Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

awaytogo

Gypsies On Benefits And Proud

Recommended Posts

Gypsies on Benefits and proud.

On channel 5 now , shows why they come here and how easy it is to get benefits.

What a mess this country is going to end in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Combines I they will be drawing less than the Royal Family, MP's, Than Bankers and Directors of Monopolies. Why the heck whould we care what a couple of dozen spongers are getting for free?

It's propaganda of the highest order and so many HPC'ers fall for it time and time again.

You people should be looking at the real issues and not be getting distracted by conservative HQ propaganda divide and conquer tactics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Combines I they will be drawing less than the Royal Family, MP's, Than Bankers and Directors of Monopolies. Why the heck whould we care what a couple of dozen spongers are getting for free?

It's propaganda of the highest order and so many HPC'ers fall for it time and time again.

You people should be looking at the real issues and not be getting distracted by conservative HQ propaganda divide and conquer tactics.

Too true my fellow scarecrow. I haven't seen the program, but no don't the scapegoating is on a par with last night panorama

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Combines I they will be drawing less than the Royal Family, MP's, Than Bankers and Directors of Monopolies. Why the heck whould we care what a couple of dozen spongers are getting for free?

It's propaganda of the highest order and so many HPC'ers fall for it time and time again.

You people should be looking at the real issues and not be getting distracted by conservative HQ propaganda divide and conquer tactics.

The Royal Family costs about £30 million a year.

Parliament in total costs about £500 million a year.

For perspective, the luvvies at the BBC suckle about £3.5 billion per year from the taxpayer's teat and the housing benefit bill is running at about £20 billion per year these days. It's more than just "a couple of dozen spongers" who are running up the benefits bill.

Further, the banks should never have been bailed out, but then the financial services industry does pay about £65 billion in tax per year (a bit under 12% of total tax revenue in the UK) so the £120 billion odd cash bailout of the banks represented around two years of tax contribution. The only reason the UK is able to afford the welfare bill it currently supports is because the country has been sold off to the banking industry. No more bankers = no more welfare state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Combines I they will be drawing less than the Royal Family, MP's, Than Bankers and Directors of Monopolies. Why the heck whould we care what a couple of dozen spongers are getting for free?

It's propaganda of the highest order and so many HPC'ers fall for it time and time again.

You people should be looking at the real issues and not be getting distracted by conservative HQ propaganda divide and conquer tactics.

Didn't realise it was a simple binary argument of opposing either the plutocracy or excessive benefit claims. Thanks for putting me straight; I was labouring under the misapprehension that it was possible to be annoyed by both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No more bankers = no more welfare state.

If you add up the costs of the bailouts, 5 years of ZIRP, QE, Frauds such as Libor manipulation ect ect and the ongoing collateral damage inflicted on the economy by the Bankers it's not that clear which of the two represent the greater cost.

Perhaps less 'financial innovation' might lead to less people needing to claim welfare in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way that a safety net and employment is handed out to the populace in a relatively rational/efficient manner is getting eroded away by avaristic plutocrats, globalisation, and mass cheap transport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Combines I they will be drawing less than the Royal Family, MP's, Than Bankers and Directors of Monopolies. Why the heck whould we care what a couple of dozen spongers are getting for free?

It's propaganda of the highest order and so many HPC'ers fall for it time and time again.

You people should be looking at the real issues and not be getting distracted by conservative HQ propaganda divide and conquer tactics.

I just don't like scum and object paying for them sort of old fashioned I know in your race to the bottom view of the world.

It is also more than a couple of dozen but I guess that's ok because it's magic money from higher tax payers and mid sized company tax receipts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've submitted my program idea's to Channel 5

MP's on expenses, and proud

Landowners on Benefits

Corporations on Subsidies and Proud

Landlords on Housing Benefit and Proud.

Bankers on QE and Proud

Bankers laundering drug cartel money and Proud.

Heres hoping for a favourable response!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't realise it was a simple binary argument of opposing either the plutocracy or excessive benefit claims. Thanks for putting me straight; I was labouring under the misapprehension that it was possible to be annoyed by both.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Combines I they will be drawing less than the Royal Family, MP's, Than Bankers and Directors of Monopolies. Why the heck whould we care what a couple of dozen spongers are getting for free?

