Does Anyone Support David Cameron's 'Austerity'? | Page 6 | Vital Football

Does Anyone Support David Cameron's 'Austerity'?

Should have been a different thread this really but agreed wurzel, all sorts of scum do it and all that do it deserve the pain and suffering those who do have the badges get. They want to join the club, they should get all the 'benefits' , sleepless nights, ops, crippling pain, social exclusion. Its a blast.

The utter, utter c****. No matter who do it, it just isn't right.
 
Bikini Inspector - 5/4/2013 20:03

kefkat - 5/4/2013 17:53

Re the point on 1700 people have died: This is about ATOS declaring people fit to work when they have cancer/life threatening illness/terminal illnesses

There have been and will continue to be people who commit suicide because of all these changes. People with schizophrenia and the like etc.
Click to expand...

That's what has sickened me. Then the likes of cameron, osborne and IDS go out and use cheap propaganda tactics to stigmatise them as scroungers.

I know full well about labour, they are twats. But i will do whatever i can to stop this spiteful lot getting another term in power. If that means voting for labour then so be it. If Thats the world we are fucking living in i will play the game.

Then Cameron goes down a food bank and tries to say its a good part of the big society. No you ****, its working people who can't afford to fucking feed their kids whilst you eat swan pate on the taxpayer.
Click to expand...


and it's the average you and I buying the stuff for the food banks too. I bet they don't buy anything to go in them when the collection is around at their supermarket. Though I dare say they don't too much food collection outside Marks & Spencers, Fortman & Mason & Harrods, the places politicians will shop in
 
Was not going to respond to this post because I get so wound up about it. I have a friend who at 64 years of age having worked all his life got made redundant on xmas eve. He waited until the new year and then went to sign on. They tried to get him to take pension credit but, because he still has a mortgage he insisted that he still wants to work. Because he gets a small pension from where he was working they told him he is not entitled to jobseekers allowance but they would pay his national insurance contributions. Two weeks ago they wrote to him saying they had stopped his contributions because he was not doing enough to find work. I have voted tory all my life but I despise this lot in power now and just dont know what or who to vote for next. One thing for certain it wont be this lot.
 
And now I am going to the pub where we will no doubt debate the whole bloody thing again, so when I get home I will come on to this thread and have another bloody good moan.
 
SKEGGY - 5/4/2013 20:34

Disabled people parking in parent and child spaces are twats!
Click to expand...

Haha, skeggy is :56:

Parent parking, that is so modern world. I can understand for youngsters in pushchairs etc, although at sainsbury most of these are closer than the disabled spots which is wrong. But it says for kids up to eleven or twelve. Wtf, kids and parents have legs don't they?

But no skeggy my good man, there was a sign by ours saying disabled are more than entitled to park in them if disabled spaces were full.

 
A bloke took a parent and child space in tesco last weekend and I pulled him up as I was with my 9 month old son and there were no spaces left. He explained that he was disabled but all the disabled spaces were taken. He was old and clearly struggling so let him off, and drove to a standard space.

The person I feel most sorry for in all this is the person I parked beside, because of course it is impossible to lift a child out of a forward facing car seat with bashing the shite out of your door and the door of the person next to you - hence why they have wider spaces.

What I don't understand is why the disabled and parent and child spaces have t be near the entrance. These spaces should be furthest away, after all the people using them have push hairs and wheelchairs, so what difference to them does it make? It would also prevent those that shouldn't using up the wider spaces because they are near the entrance.
 
Astonian, that sort of crap is Labour's doing.

Folks like me, self employed aren't entitled to JSA and the like either because of Class 1 contributions (non in the last 2 years) and that takes precedence over your entire tax life.

Obviously being self employed but not of a limited nature I can't pay Class 1 in any case, but it means a 62 year old who is made redundant, lives off savings for 2 years, and then decides they need a hand or want to get back into work, equally cannot claim JSA and other benefits.

The whole system is a sham and penalises those who have worked their entire life, but through either trying something new or doing the right thing and not wanting to be a drain on the system are less entitled to what they have paid in than somebody coming to the country who promises to find work but hasn't yet paid a single penny into the system.

Think it's class 1 anyway, PAYE I'm sure.
 
Sorry Jim, that is ridiculous. Or you are on the wind up! Of course disabled should be as close as possible, some disabled can walk, just not far, hence, disabled.

:5:
 
The Fear - 5/4/2013 21:17

SKEGGY - 5/4/2013 20:34

Disabled people parking in parent and child spaces are twats!
Click to expand...

Haha, skeggy is :56:

Parent parking, that is so modern world. I can understand for youngsters in pushchairs etc, although at sainsbury most of these are closer than the disabled spots which is wrong. But it says for kids up to eleven or twelve. Wtf, kids and parents have legs don't they?

But no skeggy my good man, there was a sign by ours saying disabled are more than entitled to park in them if disabled spaces were full.
Click to expand...

Our Morrison's isn't: The disabled parking is right outside the Morrison's doors with us. Don't know about anywhere else.

I have seen a parent pull into a parent & child parking and when questioned on it said they were with their child. The child was 30.......
 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/apr/05/quantative-easing-government-debt-banking

Interesting idea, surely can't be any worse than giving it to banks so they can wank over their bonuses?
 
Its Ok guys, just got back from the pub, and we have sorted it all out, hic, we'll be fine. no more deficit probs, hic, oh and the villa will we 10 -0 tomorrow, hic.
 
astonion - 5/4/2013 23:46

Its Ok guys, just got back from the pub, and we have sorted it all out, hic, we'll be fine. no more deficit probs, hic, oh and the villa will we 10 -0 tomorrow, hic.
Click to expand...

