Transport poverty

[Dark Knight]

Noddy
I sugest you aplogise for you childish remarks and learn how to debate without throwing your toys around, you have chosen to cherry pick certain remarks and use them to defend you weak position, did I say all, where exactly did I say that?

a stupid reply which deseves an apology

[noddy10]

There is no chance of an apology from me when even if they were cherry picked the statements were made by you and were awful judgements to make.

[Manoverboard]

People who claim Benefits through fraud and deception deseve nothing other than a jail term ... those who have fallen on hard times through no fault of their own deserve some help from the State if they have contributed to the system during their life time.

I trust we can agree on that point and call it a draw

[Dark Knight]

Moby
Agreed

[gfwgfw]

What a load of absolute bollocks

"the lowest 10% of car owners" if they are that poor , how come they have a car at all.
as usual we are harping on about poverty in country that doesn't have any real poverty, coz the government pay up to readily
for real poverty look at China, India, Brazil etc etc etc
the UK is a free ride for lazy b******s and we all know it ,but are to scared to say so , for fear of being seen as uncaring and selfish
if they are that bl**dy poor sell the car and buy food and clothes

Hello Sweety

The Giant and Mrs Giant are both sans Jam Jars


I would like to sincerely thank all ye lubberly tax payers for supporting both our state pension and bus passes

I do sincerely hope that your valued life will extend to be appreciative of these little "joys"

Must dash

Meals on Wheels have just arrived

Lubooo lots

Graham and his Ferrets

[Dark Knight]

gfw
I hope you continue to enjoy the perks of your retirement, as you paid enough for them during your working life

I to have a meals on wheels compnay that serves me very well in Derby......it is called Dominos

[Quizzical Bob]

Did I read that there are 145,000 claimants in the UK who have never worked?

[Dark Knight]

there are generations of families that have never worked

it is a joke

[Silver_Shiney]

How come I'm not laughing?

[Dark Knight]

i saw the articles about the "baby machine" who was having a house built and her teenage daughters are now sprogging and have never worked either,
why would they when some stupid p***ock agrees to build them a £400,000 house
who ever signed that off ,wants sacking and jailing for gross incompetence and wasting tax payers money

a bloody shambles and no bleeding heart liberal will convince me otherwise

[Silver_Shiney]

With you all the way, buddy

[gfwgfw]

I would guess that most posters to this confection are moderately comfortable

Sadly there are large swathes of our beautiful Islands that are less fortunate, and I do agree that let "the state take the strain is endemic"

It is my view that it is not always the fault of the maligned, but bad governments over several decades of all persuasions are the main culprits

I find it hard to enjoy reading some of my fellow members "slagging off" vitriol - sorry but I truly do

Have a very peaceful and comfortable evening

Graham

[paultheeagle]

I would guess that most posters to this confection are moderately comfortable

Sadly there are large swathes of our beautiful Islands that are less fortunate, and I do agree that let "the state take the strain is endemic"

It is my view that it is not always the fault of the maligned, but bad governments over several decades of all persuasions are the main culprits

I find it hard to enjoy reading some of my fellow members "slagging off" vitriol - sorry but I truly do

Have a very peaceful and comfortable evening

Graham

Well said sir and no mistake..

[sumdumbloke]

i saw the articles about the "baby machine" who was having a house built and her teenage daughters are now sprogging and have never worked either,
why would they when some stupid p***ock agrees to build them a £400,000 house
who ever signed that off ,wants sacking and jailing for gross incompetence and wasting tax payers money

a bl**dy shambles and no bleeding heart liberal will convince me otherwise

'She' is not being 'given' a house, and to call someone a 'baby machine' is as offensive as deriding sterile people as ' unproductive jaffas'.

The council has a statutory responsibility to house the homeless. It (the council) has decided that the most economic way to do this for this unusually large family is via this new build, but the house will always belong to the council and when this family no longer need it, another large family will benefit (don't forget by doing this they are freeing up two 3-bedroom houses much in demand).

Any fair reading of the facts would tell you that it's never so simple as the Sun's summary.

[gfwgfw]

Greetings from a gloomy Poole Bay

Mr MOB poignant and meaningful post regarding the Mumbai lady grass seller

Provoked a thought

Move just a few continents . . .


. . . . and the lady selling Grass on the corner of most major UK cities is making a spliffing fortune

Tis a sad world, make no mistake about that

[oldbluefox]

I must confess, that occurred to me gfw.

