Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Nearly Sane on August 15, 2015, 01:47:17 PM
-
Is this the cue for an updated version of Les Mis?
http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/news/1326642-stephen-daisley-on-wings-over-scotland-shoplifting-fundraiser/
-
I saw that story this morning.
Words, for once, fail me >:(
-
And what about the loss suffered by shopkeepers? Are the dogooders going to raise money for them? Theft should never be condoned.
-
And what about the loss suffered by shopkeepers? Are the dogooders going to raise money for them? Theft should never be condoned.
In this case it was a four pack of mars bars but the fine was something over £300. She stole the mars bars because she had nothing to eat for four days thanks to her social benefits sanctioned.
That's not to condone the theft, but I do have some sympathy.
-
And what about the loss suffered by shopkeepers?
Trivial. In fact trivial is putting it too strongly.
Are the dogooders going to raise money for them?
No, since they're not having to steal a four-pack of Mars bars just for something to eat. This woman had to.
Theft should never be condoned.
I condone it sometimes. This is one of them.
-
It is indeed appalling that, in one of the richest countries on earth a lady has to steal to stave of hunger caused by an uncaring government's welfare system.
Wings is to be commended.
(Mind you, it's also a fantastic site!)
http://wingsoverscotland.com/
-
I was amused by what she chose to steal. A Mars Bar is not something I'd choose to staunch hunger pangs - sweet things may provide you with energy but they do nothing to hunger pangs.
That aside, as we don't know why her benefits had been sanctioned it's difficult to judge. I wonder why she didn't go to a food-bank? Is/was she homeless? If not, did she have anything at home that she could have pawned or got money for from something like Cash Converters.
-
I am bemused by your amusement
-
I am bemused by your amusement
Clearly you have no understanding of dietary principles. Carbs, not glucose, are best for hunger. Furthermore, there are (as some on here have bemoaned) lots of organisations around the UK working to provide such people with free food.
-
I phrased my post in order to point out that being 'amused' seems inappropriate. I was trying to suggest that bemused might be a better word.
-
Also I might think that if I needed to steal something in order to feed my kids I might try and steal the easiest thing to hand rather than stand there considering dietary advice.
-
Dear Sane,
Correct, as a one time shop lifter ( many decades ago, thankyou Jesus ) you would always look for the easiest.
Maybe I could write a book, the science of shop lifting. :(
But I suppose there is a message in Hopes post, stop wearing the middle class rose tinted glasses, walk a mile in another mans shoes.
Gonnagle.
-
http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/Reverend-Stuart-Campbell-raises-11k-woman-fined/story-27613189-detail/story.html
It seems that now her fine will be paid off the excess will be going to food bank charities.
-
I was amused by what she chose to steal. A Mars Bar is not something I'd choose to staunch hunger pangs - sweet things may provide you with energy but they do nothing to hunger pangs.
She stole the mars bars because they were cheap. She knew she was doing wrong but she was desperate. Desperate people sometimes do stupid things.
-
Actually Mars Bars are quite cloying compared to other confectionery and do stop you feeling hungry. I find them far too sweet but understand exactly why they would have seemed a good option - cheap, small and likely to stop hunger.
-
And what about the loss suffered by shopkeepers? Are the dogooders going to raise money for them? Theft should never be condoned.
The point is the womans benefits should never have been removed by a sanction forcing her to steal or starve.
If the Government take away the money they are forcing people to steal. So perhaps the Government can take the 75p for the fine and pay the shopkeeper back. >:(
-
I was amused by what she chose to steal. A Mars Bar is not something I'd choose to staunch hunger pangs - sweet things may provide you with energy but they do nothing to hunger pangs.
That aside, as we don't know why her benefits had been sanctioned it's difficult to judge. I wonder why she didn't go to a food-bank? Is/was she homeless? If not, did she have anything at home that she could have pawned or got money for from something like Cash Converters.
We do know because the newspapers would not have printed this and she would not be getting help with the fine otherwise.
Nothing difficult. You need a reality check as you have a selective reasoning when it comes to the reality of the Government you voted in.
Food banks require a referral. She should not have to pawn anything and cash converters is not ideal when she then gets into further debts paying the money back with interest.
It is a little like the saying... ''If they have no bread let them eat cake'' If there is no flour for bread where do they get the flour for cake.... :-\
-
I am bemused by your amusement
Clearly you have no understanding of dietary principles. Carbs, not glucose, are best for hunger. Furthermore, there are (as some on here have bemoaned) lots of organisations around the UK working to provide such people with free food.
Money to buy food even easier. Without money she could not get carbs or glucose. That is why she stole.
-
Also I might think that if I needed to steal something in order to feed my kids I might try and steal the easiest thing to hand rather than stand there considering dietary advice.
Whereas I would explain my situation and ask them to work a couple of hours for a meal cleaning or some other job.
We can ask and explain. As a shop keeper I would give them tick till they got paid. But as a human being we could all be prepared to help our neighbours. What we need is to stop looking down on people who claim benefits and realise the Government does not care about small children, old people or disabled. They want to take any support away, as much as they possibly can.
-
Money to buy food even easier. Without money she could not get carbs or glucose. That is why she stole.
I'm not aware that foodbanks or soup kitchen providers charge their clientele, Sass.
-
But food banks close. Shops are open longer hours.
-
Is this the cue for an updated version of Les Mis?
http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/news/1326642-stephen-daisley-on-wings-over-scotland-shoplifting-fundraiser/
Presumably the Nationalists are trying to put over the message that Scotland supports criminals Maybe we ought to oblige them and send them all up there.
-
Is this the cue for an updated version of Les Mis?
http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/news/1326642-stephen-daisley-on-wings-over-scotland-shoplifting-fundraiser/
Presumably the Nationalists are trying to put over the message that Scotland supports criminals Maybe we ought to oblige them and send them all up there.
-
The only criminals are the inhuman government imposing these degrading benefit changes.
(That's the same bunch who are still trying to resist publishing the numbers of those who have taken their own lives as a result of the Eton mafia's policies)
-
You take the story at face value Anchorman ? Yes it seems a harsh sentence but is that story the whole truth? I put money on there being a hell of a lot more to it.
It's true that some people lead chaotic lives and are unable to look after themselves, usually due to mental health/disability or addiction issues, but the defence never raised that. Food prices today are historically low, if you are short of money you might struggle to pay the rent but there is no reason to go hungry. And was this a first offence or was she a regular shoplifter?
The fact that the Nationalists are trying to use this story as a political weapon says it all - it's not about compassion - it's about politics!
