We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 280 comments are related to the topic:
left to die with £3.44 in his bank account because of benefit sanctions
left to die with £3.44 in his bank account because of benefit sanctions
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 280
|
By:
Dr Crippen • August 5, 2014 4:15 PM BST
Who picked the vegetables before the immigrants arrived? Stop the benefits of they refuse to take a job. That's how it used to work. Fine, but it has to be a job people can do and was he actually offered a job? no he had not applied for quite enough jobs Not everybody can cope with this...maybe this man needed help not punishment He was also 59 years old.....who on earth was going to employ him????????? Yes I think the DWP are at fault here they should check before they anyone without money This is in a society which for four has deliberate driven up unemployment solely to protect the rich ..why not just get the rich to pay more tax? 40% top rate..is not exorbitant As I say I see no moral basis whatever for the conservatives since Thatcher |
|
By:
four years
|
|
By:
Who picked the vegetables before the immigrants arrived?
the cockneys? |
|
By:
I bet they were paid more
There is one scam which goes unnoticed, as sideshowbob pointed out earlier Women with no husband who simply get themselves pregnant to get a council house and basically live off the state This is quite difficult to deal with , because we cannot punish children But people on their own, who have bad luck, are very vulnerable now, particularly those with mental health and coping issues I have seen quite a few...and been there myself...but am now retired I realise since the Credit Crunch we do have to tighten our belts but I see a massive bias here against the less well off... I demand it be fairer...and the unemployment we have now, there was no need for this and I don't consider blaming the victims is right |
|
By:
Immigration is a separate issue of course
this is the fault of both governments. But particularly Labour They have this quite strange idea that controlling our immigration to that which benefits us and does not harm us is racist.?????????????????????? As with some of their other equalities they have completely lost me, I am a conservative with a small c But as far as economic equality goes, I am always socialist. |
|
By:
Where were his friends? Where were his neighbours? Where were his family? These are the questions Thatcher would have asked and she would have been right.
|
|
By:
Emden
05 Aug 14 23:49 Who picked the vegetables before the immigrants arrived? the cockneys? Cockneys used to descend on Kent for hop picking, or to the Vale of Evesham for fruit picking. |
|
By:
People become isolated......I think the DWP were wrong here..they need to check before they just cut
peoples money off..... I think this guy may have needed help myself.. Whats his crime, he has not applied for enough jobs he would never have got anyway There is something wrong when this happens |
|
By:
Still waiting for Facts to reappear and see my reply to her post.
|
|
By:
Bit rich referring to thatcher asking about where the persons friends and family were after she royally shafted the ethos of society with the ideology of selfishness.
Sounds a lot like tebit saying allow food banks as they as they are a symbol of people's charity, over looking the fact it should be the state and not charity who are responsible, like Attlee said. But if you are hell bent in breaking as many of the people not in the cliche that funds the party that turns the screw then the old adage of Wesley 'make as much, save as much and give as much as you can' has the focus on the former. The fact people took thatchers evil ideology to look after themselves (so chums could defend spivs as virtuous ffs) is the very reason there are blackholes in the balance sheet why opportunists ran off with the money. |
|
By:
....in pay for overinflated egos that didn't have any relation to skills, ability or input.
|
|
By:
Clique not cliche
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
It's rather ironic is it not the Royal Mail sell off back on the news, which in many ways is the epitome of the problems we have. A workforce that are being pushed to carry private companies interests, both in the form of competitors mail where they won't go and the endless amount of garbage adverts for anything from specs to pizzas all under more scrutinised allocation of time and effort.
The sell off is debated about whether it was under valued, I chose to look at the ideology. The very people WHO ACTUALLY DO THE WORK are the ones that had to hold on to their shares for 3 years, enough time for the speculators (who were the ones who decided the price ffs) to have special dispensation to make heaps by selling off directly, that's blatant opportunism and profiteering from a state asset. All of our interests got plundered on that day of sale by the very people who were given free reign to parasite on others hard work. |
|
By:
A question for crippen.
