"Benefits Street" - Justifying cuts in welfare?

reply to post by stumason
omg you are wrong, Cancel your sky subscription and you still get over 200 channels free,all the freesat channels and more. Did you not know this? I think you are winding me up troll like. Go find the truth then come back and appologise. If Fox news was free to air it would not be able to call itself a news channel.
See if you get any stars for appologising.


www.sky.com...
You really need to get a grip. Learn to admit when you are wrong,everything you have posted is wrong. The ladder is insufficent ,get a rope

reply to post by SearchLightsInc


This is why a monetary system is set up to fail. Fact. No currency, coin or paper, will ever last.

Example 1: Revolutionary France issued banknotes that were ostensibly backed by land and seized by the State from the Church. However, the costs of funding their continuing revolution, and lack of actual silver and gold coin (since most of the wealthy aristocrats had either fled or were killed), meant they just kept printing more and more money. This system lasted just a few years (1790-1796).

Example 2: Sweden was the first country to issue paper money in Europe. These notes were redeemable in copper plate money since Sweden had no silver to turn into coin but had plenty of copper, so large slab-like ingot-coins (plate money) were made and held by the Bank. The Bank printed paper money with the intention to circulate it in the place of copper but people preferred to actually own a slab of copper, however inconvenient it was to use, rather than trust a promise on a piece of paper. Another system that failed after just a few years.

Another thing to consider in an economy, is that for an economy to grow, it is fundamental that something is produced. Normally some kind of product. The problem right now is interest. There is a huge multi-billion dollar industry that just buys and trades debt. Debt is NOT a product. I've spent enough time going crazy thinking about this...

It's a very grey area as to who really controls what because the line is at the very least blurred when it comes to where the Government ends and business begins these days.

Interesting quote Text

Never mind the benefits and general help in day to day life these people need, how about we spend more time ensuring we educate and stick to the promise that NO child should EVER be left behind. Otherwise, we'll be forever sweeping up behind us and never move forward.

Peace...

reply to post by Remirah








Matthew 21:12 >>>> Jesus entered the temple of God and cast out all them that

sold and bought in the temple and over threw the tables of the money changers

and the seats of them that sold doves .......over 2000 years ago?


The earliest dated coin found is a Samian silver tetradrachm struck in Zankle

(now Messina) Sicily dated viz 494 BC .........


www.cngcoins.com...

Wheres stumason gone lol

The costs for subsidising the rich is x54 greater than the cost of benefit fraud.

Profiteering by buy-to-let landlords
Subsidies to too-big-to-fail banks
Poverty pay by rich corporations
Tax-dodging by the super-rich
£65bn

Benefit fraud
£1.2bn

www.parasite-street.co.uk...

symptomoftheuniverse
Wheres stumason gone lol

I have a life, what about you? Besides, I said in the last post I was bored of labouring this total OT nonsense of yours. It has nothing to do with the thread topic and is simply about your trying to save face, in so far that you claimed FOX News wasn't allowed to be broadcast on UK TV, which is quite clearly wrong.

And just as a parting shot - go and cancel your Sky Subscription and see what happens to your TV reception. Also, if you actually read the FAQ from Sky you posted, you'll see that even if you have the dish and decoder from Sky, in order to get Freesat (those 200 channels you bang on about) you need a brand new viewing card at £25. If you even bothered to read into this, you'd see that if you simply cancelled your sub with Sky and didn't order the new card, you would get no reception at all, so my advice to you is dismount of your high horse.

Anyway, like I said, all totally off topic and just a distraction by you to avoid admitting you were actually wrong in the first place.

reply to post by stumason


Its not off topic at all,its about benefit street being a disgrace to any kind of decency anywhere. Its the rich using extreme propaganda to demonise the poor. Its about c4 flouting broadcasting laws,ethics and decency.
Anyway you are part of that demonisation by trolling utter tripe. I have not come across anyone like you in all my time on ATS .
In future i will direct people to this thread to highlight the kind of poster you are. Its obvious an appology is beyond you which questions your motives of posting on ATS.

By the way- i cancelled my sky years ago,lol im using the same sky card,has not cost me a penny in years. But you already know this.,because you make out you already know these things,which also makes you a liar,and whats the point in liars

reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse


It is entirely off topic - we've taken up two pages arguing the toss over FOX News, because you claimed it wouldn't be allowed to broadcast in the UK when it is... End of, really.

As for whether you can actually get channels or not by cancelling, Sky themselves they say you need a new Freesat viewing card and when I cancelled my Sky to go to Virgin some years back, everything went dark - so you can call me a liar all you like, I honestly don't care for the ramblings of such a childish prat, to be honest.

reply to post by stumason


Do me a favour,pull your card out of your box,see you still have bbc1,2,channel 4,channel 5 and others,
Jeeze, some people

Stu will be away looking up more Government facts and figures on unemployment...... tell us what you find STU.?

reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse


Admittedly, it has been over 6 years since I had Sky, so wouldn't be able to test that for you. Back in the day, however, my little ones used to pull the card all the time and it would cease to work. I understand (having done a lot of reading on this) that is different now owing to the emergence of Freesat, so on that note, I bow to your infinite wisdom

However, this is a mere deflection from you again - the whole argument stared with your claim FOX News wouldn't be allowed to be broadcast in the UK - it is. If it broke rules, it would be pulled off air like Press TV was.

