Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
guitarman001

Ok Who Was It?

Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12495268

Makes some good points!!

Hmmm ... what does he sit on, what does he sleep on, what does he eat off, what does he wash with, how does he spend the dark evenings in his living room ..?

I don't care so much about him scrounging, I actually agree with much of what he says, but the pieces don't fit the puzzle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm ... what does he sit on, what does he sleep on, what does he eat off, what does he wash with, how does he spend the dark evenings in his living room ..?

I don't care so much about him scrounging, I actually agree with much of what he says, but the pieces don't fit the puzzle.

Community care grants will buy you furniture, you can find it in skips etc.

The majority of my furniture has been sourced from skips, my flat is furnished very well indeed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he has worked one year out of 20 since 18 he would be 38 years old.

He would get £65.45 JSA, + housing benefit of £95ish + Ctax of £13ish.

He should be getting £175 a wee in benefits.

His figures do not add up. The man is a liar.

He shouldnt be getting JSA if he is, because hes admitted hes not seeking a job. Job Seekers Allowance, should be exactly that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:(

If only he wasn't half-right.

Between the banksters on one side and folks like him on the other, the UK is doomed to decline until something changes.

Exactly. We have leeching parasites at the top and at the bottom. We have to minimise both.

By the way, at the top, besides bankers, we also have land owners, and other smaller fishes, all in the rentier-classes, unproductive leeches too.

(For the record, that BBC article pasted below.)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12495268

17 February 2011 Last updated at 15:10

Benefits: 'Me a scrounger? Fair enough, I am.'

he prime minister has unveiled major changes to the welfare and benefit system, including incentives and sanctions "to ensure that work always pays" and that people who repeatedly turn down jobs will be penalised. One man who could be among the targets is "Mick", who called a phone-in on BBC Radio Sheffield.

"I left school at 18 and I've had a year's worth of working over that 20-year period.

I enjoy my free time. I don't like working for someone else and making loads of money for them and nothing for yourself.

I live on about £50 a week. Can I live comfortably on that? Of course I can.

I walk my dog every day, which keeps me fit and healthy. I go fishing, and I go birdwatching, which is my favourite hobby.

All my family have worked all their lives - they worked down pits, in the steelworks, and they've all died from illnesses related to that.

And they've had nothing to show for it at the end of it.

All that money they've paid in, they've paid out again to the bankers. I don't think my family would begrudge the pittance they give me every week.

My family, who've paid in all their lives and got nothing back, I'm just taking a little pension out of that.

'Free money'

I get my £90 weekly rent and my council tax paid, so in total I get around £140 a week in benefits. It's free money - I love it.

Most of my friends are the same. They don't see a future in working.

I live from day to day - and I enjoy my days. I don't think about my future - I don't have any kids or family to look after. I don't want any kids - there are too many people in the world as it is, we're overpopulated.

The people who are working today - they're paying for the bankers, their million-pound bonuses every month.

Am I a scrounger? Fair enough, I am, I'll take that on the chin.

And if I see anyone doing the same thing, I'll say fair enough, fair play to any of them."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, this guy is archetypal of the industrial areas, progressively declining through the late 1960s, dying on their feet when he was born (1973, just at the time that Heath-Barber's first Tory Boom-Bust crashed: and was 18 in 1989, just when Thatcher's financial services miracle and her and Porky Lawson's Boom-Bust was crashing too. At the time when Thatcher destroyed what was left of British heavy industry, the mines, steelworks and etc.

The kids of the workers grew up with no hope, no jobs and decayed infrastructure, leading to sink estates and all the social problems we now see on a daily basis.

His father was perhaps 32-40: thus by 1989 approaching 50 and with a high probability of never ever finding proper work again.

Instead of actually doing anything about these areas of despair, Thatcher and her ilk simply increased taxes (You remember, "We are the party of low taxation!": for some perhaps. For the majority taxes rose and rose), to pay benefits to the dispossessed.

Who were then thoroughly ignored.

Unfortunately, society has now inherited the core reality: the guy's father would have lived on benefit: he does: and at 32, kids of the kids can see no other alternative, too.

I can therefore sympathise and understand what the man is saying: I cannot condone such behaviour of anyone, however.

Consider:

"Sykes personal history is astounding. Son of a miner, dragged up in a south Yorkshire council estate and leaving school unqualified, his first proper job was grafting as a tyre fitter. In a blink of an eye he was breaking up buses and selling the in'erds to Hong Kong and making serious brass in the process. "Selling junk fer t' junks" people said as they passed the yard. By the nineteen seventies he was one of the richest young men in the country. Twenty years on, after moving into property, he was at it again. Along the banks of Sheffields river Don, surrounded by the ghosts of broken old steel mills, he built a glittering new retail centre called Meadowhall. Turning rusting metal into pure gold."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are any employers in Sheffield compaining that they can't recruit people to work for the minimum wage?

And the point is?

They are then still benefit-dependent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All that money they've paid in, they've paid out again to the bankers.

I was surprised he didn't add to that sentence to say:

"Scroungers they are, we're exactly the same, scroungers, just they scrounge more."

but he probably didn't like to be likened to a banker no matter how well off.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:(

If only he wasn't half-right.

Between the banksters on one side and folks like him on the other, the UK is doomed to decline until something changes.

Completely agree!! The banksters are JUST as bad....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I think of Fred Goodwin and city guy's that take 80% of you pension I find it hard to dislike this guy. Wouldn't it be a crazy world if all those people who want to work were made unemployed and those that don't want to work were forced to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it be a crazy world if all those people who want to work were made unemployed and those that don't want to work were forced to work.

People who want to work are being made unemployed every day, we don't have to worry about the shirkers until we have found jobs for them (me).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he has worked one year out of 20 since 18 he would be 38 years old.

He would get £65.45 JSA, + housing benefit of £95ish + Ctax of £13ish.

He should be getting £175 a wee in benefits.

His figures do not add up. The man is a liar.

He is the figment of an ex-Daily Mail journos imagination. There to wind you up and nothing more. Its' just the same listening to Jeremy Vine some days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was not a Daily Mail article. It was BBC news.

They had Iain Duncan Smith on the other day, and some fancy graphics that were incorrect.

For every£100 you earn you lose £65 in benefits,so you better off by £35.

But they forget to take into account tax and NI, The first £100 would make you £33 better off, and then next about £24.

Very poor quality journalism.

I'm surprised people pay for the license.

By not paying you create employment, and the employed person will give you a personal visit, willingly listen to your rant about the BBC, bid you good day and leave, you then receive less letters through the post and reduce the demand for paper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. We have leeching parasites at the top and at the bottom. We have to minimise both.

By the way, at the top, besides bankers, we also have land owners, and other smaller fishes, all in the rentier-classes, unproductive leeches too.

(For the record, that BBC article pasted below.)

Producer strike.

The only thing Rand got wrong was that it starts at the bottom rather than the top.

I.e. the already disenfranchised who have no incentive to even start work rather than the capitalists who see their wealth being stolen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The people responsible for this are working for the state - government, HMRC, benefits agencies etc

They are the ones who actually force you to participate in this fubar'd situation

If you're angry at people like this man then your anger is misdirected

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.