It's propaganda of the highest order and so many HPC'ers fall for it time and time again.

You people should be looking at the real issues and not be getting distracted by conservative HQ propaganda divide and conquer tactics.

This is the stock answer to anything like this, as we saw on the Benefits Street debate a couple of months ago ("a handful of people who do not represent typical unemployed") and the housing benefit cap a year or so ago ("they may get £1000 p/w but there is only one family like that in the whole of the country and it is at a total cost to the taxpayer of £7.50. Compare that to bankers' bonuses!"

The logic of the argument is thus:

"There is something happening that is not good. However, there is something else happening that is not good and in my opinion, worse. Therefore it is improper to do anything about the former or even talk about it."

The question we should ask is do we have a benefits system that is very easy to exploit by people who have little or not connection to the country and no intention of working? If so, we should seek to change it, and not start talking about MPs' expenses or some other unrelated topic to distract attention and maintain the status quo of a flawed system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All aboard the Gypsy outrage bus is leaving the depot!!

outragebus.jpg

That program was either designed to make UKIP win every seat or to kill every Daily Mail reader with a massive heart attack....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All aboard the Gypsy outrage bus is leaving the depot!!

outragebus.jpg

That program was either designed to make UKIP win every seat or to kill every Daily Mail reader with a massive heart attack....

It was on Channel Five. I doubt anyone saw it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't like scum and object paying for them sort of old fashioned I know in your race to the bottom view of the world.

It is also more than a couple of dozen but I guess that's ok because it's magic money from higher tax payers and mid sized company tax receipts

How do you define scum?

There really is no point in talking about people as if they're not people - you end up misunderstanding what they do and what your relation to them is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Royal Family costs about £30 million a year.

Parliament in total costs about £500 million a year.

For perspective, the luvvies at the BBC suckle about £3.5 billion per year from the taxpayer's teat and the housing benefit bill is running at about £20 billion per year these days. It's more than just "a couple of dozen spongers" who are running up the benefits bill.

Further, the banks should never have been bailed out, but then the financial services industry does pay about £65 billion in tax per year (a bit under 12% of total tax revenue in the UK) so the £120 billion odd cash bailout of the banks represented around two years of tax contribution. The only reason the UK is able to afford the welfare bill it currently supports is because the country has been sold off to the banking industry. No more bankers = no more welfare state.

Yes it seems there are a lot on this site will sell this country down the pan as long as they can fill their BTL, to suggest its a couple of dozen people is just unbelievable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As i see it, 'travellers' are people who are not fortunate enough to have inherited land.

Dwell on that when you consider how much* taxpayer's money Ian Duncan Smith's farming family is awarded through the Common Agricultural Policy, for the onerous self-sacrifice of having to own thousands of acres.

* in case you are wondering, well into seven figures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11030571/Double-shooting-husband-killed-wife-after-battle-against-gypsy-camp.html

The other thing about gypsies.....not sure if it was the loss of housing equity or the nuisance. The 500k bit seems to get prominence.

Idiot, he would have done better to shoot the local councillors; that would have made people think twice before proposing such schemes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Idiot, he would have done better to shoot the local councillors; that would have made people think twice before proposing such schemes.

Surely all he had to do was phone Nick Clegg and ask for one of his House Price Guarantees?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've submitted my program idea's to Channel 5

MP's on expenses, and proud

Landowners on Benefits

Corporations on Subsidies and Proud

Landlords on Housing Benefit and Proud.

Bankers on QE and Proud

Bankers laundering drug cartel money and Proud.

Heres hoping for a favourable response!

They pretty much are as you describe! :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely all he had to do was phone Nick Clegg and ask for one of his House Price Guarantees?

There you go, there is always a silver lining no matter how bad the world seems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And there was I thinking they thought themselves a proud people who shunned the rest of society in favour of a quiet life in the old fashioned way.

Good to know their principles are as flexible as anyone elses

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well after listening to all your arguments, Judge XYY has come to a verdict.

Pikeys should not qualify for benefits as they are, in reality, actively seeking scrap-metal rather than actual work.

But I also rule that the BBC should be stripped of the licence fee, and this entire fund be redistributed to the fledgeling PBS channel (Pikey Service Broadcasting) as their shows are much funnier - especially the Ceefax subtitles... ;)

XYY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   204 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.