-
Are those of you au fait with shop lifting also ok for this thief to burgle their houses because she is reported to be hungry? I smell a stench of hypocrisy in the air esp in the northern parts of this island. Also how do you know how many tea leaves have walked away with unpaid goods from the same shop? So if the defence for committing a crime, any crime in a court of law is hunger then shall we do away with the crime of shop lifting? There's a lot more to this story then has been reported. Trust the fecking nationalists to jump on the bandwagon...
-
The one obvious 'missing' factor was the phrase first offence - if the woman was as blameless as the article suggested it is inconceivable that they wouldn't have used it, which suggests to me that she was a regular offender.
-
You take the story at face value Anchorman ? Yes it seems a harsh sentence but is that story the whole truth? I put money on there being a hell of a lot more to it.
-
Yes, sadly I do indeed take the story at face value, LA; there are too many people in my area who are under similar pressure. The days of people coming from door to door asking for food (and not just a cup of augar) to tide their kids over until the next benefit cheque or payment comes in, and until their case for being 'sanctioned' is heard, - those tales are not apocryphal - they happen in my village.
A case in point is a young mother who was sanctioned because she was fifteen minutes late for her appointment at a jobcentre springs to mind.
She admits it (and I know her).
Of course, the jobcentre were not allowed to accept her excuse that the bus broke down halfway between one town and t'other: a fact confirmed by Stagecoach.
So much of her incom is suspended pending appeal.
She is guaranteed to win that appeal; but, meantime, how do you support two children and yourself on little more than it takes to feed a dog, and the nearest food bank is four miles away?
I wouldn't condone shoplifting: niether would I condemn it under such circumstances.
-
It's true that some people lead chaotic lives and are unable to look after themselves, usually due to mental health/disability or addiction issues, but the defence never raised that. Food prices today are historically low, if you are short of money you might struggle to pay the rent but there is no reason to go hungry. And was this a first offence or was she a regular shoplifter?
-
99.9% of disabled people - such as myself - do NOT lead chaotic lives - and our benefits are being frozen , sanctioned and cut.
Thanks for that, LA.
-
The fact that the Nationalists are trying to use this story as a political weapon says it all - it's not about compassion - it's about politics!
-
No.
It's about dignity.
-
The only criminals are the inhuman government imposing these degrading benefit changes.
(That's the same bunch who are still trying to resist publishing the numbers of those who have taken their own lives as a result of the Eton mafia's policies)
Jim, one could equally argue that benefits are, in themselves, degrading. After all, most INGOs are looking to move people away from an aid-dependency culture and onto where they are given materials and skills to enable them to earn for themselves, at the same time helping them to regain self-confidence and dignity. Why are we, here in the developed world, still stuck in the dependency culture?
-
No.
It's about dignity.
Is it? Does encouraging people to rely on other people in this way really help dignity - or are you suggesting that the Scots Nats are trying to suppress people's dignity? ;)
-
It's about dignity.
If she's been reduced to stealing mars bars, dignity went out the window a long time ago.
-
The only criminals are the inhuman government imposing these degrading benefit changes.
(That's the same bunch who are still trying to resist publishing the numbers of those who have taken their own lives as a result of the Eton mafia's policies)
Jim, one could equally argue that benefits are, in themselves, degrading. After all, most INGOs are looking to move people away from an aid-dependency culture and onto where they are given materials and skills to enable them to earn for themselves, at the same time helping them to regain self-confidence and dignity. Why are we, here in the developed world, still stuck in the dependency culture?
-
Of course benefits are degradeing, Hope.
But there are those for whom there is no other option, being unable to earn through disability.
The government assessment process has meant that many such people have been removed from the benefits because those doing the assessing were unqualified to do so...over a third of appeals are successful (incidentally, a nice little earner for the tribunal appointed to conduct them).
Many disabled people, including many with learning disabilities, have been drven to attempt suicide in panic over these assessments...some have, unfortunately, suvcceeded.
Maybe Westminster could end their subsidised bars and restaurants, and use the money to pay for the funerals they have caused?
-
No.
It's about dignity.
Is it? Does encouraging people to rely on other people in this way really help dignity - or are you suggesting that the Scots Nats are trying to suppress people's dignity? ;)
Dignity, Hope.
The dignity of being able to feed the kids and pay the electricity bill...without risking ill health or hypothermia in a Scottish winter.
-
Are those of you au fait with shop lifting also ok for this thief to burgle their houses because she is reported to be hungry? I smell a stench of hypocrisy in the air esp in the northern parts of this island. Also how do you know how many tea leaves have walked away with unpaid goods from the same shop? So if the defence for committing a crime, any crime in a court of law is hunger then shall we do away with the crime of shop lifting? There's a lot more to this story then has been reported. Trust the fecking nationalists to jump on the bandwagon...
Were mars bars distributed to people rather than discounted alcohol. Still, one wants an electorate off it's face doesn't one.. fnaar fnaar..toodle pip.
-
Are those of you au fait with shop lifting also ok for this thief to burgle their houses because she is reported to be hungry? I smell a stench of hypocrisy in the air esp in the northern parts of this island. Also how do you know how many tea leaves have walked away with unpaid goods from the same shop? So if the defence for committing a crime, any crime in a court of law is hunger then shall we do away with the crime of shop lifting? There's a lot more to this story then has been reported. Trust the fecking nationalists to jump on the bandwagon...
Were mars bars distributed to people rather than discounted alcohol. Still, one wants an electorate off it's face doesn't one.. fnaar fnaar..toodle pip.
-
Discounted alcohol....we're not talkinhg about the subsidised bars and restaurants in the Palace of Westminster, and the government paid champers bill for the champagne charlie parasites in the HOL, are we?
-
Discounted alcohol....we're not talkinhg about the subsidised bars and restaurants in the Palace of Westminster, and the government paid champers bill for the champagne charlie parasites in the HOL, are we?
Is this kind of stuff only available in the Palace of Westminster? It seems to be avilable in places associated with the Senydd here in Cardiff, and I suspect that the same goes for Holyrood - not to mention just about every local council across the UK, even social club around the country.
-
Is this the cue for an updated version of Les Mis?
http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/news/1326642-stephen-daisley-on-wings-over-scotland-shoplifting-fundraiser/
Presumably the Nationalists are trying to put over the message that Scotland supports criminals Maybe we ought to oblige them and send them all up there.
Except the bloke who actually did successfully crowd fund the fine is a reverend from Bath. The surplus is going to a food bank charity.
