Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Early Morning Riser
08 Jun 12 13:52
Joined:
Date Joined: 12 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 8,719 | Blogger: Early Morning Riser's blog
just read this.

Coming to the uk in april 2013, People will be evicted from their homes when the bedroom tax comes into force when the low paid/unemployed and those on sickness benefit who claim help with their rent will have their housing benefits cut by 14% if they got 1 spare bedroom or 25% if they got 2 spare bedrooms. one bedroom is considered as being required for a couple, an adult over 16, any 2 children under 10 and 2 children under 16 of the same sex. So the UK will see mass evictions from april 2013.
Pause Switch to Standard View Mass evictions in the uk because of...
Show More
Loading...
Report History Maker June 8, 2012 4:35 PM BST
Spot on EMR, 99% couldn't hold down a proper job

That is almost certainly the most stupid statement I've seen on this forum. Few MPs are morons. Sure they're sycophants/cronies/apparatchiks/whatever, but I'd be gobsmacked if almost all couldn't hold down a proper job elsewhere.

I bet that every single one could do fruit picking, waitering or bar tending. If they're not proper jobs, good luck to you next time you fancy buying an apple at the supermarket, actually having your food brought to your table at a restaurant, or getting a drink at the bar.
Report Arleystation June 8, 2012 4:35 PM BST
WELL IF THEY THINK THEY ARE UNDERPAID WHY DONT THEY GO AND DO ANOTHER JOB INSTEAD,

The talented ones do, thats the point.  And then we are left with the talentless lot in the house now.


The talented ones have a career path to be Ministers, Secretaries of State etc where they receive significantly more remuneration and perks which sets them up for life. There is then of course the House of Lords and unelected European Commissioners where they can doze to their hearts content whilst being fully rewarded at the same time.

Wasn't an MP once supposed to be an altruistic servant of the people to whom personal aggrandisement was secondary or did the culture of Blair change all that?
Report History Maker June 8, 2012 4:39 PM BST
There is then of course the House of Lords and unelected European Commissioners where they can doze to their hearts content whilst being fully rewarded at the same time.

The House of Lords is and inexcusable stain on democracy, but I don't think that politicians of any colour run for Parliament on the basis that they might, if they're lucky, get to doss about there in twenty years time.
Report blackburn1 June 8, 2012 4:45 PM BST
Fruit picking and waiting is an essential part of life, it's also about the level of job most MPs would be capable of in the private sector. I'd bet my last penny the majority of ex MPs get cushy, pointless jobs in the public sector, it's all the useless khunnts are fit for
Report treetop June 8, 2012 7:31 PM BST
These jobs are termed police commissioners at present.
Report twomatchpoints June 9, 2012 1:11 AM BST
So much for my funny story, not even one Happy

miserable bastards Sad
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 9, 2012 10:49 AM BST
HappyHappy

The only problem with that story is...there is many a true word meant in jest..its impossible not to see it becoming a reality because certain ethnic groups have massive families...FACT
Report Lampus June 9, 2012 10:56 AM BST
May this rule will  make   the poorer  Labour  supporters
who do not bother to vote
vote next election
could be a massive own goal  by the nasty  tories
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 9, 2012 11:11 AM BST
Some people on here think if you become unemployed you relinquish your rights as a human being!!,thats how bad this tory witch hunt is getting,YOU COULD HAVE WORKED FOR 25 YEARS  SOLID  and suddenly find yourself without a job,why should you be kicked out of your house
Report Early Morning Riser June 9, 2012 11:14 AM BST
rocking horse, a lot of people think that if you are unemployed you are a lazy scrounging so and so, even if you just got made unemployed after working most of your life.
Report Early Morning Riser June 9, 2012 11:28 AM BST
the other scenario could be that you just finished work through ill health and got pensioned off meaning you dont claim any money off the dwp like job seekers or esa and only live off your pension but you get a bit of help with your rent by being entitled to claim a bit of housing benefit after you have lived off your pension lump sum only to find that you are now going to be evicted from your 2 or 3 bedroomed home into a bedsit or 1 bedroom flat because of the cut in your housing benefit. this is scandalous in my view.
Report Mexico June 9, 2012 11:32 AM BST
RH - The taxpayer will pay 100% of housing the unemployed if they have an appropriate number of bedrooms for their family's needs. If they have an extra bedroom the taxpayer will pay 93% for their rent. The unemployed also receive money from the taxpayer to cover food etc.

