from to pay for the bankers it is wrong to be stolen from to pay for these people. Not needy, not disabled just living off the back of people who work for a living. If you want to be angry about bankers you have to angry about the many thousands of people like these. Logic chap, logic.

His having been in the army makes no difference. So he wanted to kill people for a living. Woop de do, you think that buys a life a leisure?

All this schoolboy level rhetoric about people starving in the street is just such utter utter balls I'm surprised that a member of this site which generaly attracts the smarter end of the internet would lower themselves to it.

[sharpe]

A parasite is a parasite is a parasite.

If it is wrong to be stolen from to pay for the bankers it is wrong to be stolen from to pay for these people. Not needy, not disabled just living off the back of people who work for a living. If you want to be angry about bankers you have to angry about the many thousands of people like these. Logic chap, logic.

His having been in the army makes no difference. So he wanted to kill people for a living. Woop de do, you think that buys a life a leisure?

All this schoolboy level rhetoric about people starving in the street is just such utter utter balls I'm surprised that a member of this site which generaly attracts the smarter end of the internet would lower themselves to it.

the difference is as old as Acts 4 32:35

they need - that is why i mind less than paying people who do not need.

[tahoma]

In sharpe I think we have an interesting example of a mindset common on the left, that of a staggeringly self-righteous individual or group coming, quite uninvited, to the shrill defence of some supposedly oppressed 'other'.

Of course, he would probably be a bit disappointed and confused at the actual attitudes expressed by this family, which probably are not quite as politically correct as he would be comfortable with.

An amusing example of this is the left's defence of Islamic groups which, left to their own devices, would happily stone to death various other protected species - LGBTs, unmarried single mothers et al.

Ken Livingstone is a perfect example of this torn philosophy at the moment.

[sun n sea]

The tone of the debate has been set by the title - those joining in kicking an ex-army veteran and a disabled woman can expect like treatment.

My point is that transfer payments to the needy are very small relative to payments to the non-needy. I am less unhappy about paying money to people who need it rather than those who do not. Although I would naturally rather pay as little as possible.

- The bankers do not need 7 billion in tax payers money in bonuses this year.

- The Royal family do not need the billions of pounds in assets they have; which if passed to the treasury would solve a large part of the deficit.

After WW2 this country was flattened, utterly bankrupt, hundreds of thousands of its best men dead. Yet it managed to build the NHS and make payments to those most in need. This was done by taxing the idle rich. The parasites who need nothing and take enormous resources whilst doing no work and contributing nothing.

I do not want to see people starving in the streets in my local town - that is what would happen if you stop payments to disabled people or those suffering mentally.

It is really sad to hear otherwise intelligent people spouting stuff they read in the trash MSM.

Have you seen the state of the fat kunt?

Do you really think this brave dough ball has been dodging bombs and bullets in Basra or Sangin anytime in the last few years? More likely this chap was in the catering corps and spent most of his time dodging pork pies and pasties in Catterick or Aldershot.

The word VETERAN evokes visions of the paras on D-Day, the lads on Sheffield in the Ffalklands or the blokes in the Rifles who dodge IED's and snipers everyday. This bloke used to work for the Army nine years ago.... role and deployment unspecified and unknown.... the term veteran isn't in my view appropriate.

The wife has curvature of the spine.... caused most likely by the effort of squeezing out so many kids. What we don't know is how severe the condition is.... you've jumped to the conclusion that the poor woman is practically bed ridden and in capable.... she may just have trouble bending down to pick up the SKY remote. I suspect that the fact that the sow has managed to push out 10 kids means her back isn't the life changing issue you assume it is... it's strong enough to stand up to all that shagging and subsequent pushing.

I have absolutely no issue with paying money to the needy.... this pair are needy... they need an industrial size kick up the @rse... lazy feckers.

[athom]

one so called problem is insignificant compared to the other. the banking issue is the elephant in the room will bigots rant about some ants below the floor boards.

that money they receive will be spent on child rearing. in the worst case it gets spent on local services. the government gives banks billions to do this through "keynesian" economics. or subsidies and guarantees for private companies - the wealth goes straight to people in massive mansions. yet because these people are needy or disabled people despise them

Do you really believe they are either needy or disabled? They are despised precisely because they ARE NOT needy or disabled. How much benefits do you receive to have such a skewed perspective on this?

[Lone_Twin]

the difference is as old as Acts 4 32:35

they need - that is why i mind less than paying people who do not need.

So if I was to make myself deliberately needy?...