If she could pay the fine she'd have ended up in prison. By no stretch of the imagination is that in anybody's interest, including the taxpayer.
-
Discounted alcohol....we're not talkinhg about the subsidised bars and restaurants in the Palace of Westminster, and the government paid champers bill for the champagne charlie parasites in the HOL, are we?
Is this kind of stuff only available in the Palace of Westminster? It seems to be avilable in places associated with the Senydd here in Cardiff, and I suspect that the same goes for Holyrood - not to mention just about every local council across the UK, even social club around the country.
-
I don't doubt it, Hope - and the practice should cease.
However, Westminster is responsible for these inhuman policies...the policies which have led some to end their lives.
-
Are those of you au fait with shop lifting also ok for this thief to burgle their houses because she is reported to be hungry? I smell a stench of hypocrisy in the air esp in the northern parts of this island. Also how do you know how many tea leaves have walked away with unpaid goods from the same shop? So if the defence for committing a crime, any crime in a court of law is hunger then shall we do away with the crime of shop lifting? There's a lot more to this story then has been reported. Trust the fecking nationalists to jump on the bandwagon...
I would be mightily pissed off to have my private space invaded, but then I'm not a retail premesis. But could I spare a biscuit for someone whose benefits hadn't been paid? Yes I could.
-
Except the bloke who actually did successfully crowd fund the fine is a reverend from Bath. The surplus is going to a food bank charity.
If she could pay the fine she'd have ended up in prison. By no stretch of the imagination is that in anybody's interest, including the taxpayer.
Actually he is not a real rev and is a noted nat blogger - that said, I have seen nothing that says all contributors are nats, or indeed would I assume they were.
-
Really? How odd.
Does it matter if every penny's been paid by a nat?
-
Except the bloke who actually did successfully crowd fund the fine is a reverend from Bath. The surplus is going to a food bank charity.
If she could pay the fine she'd have ended up in prison. By no stretch of the imagination is that in anybody's interest, including the taxpayer.
Actually he is not a real rev and is a noted nat blogger - that said, I have seen nothing that says all contributors are nats, or indeed would I assume they were.
-
Wot NS said....but I'd add that 'Wings' is unashamedly nationalist, but has no affiliation to the SNP.
-
However, Westminster is responsible for these inhuman policies...the policies which have led some to end their lives.
Are they exclusively responsible? Is it not more correct to say that we, as a society, are responsible? Is it, perhaps, a characteristic of developed and once (but no longer) developing society? Not sure that one can blame 'capitalism' per se as I understand that the suicide rate in Soviet Russia and Maoist China used to be comparably high Before the 1917 Revolution, Russia’s suicide rate was one of the lowest in the world. But the country approached the European suicide rate over the years of the Soviet regime. This is terrible but within the past 15 years Russia has become the world’s leader regarding the number of suicides committed here. In 2003, the registered suicide rate made up 39 suicides per 100,000 people. In 2004, Russia fixed the second position after Lithuania. There is no official statistics concerning Russia’s suicide rate over 2005 but experts’ forecasts are not comforting in this respect. The suicide rate in Russia is speedily increasing. - See more at: http://english.pravda.ru/society/stories/16-02-2006/76036-0/#sthash.wAFAhudy.dpuf
Whilst this blog on Maoist China doesn't mention 'suicide' it describes conditions that I would expect to encourage it - http://www.paulbogdanor.com/left/china/deaths1.html
-
Er....yes, Hope.
Westminster IS responsible.
Society didn't impose PIP , or ATOS assessments; Westminster did.
-
Really? How odd.
Does it matter if every penny's been paid by a nat?
What's odd?
I don't think it does matter though there are some talking about bandwagons - given that it was started by a nat blogger, not sure you can jump on your own bandwagon. The only reason I wuldn't assume it to be all nats is that Wings is a very widely read blog in politics in Scotland - there could well be some other contributors.
-
... that said, I have seen nothing that says all contributors are nats, or indeed would I assume they were.
'Twould be interesting to know how many non-nats know about Wings and therefore supported this particular crowdfunding campaign.
-
Er....yes, Hope.
Westminster IS responsible.
Society didn't impose PIP , or ATOS assessments; Westminster did.
Specifically, the coalition/Conservative government.
-
Really? How odd.
Does it matter if every penny's been paid by a nat?
What's odd?
I don't think it does matter though there are some talking about bandwagons - given that it was started by a nat blogger, not sure you can jump on your own bandwagon. The only reason I wuldn't assume it to be all nats is that Wings is a very widely read blog in politics in Scotland - there could well be some other contributors.
Because I'm not quite sure why a nat blogger wants to pretend to be a vicar from Bath. But hey, it's not a scene I know anything about so, whatever.
Otherwise I don't think it matters one jot who donated.
-
Er....yes, Hope.
Westminster IS responsible.
Society didn't impose PIP , or ATOS assessments; Westminster did.
But society has, over the years moved towards regarding such things as acceptable. By the way, did you complain about DLA when it was first introduced, with all the restrictions that it had on it?
-
... that said, I have seen nothing that says all contributors are nats, or indeed would I assume they were.
'Twould be interesting to know how many non-nats know about Wings and therefore supported this particular crowdfunding campaign.
In Scottiish political circles, nealry everyone knows about Wings, and that wouldn't give you any indication of who supported it. As Jim notes, he is not affiliated with the SNP at all, and has a lot of followers from other parties who might support independence but are not Nats (capitalization deliberate) - like SSP, RIC and Greens
-
Because I'm not quite sure why a nat blogger wants to pretend to be a vicar from Bath. But hey, it's not a scene I know anything about so, whatever.
Otherwise I don't think it matters one jot who donated.
Well he lives in Bath so that is the Bath bit. The Rev is effectively an affectation he has used for some time
-
Because I'm not quite sure why a nat blogger wants to pretend to be a vicar from Bath. But hey, it's not a scene I know anything about so, whatever.
Otherwise I don't think it matters one jot who donated.
Well he lives in Bath so that is the Bath bit. The Rev is effectively an affectation he has used for some time
I won't ask why he lives in Bath. ???
-
Dear Diary,
Two points.
1. A human being in this country stole to feed herself.
2. From the link Sane gave us " there are no borders on solidarity " solidarity is not a left wing word, in Tory speak, " we are all in it together.
Gonnagle.
-
I won't ask why he lives in Bath. ???