How is this treating the unemployed badly?

There are many people who work who don't have spare bedrooms in their homes as they can't afford the extra rent/mortgage.
Report Early Morning Riser June 9, 2012 11:39 AM BST
mexico, read the thread, 14% cut for 1 extra bedroom and 25% cut for 2 spare bedrooms.
Report Mexico June 9, 2012 11:44 AM BST
Good spot EMR - is this better. Think we all agree it is generous to the unemployed.

The taxpayer will pay 100% of housing the unemployed if they have an appropriate number of bedrooms for their family's needs. If they have an extra bedroom the taxpayer will pay 86% for their rent. The unemployed also receive money from the taxpayer to cover food etc.

How is this treating the unemployed badly?

There are many people who work who don't have spare bedrooms in their homes as they can't afford the extra rent/mortgage.
Report Early Morning Riser June 9, 2012 12:01 PM BST
this is going to have an adverse effect on private landlords aswell. they will have to rent out their homes to bigger families from 2013 instead of renting it out to a clean and quiet couple who have kept their homes clean and tidy for years.
Report Mexico June 9, 2012 12:11 PM BST
EMR - I never knew you cared so much about private landlords.
Are you saying the taxpayer should fork out more money so our lovely private landlords can rent a 3 bedroom home to a clean and quiet couple rather than to a family who would use the bedrooms for sleeping in?
Report Dr Crippen June 9, 2012 12:20 PM BST
EMR, it will have little effect on private landlords now.
The rules about who can live where and get LHA came in April 2011.
As I mentioned earlier the main suffers are the single under 35s who have lost their one bedroom accommodations, although why these rules didn't apply to social housing is a mystery.

The problem is lack of housing stock, so why not stop making the situation worse by importing people?
With a rapidly expanding population the situation can only get worse for the unemployed, (what landlord is going to rent to the DSS when there are workers after houses?) and yes the unemployed are getting a raw deal, for the benefit of Johnny foreigner.
Someone has got to suffer, so if not the unemployed then who should?
Report Early Morning Riser June 9, 2012 1:18 PM BST
my point is, if you have lived in the same house for a good number of years and kept it clean and tidy and well maintained why should you now have to move out after april 2013. these new changes should not effect people who are living in them prior to 2013 and should only apply to new tenants from 2013.  this change in my view is mass eviction of older tenants by this government. yet if you are young and have a few kids you are ok, if you are a pensioner you are ok, but if you are just a couple with 1 child or no children because they have now left home and you live in a 3 bed house you are going to be evicted because you will be having your help taken away even if you pay 50% of your rent yourself and not entitled to full housing benefit because your income is over the means tested allowance.  so a couple renting with only 1 earner on the min wage and having a bit of help BUT NOT ALL with their rent will have to find the extra 14% or 25% from somewhere or be evicted.
Report Dr Crippen June 9, 2012 1:27 PM BST
Councils are obliged to provide accommodation for families, and if a family arrive here from abroad they have to house them as well.
There aren't enough houses to go around, so who do you suggest they turf out to make room for these deserving families?

It’s the welfare that needs sorting out.
Bending over backwards for all comers simply encourages more people to come here.
Report Mexico June 9, 2012 1:39 PM BST
EMR - do you believe it is fair that the taxpayers pay for your couple to have 1 or 2 spare bedrooms when many taxpayers don't have 1 or 2 spare bedrooms.