[Silver_Shiney]

i saw the articles about the "baby machine" who was having a house built and her teenage daughters are now sprogging and have never worked either,
why would they when some stupid p***ock agrees to build them a £400,000 house
who ever signed that off ,wants sacking and jailing for gross incompetence and wasting tax payers money

a bl**dy shambles and no bleeding heart liberal will convince me otherwise

'She' is not being 'given' a house, and to call someone a 'baby machine' is as offensive as deriding sterile people as ' unproductive jaffas'.

The council has a statutory responsibility to house the homeless. It (the council) has decided that the most economic way to do this for this unusually large family is via this new build, but the house will always belong to the council and when this family no longer need it, another large family will benefit (don't forget by doing this they are freeing up two 3-bedroom houses much in demand).

Any fair reading of the facts would tell you that it's never so simple as the Sun's summary.

This is starting to get off-topic, however I would like to contribute my three ha'pence-worth...

A dear friend of mine is one of 15 children. They all had the same married, and loving, mother and father. It could possibly be argued that this lady was a baby-machine and, yes, that would be offensive.

However, DK was referring to a certain Heather Frost of this parish, who has numerous offspring from a variety of men, conceived, more likely, through lust than love. It would seem to me that she is producing children in order to milk the system of benefits paid for by our taxes. As unpleasant as the epithet "baby-machine" may be, I humbly consider it to be appropriate.

She is not homeless, as DK has in no way claimed, and is currently in housing which is adequate. She says it is difficult to know what the children are doing "next door" because she can't see them. My children would play upstairs while I was downstairs. I could not see them and had no idea what they were up to... until I took the simple expedient of going to look.

No-one has ever said that this new house will belong to her. It is "merely" being built especially for her, and she has the audacity to state that if it doesn't come up to her expectations, she will refuse it and demand that something else be built for her. This I find unacceptable.

While I am blessed with sufficient income to have a little spare after I've paid for my own family, I am more than happy to put my hand in my pocket (OK, the Chancellor is doing that on my behalf before I even see my salary) to help someone less fortunate than me who, being genuinely unable to fend for themself, needs shelter and nourishing food. However, I object strongly to my contribution being used to pay for a horse or, in the case of another female recently in the news, breast implants.

[sumdumbloke]

i saw the articles about the "baby machine" who was having a house built and her teenage daughters are now sprogging and have never worked either,
why would they when some stupid p***ock agrees to build them a £400,000 house
who ever signed that off ,wants sacking and jailing for gross incompetence and wasting tax payers money

a bl**dy shambles and no bleeding heart liberal will convince me otherwise

'She' is not being 'given' a house, and to call someone a 'baby machine' is as offensive as deriding sterile people as ' unproductive jaffas'.

The council has a statutory responsibility to house the homeless. It (the council) has decided that the most economic way to do this for this unusually large family is via this new build, but the house will always belong to the council and when this family no longer need it, another large family will benefit (don't forget by doing this they are freeing up two 3-bedroom houses much in demand).

Any fair reading of the facts would tell you that it's never so simple as the Sun's summary.

This is starting to get off-topic, however I would like to contribute my three ha'pence-worth...

A dear friend of mine is one of 15 children. They all had the same married, and loving, mother and father. It could possibly be argued that this lady was a baby-machine and, yes, that would be offensive.

However, DK was referring to a certain Heather Frost of this parish, who has numerous offspring from a variety of men, conceived, more likely, through lust than love. It would seem to me that she is producing children in order to milk the system of benefits paid for by our taxes. As unpleasant as the epithet "baby-machine" may be, I humbly consider it to be appropriate.

She is not homeless, as DK has in no way claimed, and is currently in housing which is adequate. She says it is difficult to know what the children are doing "next door" because she can't see them. My children would play upstairs while I was downstairs. I could not see them and had no idea what they were up to... until I took the simple expedient of going to look.

No-one has ever said that this new house will belong to her. It is "merely" being built especially for her, and she has the audacity to state that if it doesn't come up to her expectations, she will refuse it and demand that something else be built for her. This I find unacceptable.

While I am blessed with sufficient income to have a little spare after I've paid for my own family, I am more than happy to put my hand in my pocket (OK, the Chancellor is doing that on my behalf before I even see my salary) to help someone less fortunate than me who, being genuinely unable to fend for themself, needs shelter and nourishing food. However, I object strongly to my contribution being used to pay for a horse or, in the case of another female recently in the news, breast implants.

Is she conceiving through simple 'lust' or as a means of cheating the benefit system? It can't be both, since one is by definition an animal instinct and the other is a matter of calculation, but honestly that's the least of the problem with your post.