He went there to work with Amiga - twenty or so years ago
-
I think the startling issue is that nobody at any point seems to have stepped in to say this process is a nonsense. Not the store manager, the police, the prosecutors, nor the magistrate who refused to accept the idea of hunger. I have no idea if this woman repeatedly offends or not but in case like this punishment is not the answer.
-
I won't ask why he lives in Bath. ???
He went there to work with Amiga - twenty or so years ago
Do they still exist?
-
Do they still exist?
Nope, but that was why he ended up there.
Some details below.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rev._Stuart_Campbell
-
I think the startling issue is that nobody at any point seems to have stepped in to say this process is a nonsense. Not the store manager, the police, the prosecutors, nor the magistrate who refused to accept the idea of hunger. I have no idea if this woman repeatedly offends or not but in case like this punishment is not the answer.
How much has that process cost?
-
Just to pick up on some earlier questions. She supposedly stole the mars bars because they were the cheapeat thing in the shop, and she had ben given vouchers for food bank but it was closed.
The problem I have is what is the point in fining someone with no money here.
-
No.
It's about dignity.
I'm sorry Anchorman, but I don't buy that. She was claiming Jobseekers Allowance - the clue in in the title - it's to help people who are seeking jobs. She failed to attend an interview and received the penalty, she lost her benefit for a period as is quite clearly explained on the government website:
http://www.thesite.org/money/benefits/jsa-sanctions-9197.html
It also explains quite clearly:
If you have a good reason you should be able to avoid a sanction. For example, if you tried to get the bus to the Jobcentre and it didn’t show, then you shouldn’t be sanctioned for being late to an appointment. (You should tell the Jobcentre as soon as possible if this happens.) It’s worth having your Jobcentre’s number stored on your phone for this very reason.
Apparently she couldn't be bothered to tell anyone that there had been a problem with her bus.
She then managed to obtain food vouchers but clearly couldn't be bothered to check when the food-bank was open.
So then she thought it was fine to go out and steal some food.
Far from being a victim of benefit sanctions , she is simply the victim of her own stupidity.
-
Do we know if the sanction was fairly applied? No. Do we know if this woman has learning difficulties, mental health issues or other problems? No. Do we know how often the food bank opens? No. Do we know if it was supposed to be open but the volunteer couldn't make it to open it that day? No. Do we know if her bus was late getting to the food bank? No.
Do we know that this would have cost a lot in terms of time and money on the part of the police, prosecution services and courts? Yes. Has anything been achieved by fining this women? No. Does it make it harder for her to get a job now? Probably.
-
Do we know if this woman has learning difficulties, mental health issues or other problems?
I think we do know, her solicitor would have presumably offered that as mitigation.
-
Do we know that this would have cost a lot in terms of time and money on the part of the police, prosecution services and courts? Yes. Has anything been achieved by fining this women? No. Does it make it harder for her to get a job now? Probably.
Which does strongly suggest that she had 'previous' - I think it would be unusual to be so tough on a first offender.
-
Do we know if this woman has learning difficulties, mental health issues or other problems?
I think we do know, her solicitor would have presumably offered that as mitigation.
Depends how good her solicitor is. Given this is almost certainly legal aid, she might not have asked. Or the woman may have undiagnosed depression or other problems.
-
Do we know that this would have cost a lot in terms of time and money on the part of the police, prosecution services and courts? Yes. Has anything been achieved by fining this women? No. Does it make it harder for her to get a job now? Probably.
Which does strongly suggest that she had 'previous' - I think it would be unusual to be so tough on a first offender.
Possibly. I'm not so sure. But even if you are right, that still means that they've fined someone with no money at a cost to the taxpayer of many times that of the amount she stole. How does that make any sense?
-
My understanding is that a first time offender would normally be let off with a police caution.
-
And you might be right. But this case has achieved what, exactly?
-
And you might be right. But this case has achieved what, exactly?
You might say that for a lot of cases, so what do you do, just ignore crime?
Maybe worth starting a Crime and Punishment thread.
-
From the Kidderminster Shuttle:
Louisa Sewell was the latest victim of benefit sanctions to appear before magistrates when she stole a four pack of Mars bars, worth just 75p, from Heron Foods in the Swan Centre, Kidderminster, on June 22.
But Chairman of the magistrates Maurice Lashford took no pity on the poverty-stricken woman, who's defence solicitor said she took the cheapest item she could see in the store to eat herself because she was so hungry, saying the bench did "not readily accept you go into a shop to steal just for being hungry."
And now some background from The Independent:
Frances Crook, the chief executive of the Howard League, told the Independent that the new compulsory court fines and charges, which were brought in by former Justice Secretary Chris Grayling shortly before the May general election, were “clearly so inequitable”.
“There is no leeway. Its a fixed charge and the courts cannot vary it because of circumstance, they have to impose it”, she explained.
Looks as though first offence leniency has been abolished. Another politician off my Xmas card list! A Justice Secretary who brings the law into disrepute.
-
Not a bad total....
http://metro.co.uk/2015/08/17/campaign-raises-13000-for-woman-who-was-fined-328-afte-stealing-mars-bars-5347776/
(though the accuracy leaves a lot to be desired)
-
Here's Wings comment on the latest total - and a telling comment on the coverage in rUK, but nothing in the increasingly irrrelevent Scottish press.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-geography-of-news/
-
This isn't a first offence for IDS either. Why put up with this, if you don't like cheats?
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/aug/18/dwp-admits-making-up-positive-quotes-from-benefits-claimants-for-leaflet
-
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/woman-fined-nearly-300-for-stealing-three-bottles-of-baby-milk-10460653.html
Justice?
-
There is of course one sure way to ensure that you don't have to worry about losing Job seekers allowance - Get a bloody job - but I suppose that is a bit extreme for some people.
-
The milk of human kindness appears to have turned to cheese in your case, LA - I'm thinking specifically of that one in Sardinia (IIRC) which is full of maggots and weevils.
Still, as the forum's very own representative of the swivel-eyed and spittle-flecked Right, who would be surprised by this?
-
There is of course one sure way to ensure that you don't have to worry about losing Job seekers allowance - Get a bloody job - but I suppose that is a bit extreme for some people.
Ah the unfortunate can be attacked ad hom because it is all their fault...Mmm. I will give you a clue c o m p a s s I o n
-
There are some places where there are no jobs to be had.