You don't seem to care about the people to pay for housing benefit - many taxpayers can't afford 2 spare bedrooms.
Do you believe it is fair that money is taken away from taxpayers to pay for your couple to have a bigger house than they need.
Report Early Morning Riser June 9, 2012 2:07 PM BST
dont get me wrong but where is the age discrimination law here. if you are of non working age you can live in a 3 bed home without any deductions. Wot if there are no 1 bedroom homes in your village,wot happens then.Wot happens if you are renting a 2/3 bedroom house that charges less than the LHA max allowance for a 1 bed(will the 14%/25% still be taken off your housing benefit) Who needs the human right laws when you have a government like this in power.
Report Ivor June 9, 2012 2:11 PM BST
My daughter is a council housing officer.
Training has started - but they remain confused about the process at present.
Report Early Morning Riser June 9, 2012 2:18 PM BST
mexico, So wot you are trying to say is, If a man who has worked all his life, payed his TAXES and because he has just been made redundant by no fault of his own, He should also lose his house aswell has his job. maybe that man could find a job within the next year but that will be too late to save his home. Mexico, with people like you no wonder this country is f^cked up. greed greed and more greed.
Report Lampus June 9, 2012 2:19 PM BST
She will  be  told if they are old or sick
make them homeless  Ivor

nasty tories
Report Early Morning Riser June 9, 2012 2:20 PM BST
ivor, this is going to be one big mess in my opinion.
Report Mexico June 9, 2012 2:29 PM BST
EMR - you have not provided many details. Could he use some of his redundancy payment to help with the rent?

Spare bedrooms are a luxury which many people in the UK cannot afford. Should the taxpayer be providing spare bedrooms for the unemployed when many people in the UK cannot afford them?
Report Dr Crippen June 9, 2012 2:34 PM BST
It's already a mess, and furthermore, campaigners say foreign nationals get 40% of new housing in areas of London.

For the third time, if they don't move the unemployed to make more room, then what should they do?

We've heard what they shouldn't do, so what should they do to create more accommodation.
Report Ivor June 9, 2012 2:34 PM BST
LOL = don't think that will be published as oficial policy tbh Lampus and
EMR is, albeit rarely, correct on this occasion.
Report thedodgepot June 9, 2012 3:18 PM BST
I personally would rather people requiring benefits, in order to afford their accommodation, forced to live in work houses.  I am fed up paying to house these wasters.
Report V4 Vendetta June 9, 2012 8:57 PM BST
I can see there's a lot of spongers on here by the feigned outrage. Perhaps the DSS should be given the betfair client list so we can see who's gambling with their charitable donations.
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 9, 2012 9:05 PM BST
charitable donations
What after working 25 years and  becoming unemployed,charitable donations? I've trodden in better than you on the street
Report V4 Vendetta June 9, 2012 9:09 PM BST
Why would anyone be evicted when they have a year to get out?
Report Dr Crippen June 10, 2012 9:57 AM BST
The ‘’my council home is my castle’’ brigade are simply being forced to make way for people whose need for their council house is greater than theirs.

It’s a bitter pill for them to swallow, and they won’t find much sympathy amongst homebuyers who have been losing their homes since mortgages were invented.
So where do the DSS dependents expect families to live, if they won’t give up their oversize social houses?
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 10:09 AM BST
You are not talking about a sub human species Crippen,this is human flesh and blood with family and friends and houses they have lived in for decades they are about to removed from,anyone is now 24 hours away from this fate remember,if you get the sack or laid off GOD HELP you the Gestapo knock and forced furniture van awaits you..this is poll tax to the power of ten
Report Dr Crippen June 10, 2012 10:15 AM BST
No we're not we're talking about sub human species we are talking about who live off handouts.
Report Dr Crippen June 10, 2012 10:17 AM BST
They're just being asked to give up something they don't need for people who do need it.

That's socialism isn't it?
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 10:24 AM BST
something they don't need

a pensioner has to make way for a slapper with six kids off different fathers,from a house he has lived in for decades and uproot from family and freinds, coz' thats whats going to happen they have removed security of tenancy for everyone
Report Java June 10, 2012 10:28 AM BST
Horse's emotive language cracks me up.  Earlier in the thread he suggested that someone couldn't be moved from the house they don't pay for because they had "been tending the garden for decades"  Laugh
Report Mexico June 10, 2012 10:29 AM BST
RH - are you sure this policy applies to pensioners.

What % of taxpayers have two spare bedrooms. A spare bedroom is a luxury which many people in the UK cannot afford. Many people would like to have two spare bedrooms but can't afford them.
Report Dr Crippen June 10, 2012 10:30 AM BST
RC that's socialism.

