Reply With QuoteI can deal with thatOriginally Posted by Feedback
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Thats a rather immature way of looking at the world. This failure to understand some people hold both left wing and right wing viewpoints (depending on the subject) means you'll never engage or capture the centre ground
I can deal with that
And with that, the centre left were perpetually in the shadows
😂😂
Absolute bollox. You sound more and more like someone who’s done some charity work, but now claim benefits left right and centre, and is trying to justify it.
Some charity work ?
I have done a lot more than that
What benefits do you think people can claim these days and which ones do you think I claim ?
I am all ears
I’m just doing what you do, and presuming things, with absolutely no evidence to back it up.
you regularly agree with right wing posters on here and you have for a couple of years , you denied the existence of racism in Cardiff because you as a black man hadn't experienced any .....so therefore it wasn't a problem and slagged off the black lives matters protests
I don't care whether you are from Ely, cyncoed , working class , middle class whatever , as far as I am concerned you certainly ain't someone who I see as a champion of the underclasses
Are you keeping a dossier on me?
You’re stuck in the 80’s. I’m not 👍
Has any UK Government ever been directly brought down by anything other than the electorate since universal suffrage? Ted Heath called a "who governs Britain election" in February 1974 at a time of industrial unrest and his Government were beaten - there was no need for an election at the time because it was less than four years since they'd won in June 1970, like Theresa May in 2017, Heath paid for calling an election when it was unnecessary. The Conservatives had no one to blame but their leader for their defeat in 1974, but you'll never dissuade me that there was an element of revenge in how the eighties miners strikes was dealt with.
If I can ask you another question?
Do you really believe the strikes that were permeating the country at the time had no bearing on the decision to call a snap General election?
I believe they did, hence why later governments wanted to curtail union power. You only have to look at the illegality of the 1984 miners strike to see certain trade unionists had no respect for the rule of law
My name is Bond , Basildon Bond
But my question was based on the premise of there being an infallible method of sorting the honestly needy from the idle. It will never exist which is why the question is hypothetical and just a moral one.
The point is how would society deal with those who do play the system whether they be 60% of those claiming aid or only 2%. up until now no one on here has even attempted to address it.
Tuerto even suggested that no such people exist actually saying that poor people don't Drink. Well that is a totally new one on me and I bet Mr Wetherspoon is grateful it isn't true.
Sludge defects the argument by trying to change a narrative that doesn't suit his outdated dogma, but still won't address the question and instead starts talking about those in social housing which actually has nothing to do with the question.
All we have is usually shit left v right dogmatic mud slinging which is just a smoke screen for people who claim to be caring but don't like the implication of the question, and the questions it raises in their own minds.
It could be that the money save from the lazy could be used to help the needy more. If you withdrew all support from the scammers would the get as job or turn to crime?
Could they be safe in the knowledge that the state will keep giving them handouts?
Should a person who has scammed the system for years who then wins the lottery be made to pay back all the money he/she has taken from the state?
How would you deal with it? That's the question
Good luck with that.
Be prepared for another few pages of waffle.
Wonder how many of those complaining about playing the system have worked cash in hand or paid cash in hand.?
And im not referring to this board.
I said that poor people don't drink as much as the upper working classes and the lower middle classes, where boozing is more cultural, especially at home. That's anecdotal ofcourse, my experience of it. The people in spoons at 9am are probably poor, same as the people at the corner shop at 8am picking up cans or bottles of cider. They are usually part of the underclass, alcoholics, probably not functioning, and there isn't that many of them. Alcoholism is prominent in more affluent areas, it just isn't seen as much, good housing, healthcare, working conditions and a support network can mask a drink problem for years, the opposite doesn't i'm afraid.
But this not about people who drink on . It's about idle people who work the system so they don't have work. You bring alcohol and drunkeness into the argument to cloud the basic point. I don't believe I mentioned alcohol or drugs or anything else in thev original question, you just choose to use that to avoid having to decide what you would do with them.
Oh I think people on here have done it too. I confess I have paid cash in hand for work but not for a very long time. Even people who work for a living will do a bit of that at the weekend to augment their income. It aint totally right but it isn't what I was getting at.
What would i do with people who are fiddling the state out of money? Very broad question snaggs, there are people of all backgrounds and wealth levels doing it. In my opinion, most people don't do it, and it's quite difficult to fiddle the welfare state due to testing, and loaded interviews that attempt to catch people out. Doctors reports and health panels to go up in front of. If people can get past all of that, then fair play to them if they're lying, they're obviously very good at it.
What would i do with them? I don't know, probably nothing i should think.
It's Tax evasion, although that money does go into the economy.
If a bloke on benefits does a few jobs for cash he's a fraudster
If some posh git from lakeside offers a builder cash for an extension to get it cheaper let's keep it all very quiet , nothing to see here , move along , playing golf this afternoon
Tally ho !
Well either its right or wrong ?
If someone can be deprived of their benefits for doing a bit of gardening or cleaning once in a while then if someone pays cash to get a job cheaper by several hundred quid its wrong innit
how would the posh git from lakeside know that the builder is not declaring it ? ? ?
It is surely the responsibility of the builder to declare the money
Because the posh git knows that if the builder is taking the cash and not declaring it which is why he offers the builder the option in the first place
If we ever become a cashless society a heck of a lot of people with wonga who pay cash to cleaners , gardeners and jobbing builders are going to be stuck
For the black economy to work it takes two to tango
I suppose it is, but you know as well as me that people say 'How much for cash' i always say that it's the same, they can pay however they want, but there is no discount based on cash as they're inferring that you're going to commit fraud. **** em', i'd rather not work for people like that, wanting you to be bent before a brick is laid.
Posting Permissions