Being out of work doesn't mean that the state should be allowed to try to starve you into doing what it wants. Five or six years ago a relative of mine was made redundant and claimed the basic jobseekers. He went to the job centre and explained to the girl (young enough to be his daughter, late for work, unwashed and hungover in yesterday's clothes) that on,y half a dozen firms in the UK require his expertise and that he had applied to each of them with his CV, as well as sending it to other firms in associated fields, and that he had a handful of interviews lined up. She told him that unless he went for the interviews she's arranged for him they'd assume he wasn't really looking for work and he'd lose his jobseekers. These days he's be sanctioned.
-
Don't even try, Rhi. It's all "Let them eat cake - or starve, I don't care either way" with the likes of LA and his kind.
-
Dear Lapsed,
Can the real Lapsed stand up!! Where is the guy who went on a pilgrimage, where is the guy who sent me on the journey of ego!!
I will echo our Sanes post, COMPASSION, research that word, it means, to suffer with, walk a mile in another mans shoes.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Lapsed,
Can the real Lapsed stand up!! Where is the guy who went on a pilgrimage, where is the guy who sent me on the journey of ego!!
I will echo our Sanes post, COMPASSION, research that word, it means, to suffer with, walk a mile in another mans shoes.
Gonnagle.
-
Yep.
As Rhi pointed out, there exist areas where there ARE no jobs, and also adults who cannot find funding for re-training for the jobs which exist.
Also, certain jobs on 'minimum wage' or zero hours contracts mean that even those in such employment rely on benefits to stave off hunger, homelessness or hypothermia.
Compassion, in place of Tebbitism. is needed here.
-
Lets face it, some places require miracles for meaningful, long-lasting jobs to be created.
-
Dear Rhiannon and Jim,
Smoke and mirrors from the Tories, they pay lip service to bringing down unemployment.
Their new word is aspire, but aspiration is only a dream if you do not invest in people.
They are cutting further education to the bone, places where people could learn new skills to achieve their aspirations.
The government job centres are staffed by people who have lost any interest in helping anyone to aspire, visiting one of these soulless places gives no one any hope, well that's if you can bypass the security officers on the doors.
Gonnagle.
-
Unfortunately, I agree, Gonners.
Those who staff the jobcentres have a thankless task - knowingg that the courses and schemes they send jobseekers on are really only a way of massaging the figures and getting them out of the way.
The fact is that there are areas in these islands where there is simply no chance of getting any job which would clear the potential employee of the need to claim benefit.
-
The fact is that there are areas in these islands where there is simply no chance of getting any job which would clear the potential employee of the need to claim benefit.
Isn't there a kind of implicit assumption in that comment that people should expect a job to be available on their doorstep.
While that might be nice, it isn't always the case and there are plenty of people who travel half way around the world to gain jobs and a better life for themselves. I sometimes feel that too often people from the UK aren't even prepared to relocate 30 miles in order to get a job, let alone 3000.
I do understand that for some people moving is tricky - for example if they have children in school (although moving schools isn't the end of the world) or perhaps caring responsibilities for elderly relatives. But that isn't the case for everyone. Sure it can be scary to move to another part of the country for a job, to need to start again in a new place, to make new friends etc. But I don't think it is unreasonable to expect people to do that if the alternative is benefits, or at least to consider it.
-
Prof;
you answered your own point.
If a person in lower middle age has such family responsibilities, plus a very limited income which, for example means they cannot afford a car, then moving elsewhere to find work also means finding transport, employment and housing.
Unless the potential job pays substantially more than even the 'living wage' (misnomer alwert), then the costs would outweigh the income.
-
Prof;
you answered your own point.
If a person in lower middle age has such family responsibilities, plus a very limited income which, for example means they cannot afford a car, then moving elsewhere to find work also means finding transport, employment and housing.
Unless the potential job pays substantially more than even the 'living wage' (misnomer alwert), then the costs would outweigh the income.
I'm sorry - I don't agree unless there are caring commitment that mean you can't move - e.g. an elderly relative.
The world is full of people who take the decision (which may be difficult and often very hard to start with) to relocate to another part of a country or even to another country in order to be where the jobs are if there aren't jobs near them. And if you are relocating in the UK, you will still have the safety net (such as it is) of benefits, so if you relocate to Worcester from Sunderland because you can get a job there but not in Sunderland then in work benefits will be available to you.
But there is a broader point about pride (not sure if that's the right word) and future prospects - even if you aren't much better off, or no better off at all, in the early stages, to be in a job rather than unemployed massively improves your prospects in the future. Much easier to move from one job to a better one, than to try to find an employer willing to take a punt on someone who has been unemployed for years, or even never actually had a job.
-
The fact is that there are areas in these islands where there is simply no chance of getting any job which would clear the potential employee of the need to claim benefit.
Isn't there a kind of implicit assumption in that comment that people should expect a job to be available on their doorstep.
While that might be nice, it isn't always the case and there are plenty of people who travel half way around the world to gain jobs and a better life for themselves. I sometimes feel that too often people from the UK aren't even prepared to relocate 30 miles in order to get a job, let alone 3000.
I do understand that for some people moving is tricky - for example if they have children in school (although moving schools isn't the end of the world) or perhaps caring responsibilities for elderly relatives. But that isn't the case for everyone. Sure it can be scary to move to another part of the country for a job, to need to start again in a new place, to make new friends etc. But I don't think it is unreasonable to expect people to do that if the alternative is benefits, or at least to consider it.
Are they allowed to consider it and reject it, and how long do they get?
-
The fact is that there are areas in these islands where there is simply no chance of getting any job which would clear the potential employee of the need to claim benefit.
Isn't there a kind of implicit assumption in that comment that people should expect a job to be available on their doorstep.
While that might be nice, it isn't always the case and there are plenty of people who travel half way around the world to gain jobs and a better life for themselves. I sometimes feel that too often people from the UK aren't even prepared to relocate 30 miles in order to get a job, let alone 3000.
I do understand that for some people moving is tricky - for example if they have children in school (although moving schools isn't the end of the world) or perhaps caring responsibilities for elderly relatives. But that isn't the case for everyone. Sure it can be scary to move to another part of the country for a job, to need to start again in a new place, to make new friends etc. But I don't think it is unreasonable to expect people to do that if the alternative is benefits, or at least to consider it.
Are they allowed to consider it and reject it, and how long do they get?
Not sure what you mean?
-
You said that you don't consider it unreasonable for people to uproot themselves (avec les enfants if applicable) and move x number of miles away for a job if the alternative is benefits - or at least to consider doing so. What if they consider it and say "No thanks" - and what's the difference between saying that immediately and saying it after a month? It's the same response after all.