''The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few''

Mr Spock -  Star Trek 11, The Wrath of khan.
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 10:33 AM BST
Yes that is correct you total duffer,they have invested decades of care into their houses  ,something a brain dead moron like you couldn't comprehend
Report Dr Crippen June 10, 2012 10:34 AM BST
I remember speaking to an old acquaintance some years ago.
I mentioned to him how much it was costing me to have a new central heating boiler fitted.
He laughed and said ‘’yes I just phone up the council when mine goes wrong.’’
He then told me that he received £142 in today’s figures in pension Credit, and how they pay his council tax and rent for him and maintain his house for him.
They’ll even come round and do his decorating.

I said ‘’well I’ve paid tax and insurance all my life and I get nothing off the state.’’

That really made him laugh.
Report Java June 10, 2012 10:37 AM BST
"they have invested decades of care into their houses"

Tending that garden for decades again LaughLaughLaugh
Report Dr Crippen June 10, 2012 10:42 AM BST
Where did socialism go wrong?
Report Mexico June 10, 2012 10:48 AM BST
Horse proving once again how special he is.

He has scored twice with Godwin's law - top bombing Horse.

Now he is saying that the taxpayer should pay for a couple to live in a 4 bedroom house provided they have grown daffodils in their garden for years.
Report Dr Crippen June 10, 2012 10:48 AM BST
All they’re asking them to do is to downsize if they've got spare rooms.

Lots of homeowners do that out of choice when they get older.

Mind you they haven’t got the council to look after their houses for them.
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 10:51 AM BST
Whats that got to do with a pensioner being uprooted from a house he has lived in for decades??? social housing was hijacked and sold off by people with your train of thought,thats why its in such a mess and depleted
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 10:52 AM BST
Mind you they haven’t got the council to look after their houses for them.

They pay RENT for that privilege
Report Dr Crippen June 10, 2012 10:53 AM BST
RC you’re just being selfish.
Hogging the best housing stock while decent hard working families are out on the streets.
Report Pounf June 10, 2012 10:56 AM BST
Socialsim as a concept is flawed, purely because of the greed of the individuals within society
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 11:09 AM BST
The people who will benefit most from this are wayward slappers with 6  kids,have the kids get the house,even if a pensioner is chucked out to accommodate you,expect to see a proliferation of said sprogs...a great career move
Report Mexico June 10, 2012 11:11 AM BST
RH - are you sure this policy applies to pensioners.
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 11:14 AM BST
Yes anyone in a council house deemed as under occupied,is liable to the bedroom tax what a message to send to the feckless have sprogs and you will be rewarded,this country is now twisted and warped almost beyond repair
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 11:16 AM BST
And I suppose councils will still have to by law, house,so called asylum seekers,another pensioner makes way no doubt
Report Mexico June 10, 2012 11:21 AM BST
That is good news that it applies to everybody who has the luxury of spare bedrooms being paid for by the taxpayer.

Spare bedrooms are a luxury which many taxpayers cannot afford.
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 11:28 AM BST
Hold on I think you are under some sort of illusion that everyone in a council house is paid for by the taxpayer,people who have worked all there lives rent council houses,and will now be forced to uproot because of this bedroom tax
Report Mexico June 10, 2012 11:35 AM BST
Hold on Horse I think you are under some sort of illusion that Housing benefit is not paid for by the taxpayer.

This policy relates to Housing benefit.

Who pays for Housing benefit?
A) The Taxpayer
B) Somebody else


A spare bedroom is a luxury many taxpayers in the UK cannot afford.
Report Java June 10, 2012 11:38 AM BST
"People will be evicted from their homes when the bedroom tax comes into force when the low paid/unemployed and those on sickness benefit who claim help with their rent"

This is the opening post.  Horse are you somehow implying that these people are paying the rent out of their own pocket?
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 11:41 AM BST
What I'm saying is the bedroom tax is across the board not just to benefit claimants,working families will now have a massive rent hike and will have to move,if the tories thought the pasty tax was unpopular........they are about to alienate a big sector of society turning everyone that rents into nomads
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 11:49 AM BST
Slappers with six kids occupying the correct number of bedrooms wont be penalised by the surcharge of course
Report History Maker June 10, 2012 11:59 AM BST
Rockin Horse's philosophy seems to be 'more for everyone'. Yes it's a sad state of affairs, that not everyone can be housed for free in Cloud Cuckoo Land, but that's the way it is.