You seem to like to focus on the often used mantra of suggesting certain types are feckless. Answer me this; that in itself is based on a person earning their keep, and by extension is about getting paid for their worth. Is it right and proper for gross over inflated reward for nothing very much in regard input, is the ratio of reward for people having money agreeable on the same basis that you judge others not pulling their weight? Within a finite economy egregious damage is made by the lack of correlation between ones take out and ones input, do you not agree with that truth? |
|
By:
in spite of the trite c rap you uttered to gibberish, doc, there are, in case u havent noticed, millions of people who cannot always stand on their own two feet, as you put it, and now and again, need a helping hand from the state. Next youll be telling ill people to take pills and stay away from hospitals, where, in your sick society, wed probably all have pay-per beds.
|
|
By:
Au contraire, Thatcher right abut most things.
Why do all the n'er d wells blame the government for their own personal failings? |
|
By:
Do they? (whatever n'er do wells are)
Or do you just say this to suit your warped reasoning? |
|
By:
I think we should go back to the days when the welfare state provided support for people who were between jobs and others who were genuinely incapable of work.
Not the situation we have now where living off the state is a way of life. The person who is the subject of the thread had his benefit stopped because he failed to turn up at two interviews. So obviously he wasn't making sufficient effort to find a job. There's a difference between satisfying the conditions for receiving JSA and genuinely looking for work. And the jobcentre can't be held responsible for him not taking his medicine either. |
|
By:
Do you think that ponces sat behind a desk or for that matter stood on a trading floor with their c0ck in their hand are getting a right and proper take out of the overall wealth or don't you?
My family on my mother's side all worked in steel foundries and rolling mills, that was work....sure they got a steady pension but since they were all well dead by 70 that didn't help them too much. they were worked to the bone by the corporate machine who took far too much of the wealth than they created for others. These companies used the opportunities that were provided them, like protectionism or utilisation of industrial revolution, yet gave far less back than they took out. The worker was seen as a commodity, and now is seen as a robot followed by a computer and forced into servility to fund the corporate greed of others. I personally have no problem if individuals choose not to be part of that, but the laughable comment by oxy shows how out of touch he is. |
|
By:
dustybin, why on earth didn't your family on your mother's side go and work behind a desk or on that trading floor you mentioned?
It sounds like a much better deal. |
|
By:
mainly because back then it was a who you know rather than any measure of merit.
people round these parts worked hard for a living and look where it got them. |
|
By:
you going to answer the question I asked?
|
|
By:
Tragic case of someone dying being used for some sort of political gain .
If its all about how much money is in your bank account when you go ,i know plenty folk that would be leaving plenty debt if they died any time soon ,its the New Labour legacy ,everyone in hawk up to their eyeballs and loads of min wage jobs ,public sector ahead of the private in conditions ,wages and pensions .But who pays for it ......same old same old This thread is a Pathetic attempt at making political gain out of a personal tragedy . with the same old finger pointing tripe from the left .  |
|
By:
There is no denying BB that the greed of man is ever present, the problems of a socialist system is firstly that despotic types take control and secondly that the individuals won't work hard enough if its not them that gains full benefit. But that is reason enough not to over deregulate industries, you give an inch and people take a mile.
Arguing that just because things before had been affected by malignant individuals doesn't mean that thatcher was right to promote selfish abandon. If you have a puncture you don't throw away the bike, you fix it....but thatcher's way was about short termism, sure industry was already doomed, but choosing to back the city was backing the wrong horse, this approach is the very reason the system collapsed. So what are we now since the capitalists love to pigeon hole, are we capitalist or are we socialist since it was keynesianism that bailed out the begging corrupt? Investment is down since those dark days, inequality is up. |
|
By:
thatcher promoted debt widescale, compound interest borrowing to own your own home whether private or council were all vehicles to make money from money.