-
You said that you don't consider it unreasonable for people to uproot themselves (avec les enfants if applicable) and move x number of miles away for a job if the alternative is benefits - or at least to consider doing so. What if they consider it and say "No thanks" - what's the difference between saying that immediately and saying it after a month? It's the same response after all.
I think there are people who could reasonably relocate, but simple won't consider it - that's where they live, they expect a job to be local to that place or they aren't prepared to contemplate it. I don't think that's right and it shows a real lack of ambition and drive and actually if they do have kids, that' not a great example to be showing them.
So to give an example, I was born near Liverpool - my Dad worked in the docks in Birkenhead. In the early 70s he lost his job with no prospect of employment locally. He got a job near London and we moved. The whole time was extremely stressful for the family (I didn't see this really as I was only 6), not helped by the fact that the new job disappeared very rapidly too, so he got another job in London. For a while our quality of life down south was less than near Liverpool, but I think you've got to be prepared to move at times if there isn't work locally.
-
I think there are people who could reasonably relocate, but simple won't consider it - that's where they live, they expect a job to be local to that place or they aren't prepared to contemplate it.
But the same question applies - what if they do contemplate it and say no? Contemplating something doesn't equate to agreeing with it.
-
I think there are people who could reasonably relocate, but simple won't consider it - that's where they live, they expect a job to be local to that place or they aren't prepared to contemplate it.
But the same question applies - what if they do contemplate it and say no? Contemplating something doesn't equate to agreeing with it.
I'm not sure, but I think there does need to be a big push to get people to recognise that part of moving themselves and their family out of a dependency culture may involve ... well ... moving. I think there are too many people whose horizons are massively narrowed, both in terms of their ambitions and also their geography. That's a problem.
It is about expectations I think and that is driven a lot by the society you live in - if you create an impression that there aren't any jobs, that no-one should ever expect to move to get a job, guess what - you'll embed the benefits culture. Create a new, more ambitious and aspirational culture, where people are encouraged to better themselves, and to understand that it may require some sacrifice and moving out of a default comfort zone (which might not be very comfortable anyhow) you begin to empower people toward a better future. And not just for themselves, but potentially for their kids etc as there is an issue with multigenerational non working families.
-
It depends on where the pressure is coming from. There are arguments at the moment that a kind of social cleansing is going on in the South-East. That is, poor people are gradually being moved out via various means. The council estate I used to live on is being knocked down and replaced with 'executive homes'. Where will the old occupiers go? All very murky.
-
It depends on where the pressure is coming from. There are arguments at the moment that a kind of social cleansing is going on in the South-East. That is, poor people are gradually being moved out via various means. The council estate I used to live on is being knocked down and replaced with 'executive homes'. Where will the old occupiers go? All very murky.
Not dismissing this as an issue, but it is a different issue.
What you are describing is a situation where people are likely to be able to find jobs, e.g. in London and the South East, but can't afford to live near their work, so must commute or aren't able to take the job because the finances don't stack up.
What I was talking about was a situation where there aren't available jobs locally, but might be some distance away (that might be 10 miles, 200 miles or even in a different country) and the willingness of unemployed people in an area without jobs to move to take a job rather than stay put on benefits (and often with diminishing likelihood of getting a job in the future).
-
Auf Weidersehen Pet, you mean?
-
Auf Weidersehen Pet, you mean?
Doesn't have to be abroad.
I'm actually quite shocked at times at the lack of vision of some people. As you might know, along with my wife we run a nursery and therefore are regularly recruiting, and this is an area where the positions aren't high paid (perhaps they should be, but they aren't across the sector). I'm regularly amazed when we get people who seem interested in a post (and may be without a job) yet decline to come to interview or take a position, because it's too far. And that often means a 5-10 mile bus journey. We're not recruiting from the other end of the country, merely perhaps from the next town, yet there seems to be a perception that this isn't really good enough, they want a job two minutes away.
-
I'm actually quite shocked at times at the lack of vision of some people.
You can't compel people to have ambitions and aspirations they don't have and don't want, or the ambitions you think they ought to have because they would be just like you if only they knew the facts of the case.
And nor should you.
-
I'm actually quite shocked at times at the lack of vision of some people.
You can't compel people to have ambitions and aspirations they don't have and don't want, or the ambitions you think they ought to have because they would be just like you if only they knew the facts of the case.
And nor should you.
You can nuture and encourage aspirational attitudes and also do things to discourage lack of ambition and aspiration.
But remember we aren't talking here about someone comfortable pottering along, making their way rather that being uber-driven to be a world leader in a field. Nope we are talking about people whose cultural dearth of ambitious and aspiration (which lets face it is often from poor role models in the pervious generation and lack of good role models) results in a dependency position which isn't good for either the person, nor those who pay for that dependency through benefits etc.
Is it unreasonable to expect someone to take an available job, that may be 30 miles away rather than love on benefits? Again I mean in circumstances where there is no reasonable barrier to them doing so (e.g. dependents etc).
-
You can nuture and encourage aspirational attitudes
Not in those who aren't interested, you can't.
But remember we aren't talking here about someone comfortable pottering along, making their way rather that being uber-driven to be a world leader in a field. Nope we are talking about people whose cultural dearth of ambitious and aspiration (which lets face it is often from poor role models in the pervious generation and lack of good role models) results in a dependency position which isn't good for either the person, nor those who pay for that dependency through benefits etc.
This sounds as though it comes straight from the IBS playbook. (Yes, I know his name is Iain Duncan Smith but I always refer to him as IBS since even the mere mention of his name let alone the sight of his endlessly kickable smirking face gives me the shits).
Is it unreasonable to expect someone to take an available job, that may be 30 miles away rather than love on benefits? Again I mean in circumstances where there is no reasonable barrier to them doing so (e.g. dependents etc).
I can think of umpteen reasons why it could well be unreasonable.
-
You can nuture and encourage aspirational attitudes
Not in those who aren't interested, you can't.
But remember we aren't talking here about someone comfortable pottering along, making their way rather that being uber-driven to be a world leader in a field. Nope we are talking about people whose cultural dearth of ambitious and aspiration (which lets face it is often from poor role models in the pervious generation and lack of good role models) results in a dependency position which isn't good for either the person, nor those who pay for that dependency through benefits etc.
This sounds as though it comes straight from the IBS playbook. (Yes, I know his name is Iain Duncan Smith but I always refer to him as IBS since even the mere mention of his name let alone the sight of his endlessly kickable smirking face gives me the shits).