The fact is that there is a housing deficit in this country, and for the state to be subsidising people for unused bedrooms is utterly inexcusable given the pressure on resources.

These old duffers don't necessarily have to move out - surely they could find people with whom to co-rent if they want to stay so badly (though I think that councils should offer a free credit and CRB check if they expect pensioners to take in people that they don't know).

For what it's worth, both my grandmothers moved out of their houses that they'd owned for decades into flats, in their 70s and 80s* respectively - but then they were living in houses that they owned, not the fairytale utopia of cheap living that is council housing.

* - for pointless trivia fans, one sold hers to Yorkshire and England cricketer Craig White. It was on the street his wife'd always wanted to live on.
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 12:05 PM BST
Yes History Maker if we want pointless trivia,we'll come to you
Report Dr Crippen June 10, 2012 12:25 PM BST
I can sympathise with RC.
These people are vulnerable, they’re used to being looked after by the council.
And they still will be, but under new terms.
The problem is lack of housing, if you are going to look after as RC puts it ‘’slappers with six kids,’’ and immigrants as well as a growing population then something’s got to give.

Someone has to pay for this socialist paradise, or in the case of council house tenants, move to somewhere smaller when the councils can't cope with the numbers.
Report History Maker June 10, 2012 1:30 PM BST
When push comes to shove, we've got ourselves into a hole on several different fronts.

i) In an entirely reasonable effort to be altruistic, we signed up to post-war conventions and treaties on refugees and asylum seekers. At that time, few dispossessed people had the means to actually get to Britain. Widespread air travel is now as cheap as chips, so many more people are coming

ii) Which is exacerbated in Britain's case by the fact that for about twenty years, immigration from the Commonwealth was positively encouraged, and the rules about bringing over family members were probably too lax for too long.

iii) English, the lingua franca of the modern world, means that many asylum seekers/refugees/economic migrants want to come to Britain. This is not unreasonable. I speak French and a little Spanish. If there was civil war or some other catastrophe in Britain, I'd seek first to go to some other English speaking country, failing that French speaking, then Spanish speaking, and finally anywhere else. It's a difficult analogy to properly demonstrate with Brits, because we can go almost anywhere and find people who speak at least a little English. Blame Hollywood.

iv) There is no disincentive whatsover for poor women not to churn out as many children as they possibly can. One shoots you to the top of the housing list. Three or four will get you a house. Government social policy has, for at least two decades, been to put children first. Admirable and just. House them, feed them, educate them. The collateral damage is that feckless, irresponsible parents can freeride on the back of their kids existence. Four kids? Here, have a three bedroom house, and we won't evict you, pretty much no matter what, because your kids are the most important thing. The emphasis on the kids fosters a total lack of responsibility in adults. Unfortunately I cannot offer any solutions to this problem - I don't have them.

v) The rise of nimbyism. Two friend's fathers, one in construction, the other a civil engineer, both say that this is the single worst problem affecting housing costs and building rates in this country.

The civil engineer admitted that at the beginning of every project, they worked out what was actually needed.

Then they doubled the amount of inconvenience/hassle/noise/land needed etc. Millions, sometimes billions, of pounds and an eternity later, after many appeals something would finally be approved.

They carried on submitting plans for what was actually needed for some projects, just to see if they'd get passed. They never did. They always got watered down too, to the same degree as the other projects.

The stupid thing about the whole affair is that the exorbitant costs of the various legal processes are always passed onto either the housebuyer or taxpayer.
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 1:35 PM BST
There is no disincentive whatsover for poor women not to churn out as many children as they possibly can. One shoots you to the top of the housing list. Three or four will get you a house. Government social policy has, for at least two decades, been to put children first. Admirable and just. House them, feed them, educate them. The collateral damage is that feckless, irresponsible parents can freeride on the back of their kids existence. Four kids? Here, have a three bedroom house, and we won't evict you, pretty much no matter what, because your kids are the most important thing. The emphasis on the kids fosters a total lack of responsibility in adults. Unfortunately I cannot offer any solutions to this problem - I don't have them.