Perhaps like these people by having loads of kids I couldnt afford. In the face of free contraception....

And turned up at your door. How much of your money would you give me?

[sharpe]

In sharpe I think we have an interesting example of a mindset common on the left, that of a staggeringly self-righteous individual or group coming, quite uninvited, to the shrill defence of some supposedly oppressed 'other'.

Of course, he would probably be a bit disappointed and confused at the actual attitudes expressed by this family, which probably are not quite as politically correct as he would be comfortable with.

An amusing example of this is the left's defence of Islamic groups which, left to their own devices, would happily stone to death various other protected species - LGBTs, unmarried single mothers et al.

Ken Livingstone is a perfect example of this torn philosophy at the moment.

in tahoma we find a classic example of right wing plebian non thinking. using all sorts of government services, likely uninsured against all sorts of catastrophes that he rants against other for accepting state benefit for once they are unlucky enough to have fallen victim to.

the hypocrite in classic form

[sleepwello'nights]

Philip Green: http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2006/06/19/sir-philip-green-the-rewards-of-tax-avoidance/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4763984.stm

Not one word against a man who avoids hundreds of millions in tax. A rant about two poor people trying to raise a large family.

Have a look at the accounts of Philip Green's companies and tell me how much tax they have paid.

If I don't want Philip Green to have any of my money then I can choose not to spend anything in his shops. I can't choose which "needy" families my taxes go to.

What about bringing the pop stars who avoid paying taxes, including Bono and Bob Geldof, into your rant.

[Pindar]

The problem is, this is now entrenched in our society and will take generations to undo. You can't just take away life support from a monster and expect it to lie down quietly. The whole system is rotten to the core and people continue to deny reality and vote for the same old politicians who serve the same old agenda. I'd almost say that people deserve what they get in terms of government because they refuse to act collectively to really vote (or force) for a change, continuing to cooperate with a system that is fundamentally evil.

[athom]

Take out those working the system and there could be scope for giving those who flat-out obviously can't contribute a better life or to give more generous benefits to those who have paid into the system for years so they can have some breathing space for a decent job hunt.

Exactly. To say people supporting cutting the benefits of faux disabled blaggers is somehow immoral misses the point that they are harming not only the tax payer but the outlook and reputation of genuinely disabled people or those deserving of help.

This is all i need to know about this woman's "disability" or the need for her husband to care for her -

Mr Smith, 40, left the Army in 2001 to care for his now 36-year-old wife, who has curvature of the spine. At the time they had three children - they now have ten

Sub-zero sympathy over here. Nothing but contempt in fact.

[athom]

in tahoma we find a classic example of right wing plebian non thinking. using all sorts of government services, likely uninsured against all sorts of catastrophes that he rants against other for accepting state benefit for once they are unlucky enough to have fallen victim to.

the hypocrite in classic form

Are you on benefits? Please answer the question

[_w_]

so quick to judge and condemn others you know nothing about

Look who's talking

And BTW, you are so focused on the unfairness of banker bailouts etc. that you refuse to see how much abuse this family commit. They are part of the rotting of society as much as the bankers I'm afraid.

[sharpe]

Are you on benefits? Please answer the question

i benefit from the health service, the police, infrastructure, the safety from the army and many other things. also child benefit until 2013.

i had education for many years also and university tuition fees paid.

i pay more tax than likely anyone you know

[sharpe]

Have a look at the accounts of Philip Green's companies and tell me how much tax they have paid.

If I don't want Philip Green to have any of my money then I can choose not to spend anything in his shops. I can't choose which "needy" families my taxes go to.

What about bringing the pop stars who avoid paying taxes, including Bono and Bob Geldof, into your rant.

I just pointed you to the article showing how tax is avoided massively in Philip Green's affairs.

[tahoma]

the hypocrite in classic form

Ironically, the last benefits I was effectively in receipt of was... child benefit when I was a child.

I would need to be on the dole for many, many years and suffer much ill health before I got back what I have put in to your glorious socialist experiment. No hypocrisy here.

Again - are you on the dole? You are, aren't you? People such as yourself cannot exist without people like me, financially wiping your **** for you. It is the repressed shame of this that puts that petulant little curl on your lip.

[sleepwello'nights]

i benefit from the health service, the police, infrastructure, the safety from the army and many other things. also child benefit until 2013.

i had education for many years also and university tuition fees paid.

i pay more tax than likely anyone you know

Ah a caviar socialist. Do you want to tell us how you got your money and why you haven't given it all away to the poor and needy?