Is it unreasonable to expect someone to take an available job, that may be 30 miles away rather than love on benefits? Again I mean in circumstances where there is no reasonable barrier to them doing so (e.g. dependents etc).
I can think of umpteen reasons why it could well be unreasonable.
No this isn't from the IDS book, because his approach tends to be punitive and entirely 'stick'. I don't agree with that, but nor do I agree that we should sit aside and accept low aspirations as embedded and hereditary, which we currently do. Actually I think that the 'aspirations' agenda and encouraging aspiration and ambition and social mobility has always been more embedded in left wing politics than right wing, who are actually often rather happy with the status quo where the currently advantaged remain advantage and the current disadvantage remain disadvantages (as long as the advanced aren't expected to pay for them).
And I agree there are plenty of legitimate reasons why this might not be reasonable, but there are also many people who don't have any legitimate reasons not to take a job 30 miles away, but aren't prepared to consider this due to embedded expectations.
-
But we're back to your use of the word 'consider' again and my questions about what you propose to do with those who consider it and reject it, or if there's any really meaningful difference between those who say 'no' immediately and those who consider it for three weeks and still say 'no.' I don't think there is.
-
Auf Weidersehen Pet, you mean?
Doesn't have to be abroad.
I'm actually quite shocked at times at the lack of vision of some people. As you might know, along with my wife we run a nursery and therefore are regularly recruiting, and this is an area where the positions aren't high paid (perhaps they should be, but they aren't across the sector). I'm regularly amazed when we get people who seem interested in a post (and may be without a job) yet decline to come to interview or take a position, because it's too far. And that often means a 5-10 mile bus journey. We're not recruiting from the other end of the country, merely perhaps from the next town, yet there seems to be a perception that this isn't really good enough, they want a job two minutes away.
It wasn't always abroad in the programme either.
I've always lived in areas where people commute so the idea that people won't strikes me as plain odd.
And I'm not sure how the rights of the working people are supported by shrugging our shoulders about those that won't.
-
Dear Prof,
I can't really argue with your stance, there are some who could relocate ( I am in the process of doing just that ) and the lady mentioned in the OP could, with help do the same.
My argument is that this government is doing very little to ease unemployment, their Job centres are next to useless, the government website ( Universal jobmatch ) is hopeless, old jobs which have been filled and not very user friendly compared to other websites.
Even the company who runs the website wants out, citing to much government interference.
They are cutting adult education, I personally at the end of June signed a petition to try and save staff jobs at my local college.
This government is failing to invest, invest in people who want to work, the ones who do not want to work, in my opinion are a very small minority, but of course the media likes to focus on them, they make better telly. >:(
Gonnagle.
-
I'm not sure that people who won't commute or relocate simply don't want to work. If all you've known is the few miles radius around where you grew up it's going well out of your comfort zone even just to commute each day. It's completely different to areas where people expect to commute or relocate. Growing up in suburbia as I did, everyone wanted to be close to bus stops and the Tube because most people headed into the City or one of the bigger commercial areas every day. Where I live now as very low unemployment but most jobs are in the two main cities that are commutable from here.
Anchorman mentioned dignity earlier. There's nothing dignified about not encouraging people to be their best.
Adult education is a scandal; the last government slashed the budget and diverted funds to literacy, numeracy and computer skills for people seeking work - no more floristry, Spanish or philosophy. Now even the remedial stuff is going.
From what I've heard the Job Centres are badly run and the staff poorly trained and with a ad attitude, but I don't have firsthand experience of this. It figures though that on the budgets allocated for these things that both staff and services aren't going to be the best.
I'm not sure that the last government had a clue on dealing with this either; creating lots of public sector jobs seemed to be their main answer and that isn't sustainable any more than slash and burn is. There needs to be a complete rethink, but goodness knows who is going to step up to do it.
-
Money to buy food even easier. Without money she could not get carbs or glucose. That is why she stole.
I'm not aware that foodbanks or soup kitchen providers charge their clientele, Sass.
What did Christ charge when he died on the cross and rose again to give life.
You talk about money and then you fail to heed what is written in the NT...
21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.
When someone is in need then we should not be asking ourselves about the cost but why this person had no one to help her out.
A packet of mars bars.. tell me, would the shopkeeper or the company have these things but for God the creator.
Psalm 50
KJV If I were hungry, I would not tell thee: for the world is mine, and the fulness thereof.
EVERYTHING IN THIS WORLD BELONGS TO GOD....
So who is anyone to allow another to starve.
That woman was forced to break the law because man breaks GODS Laws everyday. YOU included with such an unloving attitude without empathy, pity or mercy. YOU are too content with what you have..
-
Is this the cue for an updated version of Les Mis?
http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/news/1326642-stephen-daisley-on-wings-over-scotland-shoplifting-fundraiser/
Presumably the Nationalists are trying to put over the message that Scotland supports criminals Maybe we ought to oblige them and send them all up there.
-
The only criminals are the inhuman government imposing these degrading benefit changes.
(That's the same bunch who are still trying to resist publishing the numbers of those who have taken their own lives as a result of the Eton mafia's policies)
The one thing we can both agree on. :-*
-
Are those of you au fait with shop lifting also ok for this thief to burgle their houses because she is reported to be hungry? I smell a stench of hypocrisy in the air esp in the northern parts of this island. Also how do you know how many tea leaves have walked away with unpaid goods from the same shop? So if the defence for committing a crime, any crime in a court of law is hunger then shall we do away with the crime of shop lifting? There's a lot more to this story then has been reported. Trust the fecking nationalists to jump on the bandwagon...
You sound like ''no bread, let them eat cake''
It wasn't any old crime. Not a robbery not a burglary.
Just the taking of food itself not money from someones purse and not a mugging. Not a false claim for another benefit just wanting food having starved for days...
Why not starve yourself for 4 days and then tell us you did not feel hunger pains or need to eat.
The Government rely on the darker sides of the nature of people.
They make them out to be work dodgers and crooks but in truth the elderly and the disabled as well as carers are NONE of those things.
The real reason we have money problems are the high wages they pay themselves and the immigrants now coming in large numbers to take the benefits which were solely meant for the people here.
However, the way to get rid of the system was to bring those immigrants in to make the excuse. Now they have done what they were brought here to do, they don't want anymore in and they want those already here... OUT...
-
You sound like ''no bread, let them eat cake''
I could agree less, Sass.
[quoteIt wasn't any old crime. Not a robbery not a burglary.
Just the taking of food itself not money from someones purse and not a mugging. Not a false claim for another benefit just wanting food having starved for days...[/quote]But its still a crime. It's taking someone else's possession, and is very similar to taking money from someone's purse.