Didn't dante say about a special place in hell for these, that being a metaphor to the damage it reaps when productivity does equal reward. It was a double act of yank anglo aggression (no other country went as far down that road as us) and new labour was just tory all over again and you know it. Thatcher said at the end of her life that new labour was her 'greatest' legacy. |
|
By:
*
doesn't equal reward |
|
By:
Everything that Thatcher did can be reversed.
How do you reverse the damaging effects of immigration? |
|
By:
send em back
|
|
By:
Breadnbutter.
Just about everything in your 12.28 post is complete, 'Tory spin', crap. I might take the time to address each point when I'm not at work and have the time. |
|
By:
Aug 6, 2014 -- 1:26AM, Eeternaloptimist wrote:
Where were his friends? Where were his neighbours? Where were his family? These are the questions Thatcher would have asked and she would have been right. Maybe he had no friends or all had moved on or dead he was 59 , neighbours does everyone know their neighbors well enough to chap them if they dont see them for a few days and say whats up fella and his family well if you read the article youl know he had a sister |
|
By:
We know that David Clapson was actively searching for work when he died because a pile of CVs he had just printed out was found a few metres from his body
I think we can sefely say the guy was looking for work |
|
By:
The fact remains those at the top are ATTACKING the most vulnerable members of soociety and making finanical gain from taking away benefits from those in real need. Believe the shyte about sponging all you like, but the elite of this sick world will always be the real spongers.They are evil. If you support them, you are selfish twut.
|
|
By:
Yes you will always get some hangers on with Socialism Tony. It has to be vigilant.
But all in all I prefer that to the appalling survival of the fittest society the Tories are trying to create. The only reason they do that is to protect the fittest, the rich, I find this immoral. |
|
By:
studyform ...dont know what your on about M8 ....12:28 post ?
anyway sounds like yer a foamin lefty so just send any comments you have to Dusty and he/she will file it . Regards BnB .  |
|
By:
Sad case, everyone should be allowed benefits at a certain level no matter what. This man must have died through the stress of what happened. Dignity for all .
|
|
By:
Blimey I didn't realise Thatcher had the power to change the whole of society...
She was a PM not God. The notion that selfishness was created by MT is insane. If your behaviour is shaped by a PM then you're in trouble. As for our Welfare State I think it's staggeringly generous. Only yesterday on a commercial radio station the Govt was advertising tax credits and the need for people to hurry up and make their claims. There will always be the tragic cases, the forgotten people. Govt cannot be held responsible for any and every one who becomes isolated from their friends and family. In this case they tried to ensure the man could apply for an emergency grant. They phoned him and wrote to him. |
|
By:
They could have just payed his benefits and saved the stamp fees and phone calls , waste of more monies
|
|
By:
Not wishing to sidetrack the debate into the usual one about Thatcher and her motives but people are quite free to argue her policies were wrong, hypocritical or whatever. My point is that based on the speech which is so widely misquoted by the left it is unlikely that someone like this would have been left to die alone in this way. The welfare state as envisioned by the post war Labour governments can be good at giving people money but not so good at showing people that they are cared for. In any form be it under Tory or Labour. What shows people they are cared for and part of things in general is other people be they family, friends or neighbours. We make the society we want through our connections with other people. Not government. That was Thatcher's point and on that, if nothing else in her life, she was absolutely right.
|
|
By:
Dustybin - 'are we capitalist or socialist?'
A brilliant question - I'd say we're very confused! In theory capitalism would not have bailed out the banks. For Govt to take control of 2 massive banks was a staggering case of socialism. The whole tax credit thing is socialism in the extreme. Govt subsidising employers, effectively topping up peoples' wages so employers don't have to. Zero hours contracts = capitalism. Regulation of private industry: we have off this and off that (offcom, offgem) keeping an eye on business, Milliband telling how much energy companies can charge etc. Socialism Capitalism is in the housing market, probably the clearest example and it's been a disaster. A free market that has no regulation in recent times meaning house prices have gone up 5 or 10 times salaries each year. Utter utter madness! That then leads to zillions spent on housing benefit and the socialist 'help to buy' scheme which creates more inflation. Laughable. |