Think they also slipped something in your drink astonian :7: :8:
 
They have single women parking spaces here because the poor little flowers can't be trusted to walk to their cars without tempting some man to rape them.

Anyway, being a **** I parked in one and ran up to the cinema,bought some tickets and went straight back down to the car. When I got back to the car I got some filthy looks from some girls in a car. GIRLS in a car not happy that I parked in a space for SINGLE women.

In the end of the day, everyone wants to park close to the doors and has an excuse why they should get preferential treatment. You are going to spend a couple of hours walking around the supermarket but can't walk 100 meters to the door?
 
Labour, Labour, Labour = Welfare, Welfare, Welfare!

I think everyone agrees that when the Labour party came into power, in came the influx of scroungers. Whether it be through asylum, single mothers or down right benefit cheaters = the welfare state was a shambles. Too much hard earned tax payers money given out way, way too easy. Not mention all the labour "created" jobs within the public sector.

So the Cons have come in with a major clean up op, long overdue and much needed - to once again sort out a country half destroyed by the Labour party. Labour's recent answers are just in one ear and out the other, does anyone(other than the scroungers or pub sector workers even listen to them?)

"According to government statistics, there were 3.2 million children living in families with three or more children in 2010-11 and families with more than two children are more likely to be living in poverty based on standard measures of comparative income."

Poverty, breeds poverty = Lets have more kids even though we cannot afford them because the state can pay. The more you have, the more money you can claim, forget that we cant afford them that bit is irrelevant. You can get the state to pay for school uniforms, pay for school dinners = this on top of all the other state benefits along with housing etc. = Lets thank Labour for screwing up "Great" Britain.

What sane person has kids if they cannot support them? Its almost like child abuse! Shouldnt people sort their own lives out 1st before screwing up others?

Child A = Goes through school being a prick. Didnt listen, just dossed about, laughed and joked and then failed in his exams. = Poor job prospects or lives off welfare.

Child B = Goes through school and listens, learns, tries hard. Instead of going out drinking cider down the park, he stayed home and studied. Good exam results -= got a great job.

The system = punishes child B in high tax, high council tax for improving his life, for doing well. He has money worries, stress, hard working lifestyle.
Yet child A is the receiver of benefits,maybe has sky TV doesnt have money worries and can still screw around.

Message to country = just be a child A it makes more sense and you get better rewards.
 
astonion - 5/4/2013 20:50

And now I am going to the pub where we will no doubt debate the whole bloody thing again, so when I get home I will come on to this thread and have another bloody good moan.
Click to expand...

Our lives are so circular!
 
People need to realise that all of this shit in the news at the moment about welfare is propaganda. They want people in work to hate people out of work. They want the private sector to hate the public sector. They want the healthy to be suspicious of the sick and disabled. Why? So they can strip everything bare and put public money in private pockets.

If they had genuine welfare reforms(which are needed) they would not have to sell them to the public by pushing divisive hate. The reforms would be reasonable and nobody would have a problem with them.

It's not about welfare reform, its all about passing the buck. Because mark my words your taxes will not be going down.
 
Green Tea - 7/4/2013 12:50

Labour, Labour, Labour = Welfare, Welfare, Welfare!

I think everyone agrees that when the Labour party came into power, in came the influx of scroungers. Whether it be through asylum, single mothers or down right benefit cheaters = the welfare state was a shambles. Too much hard earned tax payers money given out way, way too easy. Not mention all the labour "created" jobs within the public sector.

So the Cons have come in with a major clean up op, long overdue and much needed - to once again sort out a country half destroyed by the Labour party. Labour's recent answers are just in one ear and out the other, does anyone(other than the scroungers or pub sector workers even listen to them?)

"According to government statistics, there were 3.2 million children living in families with three or more children in 2010-11 and families with more than two children are more likely to be living in poverty based on standard measures of comparative income."

Poverty, breeds poverty = Lets have more kids even though we cannot afford them because the state can pay. The more you have, the more money you can claim, forget that we cant afford them that bit is irrelevant. You can get the state to pay for school uniforms, pay for school dinners = this on top of all the other state benefits along with housing etc. = Lets thank Labour for screwing up "Great" Britain.

What sane person has kids if they cannot support them? Its almost like child abuse! Shouldnt people sort their own lives out 1st before screwing up others?

Child A = Goes through school being a prick. Didnt listen, just dossed about, laughed and joked and then failed in his exams. = Poor job prospects or lives off welfare.

Child B = Goes through school and listens, learns, tries hard. Instead of going out drinking cider down the park, he stayed home and studied. Good exam results -= got a great job.

The system = punishes child B in high tax, high council tax for improving his life, for doing well. He has money worries, stress, hard working lifestyle.
Yet child A is the receiver of benefits,maybe has sky TV doesnt have money worries and can still screw around.

Message to country = just be a child A it makes more sense and you get better rewards.
Click to expand...

GT there is too much generalizing in your statement for me. The actual figures for benefit cheats/scroungers the government try and minimize is 0.5% of 100%. That is very tiny and granted too many but it is but a drop in the ocean of what most people think it is.

God no I would never listen to Labour and would never vote for them, however I am sick of so many generalizing against people who claim welfare.

There is more claimed in working tax credit than actual benefits yet people don't squeal about that. DLA/PIP's is not a welfare benefit as such either. It is given to help people's lives and is not means tested
 
You must log in or register to reply here.