That is absolutely bang on
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 1:37 PM BST
I can see a scenario (many scenarios) where a tearful pensioner is forced out of his home by low life,low moral trash
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 1:38 PM BST
This wants looking at sensibly
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 1:49 PM BST
irresponsible parents can freeride on the back of their kids existence.

Very wise words m8
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 10, 2012 2:11 PM BST
This government AND previous ones,seem to bestow everything to people whose only achievement in life was to open their legs,they will hound the sick and disabled to death,but wont go anywhere near this one
Report V4 Vendetta June 10, 2012 9:17 PM BST
The welfare state bestows everything on people just by the accident of birth. People born in India who are far more worthy than the wasters here who expect everyone else to buy them a house just because they've grown carrots in the garden for years.
Report whodareswins June 10, 2012 11:19 PM BST
Rockin Horse I think you will find that people of pension age are exempt from the legislation.  But pension age is yet to be defined.  It only applies to those of working age.
Report blackburn1 June 11, 2012 9:02 AM BST
horse says

slappers with six kids

and

I can see a scenario (many scenarios) where a tearful pensioner is forced out of his home by low life,low moral trash

Surely that cant be right horse you evil despot, these people need help and resources, possibly genetically modifying to help them

LaughLaugh
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 11, 2012 9:22 AM BST
They need a good education system,and to be instilled with an obligation to behave in an intelligent manner in society,its a bit more sophisticated than a skip,I wouldn't expect you to comprehend it
Report blackburn1 June 11, 2012 9:42 AM BST
Every child in this country is entitled to free education, this is like drinking or taking drugs, its all about personal responsibility.

There is nothing complicated or sophisticated about it, dont take drugs, dont drink to excess and dont have kids you cant afford.

In your words

I wouldn't expect you to comprehend it
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 11, 2012 9:47 AM BST
Every child in this country is entitled to free education

Yes and the standard is abysmal,and bereft of any moral compass and life skills
Report blackburn1 June 11, 2012 9:57 AM BST
Absolute nonsense, millions leave school perfectly equipped, its the feckless kids of feckless parents that choose not to take advantage.

Apologists like you fan the flames.

What happened to 13 years of education education education?
Report Java June 11, 2012 10:04 AM BST
"Absolute nonsense, millions leave school perfectly equipped, its the feckless kids of feckless parents that choose not to take advantage."

But the real horror is that the sc*m spoil it for the ones that want to learn, largely due to the fact that the teachers aren't allowed to beat the living daylights out of the offenders anymore with assorted sticks/canes/slippers.

The liberal way of thinking has ruined this country.  I hate them.
Report blackburn1 June 11, 2012 10:08 AM BST
The problem lies with the parents not the schools, go to any supermarket and see these young parents with their ghastly kids out of control.
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 11, 2012 10:13 AM BST
As long as they know what trainers to buy,and not commit the sin of buying an item out of fashion,that's the only life skills you need
Report Java June 11, 2012 10:14 AM BST
But the parents are imbeciles because they weren't caned themselves at school.  Indiscipline breeds indiscipline. 

This combined with draconian sentencing is what is required to turn around this miserable excuse for a society.

If any parent threatens a teacher over punishment then this should carry a mandatory 6 month sentence.
Report Java June 11, 2012 10:15 AM BST
That's great Horse.  And then hope they either make it as a footballer or become the next ghastly Cheryl Cole.
Report blackburn1 June 11, 2012 10:18 AM BST
horse, I'll ask you again

What happened to 13 years of education education education?
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 11, 2012 10:28 AM BST
What happened to 13 years of education education education


I was hoping you might be able to tell me,because if you think what we are achieving is satisfactory I'm bamboozled,there are kids out there that think Churchill is a talking dog
Report twomatchpoints June 11, 2012 12:10 PM BST
He is, isn't he ?
Report Eeternaloptimist June 11, 2012 4:41 PM BST
Rockin Horse

For nearly 50 years people have been attempting to spread the message which you are currently espousing. It is a shame that people like you weren't on the right side of the argument when we could have nipped many of those emerging problems back then.
Report V4 Vendetta June 11, 2012 8:21 PM BST
The problem is that the proles really think it's everyone else's fault they're crap. If they realised they had found their natural level to begin with they might learn to be happy with it.
Report Dr Crippen June 11, 2012 8:39 PM BST
The problem is that the proles know the rich aren’t better than they are, they also know that most rich  people are rich simply because they had a better start in life than they had.