I find it astonishing that people can condemn someone based on nothing more than the vile prejudice of a rag newspaper, and I take from your horse reference that you're no better informed on this woman's true situation than was the previous contributor (the part share of a horse belongs to a grown up daughter). If that's all the proof you need to condemn someone openly, by name, then I find that as regrettable as I find the fact that you would wish to make a judgement about someone based on the circumstances of their conception.

[Silver_Shiney]

I find it astonishing that people can condemn someone based on nothing more than the vile prejudice of a rag newspaper, and I take from your horse reference that you're no better informed on this woman's true situation than was the previous contributor (the part share of a horse belongs to a grown up daughter). If that's all the proof you need to condemn someone openly, by name, then I find that as regrettable as I find the fact that you would wish to make a judgement about someone based on the circumstances of their conception.

I think you will find that the horse is "owned" by a 16-year old daughter, who claims to pay all the bills but refuses to say how she gets the money. I am happy to be proved wrong.

I would never judge a person on the circumstances of their conception, it's the integrity and motives of the two people who caused that conception that I would query.

[paultheeagle]

Hello My Darlings

The fact is it is a housing association that is building this house for the large family and then renting it out to the woman...Not a penny of tax payers money is being used. When this family have finished with the house and the children have all left home, then the housing association will rent it out to another large family.

So all those that are so quick to condemn what would you do to house this family...Maybe the mother has been reckless and should be put in a chastity belt or burnt at the stake but what is the alternative. Do we depive these children, who have done nothing wrong remember of family life just because their mother cannot keep her knickers on or do we house them.

To split the family up and foster the children out or put them in children's homes would cost the tax payer a great deal more money than keeping them all under one roof.

We have this thing called a welfare state to help the more vulnerable in our society and yes there are a few that abuse that privalege but the vast majority don't.....Believe it or not they don't just give you benefits you have to apply, fill in a form and some middle class suit will agree that someone can have that benefit. Contrary to popular belief they ain't handed out will nilly.

As I say we have created the welfare state, we cannot now just pull the rug from under peoples feet because the politicians have got it wrong.....Not like what this government are doing because all that will happen is that you will put more and more innocent people into poverty.

[Manoverboard]

... Not like what this government are doing because all that will happen is that you will put more and more innocent people into poverty.

I agree with much of your posting but the innocent people will find themselves in greater hardship .... NOT in poverty.

[Dark Knight]

somebody please show me TRUE poverty in the UK and I will happily retract anything I have posted and ask Admin to remove it
a council house filled with kids filled by a feckless mother who is getting lots more benefits, that working people earn. for doing nothing is repugnant and morally corrupt and to have the gall to say it is because I red the Sun , just shows how feeble peoples arguments are
her family is now on a second generation of scoungers and wastrels, so don't pretend it is a public service when she is clearly fleecing the system and to try to justify her having or part owning a horse is pathetic

show mw real poverty and not just bleedin heart liberal sentiment and I will plat fog, it just does not exist and not one of you can show it does, so rather than insult me try to prove your counter argument and when you cannot you can pm me to apolgise

[oldbluefox]

When I think of my dad, who was one of 12, living in a two up, two down cottage this woman is in the lap of luxury. In those days there was no welfare state, you had to go out to work to feed and keep your family. As has already been pointed out, poverty is a relative term.
Does anybody know what the fathers are doing to support their offspring?

[sumdumbloke]

... Not like what this government are doing because all that will happen is that you will put more and more innocent people into poverty.

I agree with much of your posting but the innocent people will find themselves in greater hardship .... NOT in poverty.

Of course you're right, it's not poverty in the plain meaning of the word.

But that doesn't mean that the concept of relative poverty isn't the correct one to be looking at. What is important in any society is the fact that we all feel connected to it. Rule of law, general standards of decency and behaviour, even acceptance of the need to go to war, all depend on us feeling part of a whole. If the gap between any one group emerges, either higher or lower up the income scale, then that's generally bad news for the rest of us. Higher up the scale we get reckless bankers, lower down the scale we get the so called underclass.

The subject gets confused with lazy allegations about armies of benefit cheats and people finding false virtue in their own (often fortuitous) circumstance, but just because poverty is relative, and not absolute, it's no less pernicious.

[Dark Knight]

Relative to what ???
relative to some poor child dying in Africa covered in filth and flies?
Relative to someone slaving away in sweatshop for 20p a day
or relative to some overpain footballer

because relative to the top 5% of wage earners in the UK I am in poverty, and somewbody getting 10's of thousands of poundsd a year in benefits is not poverty, it is fleecing the system and should be stopped
there is no supporting argumnet ,that holds water, for that level of benefits