Why not starve yourself for 4 days and then tell us you did not feel hunger pains or need to eat.
A more important question is why, in this day and age, had she been without food for 4 days. After all, pretty well every town, city and even many villages have some form of food bank/provision for the homeless.
The real reason we have money problems are the high wages they pay themselves and the immigrants now coming in large numbers to take the benefits which were solely meant for the people here.
However, the way to get rid of the system was to bring those immigrants in to make the excuse. Now they have done what they were brought here to do, they don't want anymore in and they want those already here... OUT...
Please tell me that you aren't being serious here, Sass. Not only are immigrants 'taking the benefits which were solely meant for the people here". Not sure that there a such benefits, but more importantly, the majority of immigrants are working and earning perfectly legitimately- and paying tax as appropriate. Ironically, most immigrants want to work, but British law often states that they can't. I used to teach the children of an Afghan who was a highy qualified and experienced ophthalmology surgeon, with qualifications from Moscow and London. At the time, the local University College Hospital had a vacancy for just that speciality - yet it was made very clear that he was not eligible to apply for the job, even though he had received refugee status a year earlier. By the time I left that job two years later, the post was still vacant!!
-
Any chance that we might realise there is a difference in how we treat immigrants and asylum seekers, or is that like worrying about the apostrophe?
-
Leaving out the expletives (though understanding the need for them), this is a superb critique of the disgraceful policies of the Tory government, disgracefully endorsed by Labour:
https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2015/08/23/the-tories-are-fucking-bastards/
-
Leaving out the expletives (though understanding the need for them), this is a superb critique of the disgraceful policies of the Tory government, disgracefully endorsed by Labour:
https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2015/08/23/the-tories-are-fucking-bastards/
One of the best, and rightest, things I've encountered in some time.
-
Apparently, this wonderful, caring government are arranging 'suicide training' for employees in job centres who have to cope with the consequences of the degrading, inhuman treatment meated out by Westminster on the most vulnerable members of society.
This is an interesting, though depressingly true, report from 'The National'.
http://www.thenational.scot/comment/when-compassion-disappears.6869
-
Dear Jim,
Heard about this yesterday, apparently if someone is talking about suicide the job centre employee has a pink card to hold up.
If ever a post was ripe for expletives it's this one but I will settle for smileys. >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( >:( >:( >:( :-[ :-[ :'(
Gonnagle.
-
.....and yet more truly shocking stats taken from the Daily Mirror web site.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/more-2500-benefit-claimants-die-6328956
This government has blood on its' hands.
-
Dear Jim,
Heard about this yesterday, apparently if someone is talking about suicide the job centre employee has a pink card to hold up.
If ever a post was ripe for expletives it's this one but I will settle for smileys. >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( >:( >:( >:( :-[ :-[ :'(
Gonnagle.
I must've posted this
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/more-2500-benefit-claimants-die-6328956
at the same time, Gonners.
Truly horrifying and shameful, imho.
-
Any chance that we might realise there is a difference in how we treat immigrants and asylum seekers, or is that like worrying about the apostrophe?
Isn't there also a distinction from refugees? Surely, those Syrians and Afghans who are fleeing to Europe come into this category? Presumably, this is why Germany (at the moment) is accepting Syrians who are fleeing, and neither deporting them nor passing them on to another EU country.
-
Any chance that we might realise there is a difference in how we treat immigrants and asylum seekers, or is that like worrying about the apostrophe?
Isn't there also a distinction from refugees? Surely, those Syrians and Afghans who are fleeing to Europe come into this category? Presumably, this is why Germany (at the moment) is accepting Syrians who are fleeing, and neither deporting them nor passing them on to another EU country.
Why are they considered to be refugees if they have left the safe heaven of Turkey and Italy to try and pick a country of their choice ('based on welfare payments possibly?). And anyone working for border agency will tell you that not everyone claiming to be a Syrian is actually a Syrian.
-
An update on Wings' appeal, and also appeals for suggestions for the rest of the cash raised:
http://wingsoverscotland.com/meanwhile-in-the-real-world/
-
I could agree less, Sass.
A more important question is why, in this day and age, had she been without food for 4 days. After all, pretty well every town, city and even many villages have some form of food bank/provision for the homeless.
Please tell me that you aren't being serious here, Sass. Not only are immigrants 'taking the benefits which were solely meant for the people here". Not sure that there a such benefits, but more importantly, the majority of immigrants are working and earning perfectly legitimately- and paying tax as appropriate. Ironically, most immigrants want to work, but British law often states that they can't. I used to teach the children of an Afghan who was a highy qualified and experienced ophthalmology surgeon, with qualifications from Moscow and London. At the time, the local University College Hospital had a vacancy for just that speciality - yet it was made very clear that he was not eligible to apply for the job, even though he had received refugee status a year earlier. By the time I left that job two years later, the post was still vacant!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9mETkfC7xQ
God owns everything all the goodness of the land and the waters of the earth.
Where does he charge us for these things? Whom does he send bills to?
You need to change the way you think and look at things...
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9mETkfC7xQ
God owns everything all the goodness of the land and the waters of the earth.
Where does he charge us for these things? Whom does he send bills to?
You need to change the way you think and look at things...
YAWN!!!! ::)
-
If you are hungry because you have no money you don't nick something which is nearly pure sugar you take something with a high fat content, or something that is more of a meal.
-
If you are hungry because you have no money you don't nick something which is nearly pure sugar you take something with a high fat content, or something that is more of a meal.
No, you take what you think you can get away with.
-
The point is that no one should be hungry or homeless in this country. Assylum seekers should not be allowed into a country where we cannot house our own.
Wait till the NHS disappears and they think no one will want to come here because even our own people will be dying because they cannot afford medical attention to be paid for.
The stupid government are trying to turn us into the uncaring Americans civilisation with ghettos and slums and people dying for they cannot afford medical insurance. Watch and learn because it won't hit everyone till it is too late. The rich and middle class get better off whilst the working class get poorer and become sick. But when the working class goes the upper classes fall with them/... The Working class are the back bone of the country and once they fail the whole body becomes paralysed.
-
dadvokat, someone who opportunistically snatches Mars bars from a shop counter is unlikely to be in the same category as a burglar - or a regular shoplifter come to that.
It's good to read so many compassionate posts on this thread which far outweigh the ones by posters who have no inkling what it is like to live on Benefit and be desperate. There but for the grace of God, etc.