Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: ITK doesnt write newspaper columns .....
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
In The Know |
steveimp wrote:
[quote]In The Know wrote:
[quote]steveimp wrote:
I get where you are coming from and I really believe that you really think that *ALL* benefits should stop for everyone - probably even state pensions. What would that achieve? A ridiculous increase in crime.... oh, and tax cuts for the very rich.
And where did i say ANY of that?
When you can't answer the question - ask a different question.
You didn't answer my NHS question - about the 'lower class' person getting cancer treatment on the NHS.
Utterly irrelevant - just proves you have not read the article - which is soley about girls getting pregnant instead of looking for a job - and expecting US to keep them. |
|
Hedda's Handouts |
" but the whole pint is they shouldn't be getting ANYTHING at all !"
I reckon they should get free beer.  |
|
steveimp |
In The Know wrote:
steveimp wrote:
Working the benefits *within the law* to maximise what they get? How come that is wrong when companies doing the same are acting brilliantly, in your opinion?
You just don't get it, do you Steve?
You say "Working the benefits *within the law* to maximise what they get" - but the whole pint is they shouldn't be getting ANYTHING at all !
They are idle scroungers who have NEVER contributed anything to society.
Try going to a bank and asking to withdraw money (and saying you may pay it back if you ever get a job !)
Firms that invest, take risks - with their own money - and fall on their faces if they get it wrong.
Why can't the parents - who knocked these scroungers out, and wanted them whilever they were getting money for them - look after them?
Times are a-changing, steve -
The Independent have been through this fallacy - £1.2BN is believed to be lost in benefit fraud. £25BN is lost in tax 'fiddles' which you say is acceptable.
I get where you are coming from and I really believe that you really think that *ALL* benefits should stop for everyone - probably even state pensions. What would that achieve? A ridiculous increase in crime.... oh, and tax cuts for the very rich.
You didn't answer my NHS question - about the 'lower class' person getting cancer treatment on the NHS. Do you believe that they should be allowed to die, because they don't have the money - or arranged their own health care? Do you really want an American way of health care, where you pay in thousands to an insurance company and where cover runs out as soon as you get ill or need an operation? Where profits come before life? |
|
In The Know |
steveimp wrote:
Working the benefits *within the law* to maximise what they get? How come that is wrong when companies doing the same are acting brilliantly, in your opinion?
You just don't get it, do you Steve?
You say "Working the benefits *within the law* to maximise what they get" - but the whole pint is they shouldn't be getting ANYTHING at all !
They are idle scroungers who have NEVER contributed anything to society.
Try going to a bank and asking to withdraw money (and saying you may pay it back if you ever get a job !)
Firms that invest, take risks - with their own money - and fall on their faces if they get it wrong.
Why can't the parents - who knocked these scroungers out, and wanted them whilever they were getting money for them - look after them?
Times are a-changing, steve - |
|
steveimp |
Hedda wrote:
In The Know wrote:
steveimp wrote:
How do you define scroungers?
I repeat ...
Have you actually READ the article ?
I can't speak for steveimp but I must confess I haven't as I tend to steer clear of anything with the word Express, Daily Express etc etc for as Private Eye continually points out, they are gutter rags produced by a well known pornographer.
A more credible source would be preferable. 
I tend to stay away from the mainstream media when I can to be honest. What gets my goat at the moment are the conspiracy sites who also 'say no to MSM' believing everything coming about about Jimmy Savile. There is a strange hypocrisy there. |
|
|
|