Soloprotocol
Stu will be away looking up more Government facts and figures on unemployment...... tell us what you find STU.?

Everything is super - thanks for asking!

I do wonder though, Solo, if we're ever going to get a coherent post out of you that is more than some half-witted one liner? You may dislike those "Government facts and figures", but you have never come back to refute them.....

I do think that the tv is very much state-run in this country and this programme has been made and released now, deliberately to help the government justify its making more and more cuts to the benefit system. Its timing is indicative of the politics behind this programme and if people can be persuaded that all people claiming benefit are the same as the people in the street living identical lives, then the easier it is for Cameron and Osborne - who won't loose a second's sleep over the increase of child poverty and the fact that many people, especially the vulnerable as well as working people are now in fuel poverty and also, even worse for some food poverty also. As we are one of the wealthiest countrys in the world, this is unacceptable and its time people started asking why and where the hell has our tax money gone? If you think of the huge sums the government collects also through our Council tax and all its legitimate and stealth taxes today, they have some serious questions to answer. Such as how much does it cost us to pay for the Afghan fiasco? Why do we pay for a Commonwealth as well as to be in the EU and what are the costs of this extravagance and the benefits to people here. How come the Queen got an extra £47 million yet the old age state pension goes up by pence only??? Would be interested to know the answers to these as I have many more questions.

stumason

Soloprotocol
Stu will be away looking up more Government facts and figures on unemployment...... tell us what you find STU.?

Everything is super - thanks for asking!

I do wonder though, Solo, if we're ever going to get a coherent post out of you that is more than some half-witted one liner? You may dislike those "Government facts and figures", but you have never come back to refute them.....

I dont need to come back with facts and fictitious figures...we all know they are BS.

Dragging us all back to the OP. I only watched a part of the programme. As a rule I am uninterested in this type of TV and switched off when one woman complained (all victim like) about her reduced benefits...

“...they are cutting my pay. What will I do”?

Well, get a job.

I know many people may dislike my sentiment above, but most people want welfare to be reformed precisely because it is abused by people who take, take and take.

Regards

paraphi
Dragging us all back to the OP. I only watched a part of the programme. As a rule I am uninterested in this type of TV and switched off when one woman complained (all victim like) about her reduced benefits...

“...they are cutting my pay. What will I do”?

Well, get a job.

I know many people may dislike my sentiment above, but most people want welfare to be reformed precisely because it is abused by people who take, take and take.

Regards

some people are unemployable and its these people the powers that be are most cruel to,and they use the unemployable to portray all benefit claimants as parasites. It stinks. Would they make a programm about unemployed graduates? I do not think so.
The propagander against the most unfortunate in society is past evil,its cruel and the fortunate in the u.k should be ashamed. BASTARDS

reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse


Sorry, but no one is unemployable. Granted, some people have some very challenging lives and need help, but any healthy person is employable. Appreciate it is a minority of people, but welfare for healthy people should not be a lifestyle choice. As a society, we do ourselves no favours by allowing people to live a life where they contribute nothing.

Regards

paraphi
reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse

 

we do ourselves no favours by allowing people to live a life where they contribute nothing.

Regards

Most Politicians spring to mind. Parasitic, unemployable free loaders

Soloprotocol
Most Politicians spring to mind. Parasitic, unemployable free loaders

Ah, but we are talking about the other end. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Regards

paraphi
reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse

 

Sorry, but no one is unemployable. Granted, some people have some very challenging lives and need help, but any healthy person is employable. Appreciate it is a minority of people, but welfare for healthy people should not be a lifestyle choice. As a society, we do ourselves no favours by allowing people to live a life where they contribute nothing.

Regards

so would you employ a cleptomaniac?an imbecile?an alcho? A serial masturbater?
Yes lots of people are unemployable,and most are a product of an uncareing society. No one wants to live on 60pound a week,would you? Iwhat would you suggest we do with the unemployable?Euthanise them perhaps?
Im sick of rich people thinking they are superior when the truth is they would not last 2 weeks on 60 pound a week.

Jack Munroe makes some interesting observations about how the politicians are the real benefit scroungers;

Jack Monroe: 'It's time to focus on the real Benefits Street'
Poor people with TVs and tattoos inspire more anger than MPs with duck houses and moats. But in Westminster the perks of the job, often termed 'benefits', are funded by the taxpayer

To avoid any further confusion in the social security and entitlement debate, perhaps someone could draw up an official list of "things poor people are allowed to have". According to Edwina and co, dogs, tattoos, mobile phones, televisions and children under 18 sleeping in separate bedrooms are a definite no – although from bitter experience some of them are harder to sell on than others when the chips are down. Where do they stand on paracetamol? Goldfish? Razors? Teabags? Sanitary towels? £12,000 self-portraits?

www.theguardian.com...