They know they’re being taken for a ride, that’s the real problem.
Report V4 Vendetta June 11, 2012 9:36 PM BST
They think that, but it's totally untrue.  I have not only seen no evidence to support that view, but copious amounts to the contrary.
Report V4 Vendetta June 11, 2012 9:36 PM BST
and in fact, as only 20% of IQ variance is environmentally dependent, and 60% genetically so, it's not a surprise.
Report V4 Vendetta June 11, 2012 9:39 PM BST
The bird from my other thread that replied to an ad, "Weeding and sweeping, £5 ph" with,
"What does the job entail and how much does it pay?"
is a prime example not only of that point, but of why £5 is too much for some people.
Report History Maker June 11, 2012 11:46 PM BST
Only the second half of her question is stupid. As someone who did all sorts of menial garden, cleaning and other bog standard work in my school holidays, I'd say the first part is not only a reasonable question, but one that I'd expect anyone with a modicum of intelligence to ask.
Report Dr Crippen June 12, 2012 8:22 AM BST
I suggest next time V advertises for labour he puts the hourly rate of pay along with the hours expected.
Well how much does the job pay?
She knows the hourly rate but how many hours would she be allowed to work?
She wants to know how much she can earn, what's stupid about that?

Four hours a week pays £20, while forty hours a week would net her £200 pounds.

When V fills in his tax returns does he enter his hourly rate of pay or his total earnings?

To be honest I don't think that V has ever advertised for labour or he would have known that.
Report blackburn1 June 12, 2012 8:37 AM BST
I'm beginning to think V4 and karla are the same person, a couple of Harry Enfield style alter egos, its difficult to take either seriously
Report V4 Vendetta June 12, 2012 5:24 PM BST
Good effort Crippen, but the full description was included - I didn't repost the whole ad here, just the title.
The body specified 8-12 and £20 cash, even you and HM could have worked it all out.
Blackie - thanks.
Report Dr Crippen June 12, 2012 6:07 PM BST
Good effort Crippen, but the full description was included

Therefore you misled us?

So it's four hours a day, but you still haven't told her many days per week she can work.

What is your IQ again?
Report ROCKIN HORSE June 12, 2012 6:14 PM BST
He's obviously suffering from some sort of genetic disorder,poor fellow
Report V4 Vendetta June 12, 2012 6:40 PM BST
All irrelevant, Crip.  It says weeding and sweeping fiver and hour and someone asked what the job was and the rate.  That's dim. Unless you're dim, then it's not I guess.
Report V4 Vendetta June 12, 2012 6:41 PM BST
Anyway, interestingly... said person came back after another few emails to tell me it was below NMW (which it isn't for the age I was employing) and that I had "better be careful".  Pretty much the same comment someone else made on here.  The funny thing is, he'd do it for £5.15 an hour he said.  I asked whether he relied on the state to do all his negotiation.
Some people have issues...
Report Dr Crippen June 13, 2012 8:13 PM BST
People are perfectly happy to take the upside of living in council properties
They like phoning the council when the heating breaks down, or the drains get blocked knowing they won’t have to foot the bill.
And they love the subsidised rents they pay, that’s those who work and pay rent.
But witness the bellyaching from them when they are asked to move over and make way for others more deserving.
Suddenly they’re the victims, quickly forgetting the easy ride they had on the backs of the taxpayers who’ve been footing the bills for their social housing.

They want it all ways.
Report V4 Vendetta June 13, 2012 8:15 PM BST
That's most political viewpoints in this country.  "I deserve to have it taken from others richer than me" but poorer people in other countries don't deserve anything.
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com