| Author | Message | ||
     Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.55 |
TWOMAL syndrome seems to be spreading like wildfire. The number of people who think "The World Owes Me A Living" is increasing at an exceptional rate. Workshy spongers are everywhere. Whether it's my cousin who's just got a very well paid job on the roads but is more concerned that the social won't pay his rent any more, or one of my work colleagues who was nearly apoplectic with anger because he hadn't been spoonfed every last detail of information for the new reports he's supposed to be creating and he was expected to - gasp! shock! horror! - use his intelligence to track some information down himself, or whether it's any of the dolescum who have never done an honest days work in their lives, TWOMAL syndrome is fast becoming an epidemic. Is there anything that can stop it? | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
You looking a post in the new coalition government, Weber? | ||
| Barbara Roden (Nebuly) Username: Nebuly Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 216.232.181.249 |
A fellow worker - single mom - just had her daycare rates jacked up by $300 a month. Now, fair enough, she's only making $12.50 an hour, and the increase means that she'd essentially have about $50 left a pay period after paying rent and childcare. Rather than try to find a better-paying job, though, or seek out a lower-priced alternative for childcare, she opted to quit with two days' notice and go on Employment Assistance; on Friday she was gleefully talking about how she'll now be paid to stay at home with her son over the summer. I've been paying into EI since I was 17, and have never collected a penny; I've been employed throughout my adult life with no breaks (anytime I've found myself out of one job, I've got another within a week). Nice to know who's benefiting from my decision to get an education and stay employed. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 06-2008 Posted From: 86.172.184.103 |
Some people get paid too much for what they do or claim they do -- and some people get paid too little for what they do or claim to do - whether by state or private. It's the shake of the loaded dice. It's ever been that way. Accepting it is halfway to defeating it. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 06-2008 Posted From: 86.172.184.103 |
I imagine many writers depend on state benefits to write what they do. Or they suffer day-job work so that they can write what they do. Or they enjoy day-job work and also write what they do. Loaded dice, I say. One has to ride what destiny brings you to the optimum - and challenge your own instinctive moral values to fit in as best they can. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.72 |
What are people's thoughts on people who work illegally, but claim state benefits? | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.31.165.34 |
Do you want to start about the bankers et al, Joel, or shall I? | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.31.165.34 |
This is a fun read: http://www.attorneygeneral.gov.uk/nfa/GuidetoInformation/Documents/NFA_fraud_ind icator.pdf Basically, it says this: The NFA estimates that in 2008 alone, fraud cost the UK £30 billion. 15 billion of that was tax evasion. 1 billion was benefit fraud. On average, fraud costs every adult member of the population £621 per year. So, tax evasion costs you about £320 a year. Benefit fraud costs you £20.70. Choose your own source of anger . . . | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.37.199.45 |
Precisely. And the money spent by the Government on chasing benefit fraud, including a massive advertising camapign, is an order of magnitude greater than the money spent on pursuing tax fraud. Some people think the world owes them not just a living, but a fortune. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.72 |
Gary - I hope that's not directed at me, because I am definitely NOT on the side of blaming people who work illegally and claim benefits. I was born into a community where it was the only way to survive for many families. I don't remember a single one of them wanting to do it, but knowing they had to was a matter of putting food on the table. I'm not exaggerating. I was simply disappointed with Barbara's feelings towards her friend claiming benefits. I was curious to see what she felt about the situation. Though I admit I don't know all the facts, I'm very much biased about this subject and have to bite my bottom lip from 'seeing the proverbial red'. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.31.165.34 |
Er, Frank, it wasn't. It was directed at a new phenomenon which, in the spirit of this thread, I choose to call MFBTDM (Mindfucked by the Daily Mail). Is there anything that can stop it? | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.37.199.45 |
Or to take a more specific and topical example: the Labour Government gave £14 billion of public money to the banks (don't tell me the Tories would have given less, I don't believe it). Last Christmas the bonus paid to banking executives reached record levels. So very rich people were pocketing windfall payments of tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds siphoned directly from money that came out of the public purse, and to repay which we are now looking at unprecedented cuts in public healthcare, education, transport, social care and other public services. I think we should get our money back. Since the police and the authorities won't do it, I think we should do it ourselves. Take back our stolen money from the banking executives. By any means necessary. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.31.165.34 |
Well, there's a good chance we will get our money back from RBS and Lloyds - plus a fair profit - since the money went into stock rather than just a handout. But yeah, the bankers' bonuses are the real issue. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.72 |
Gary - I don't think it's as a new a phenomenon as we would like to think. In the 1980's it all depended on where you lived. My mum does still live in a village where for decades they voted Tory, and they didn't think twice about reporting people working illegally, which they did frequently. And I agree with the apt choice of abbreviation MFBTDM. Ironically, or not. Joel - I was just about to tag this:http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20100517/ten-walking-tour-for-joy-division-fans-5f8a bb3.html I'm not sure whether or not you will think it a good thing or not. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.37.199.45 |
Apparently the bonuses can't be cut back because then we would "lose the talent" of those financiers who caused the economic crisis. That's the kind of talent we can well do without. Oddly, the Government won't be held back from cutting public services by any fear of losing the talent of all the doctors, nurses, teachers, care workers and other service providers on whom all but the rich depend – let alone the workers without whom we would have no food, water or electricity. It's only the bloated cash-gorging parasites who have to be appeased. They're the 'winners' and the rest of us are the 'losers'. They set the moral agenda. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.72 |
'I'm not sure whether or not'...repeating myself again | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.72 |
I mean with negatives. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.37.199.45 |
Probably a good thing, in all – it's important that Curtis is remembered and his work is celebrated. Macclesfield is such an economically blighted town, an island of deprivation in a wealthy region, that anything that gets people to visit it is to be cautiously welcomed. And it's still a beautiful town. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.31.165.34 |
I've been a recipient of state benefits. Those benefits helped me turn my life around. As a 22 year old I was living in a council house with a part-time job and little else. Now I'm paying plenty of cash back into the system and, satisfyingly enough, researching social benefit reform. I suppose I might in the past have been classed as work-shy dole-scum. It's pleasing to realise that I've now shed the first three of those descriptive words.  Seriously, though, the freeloading nature of social benefits is just something we have to live with - and put in perspective - if we're to have a social support system which actually does what it should do: give people in many various circumstances (for example, me once upon a time) a chance. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.72 |
Well said, Gary. Joel - glad you think that way,about Macclesfield, I mean. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.31.165.34 |
Benefits systems also encourage people to take commercial risks and work towards generating jobs via successful enterprise. The entrepreneur, for example, feels more secure as s/he kickstarts a new endeavour, knowing that failure will not result in destitution. And success may well create a good deal of prosperity for more than her/himself. Will Hutton describes what a country is like without this kind of security system: people rabidly hoarding money for their frail old age and fearful of risk in the commercial world; no innovation; insularity; a crushing burden on offspring to support their elders. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.31.165.34 |
AKA China. | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.4.251.247 |
I've said it before - money is an illusion. It is the ratio of slaves:slave-masters. The government could write a check for $1,000,000 to every single person today, and nothing would break. But if you did that, there would be no slaves - and you wouldn't dare get on a plane - and then people with apple trees would suddenly have enough power to demand your luscious daughter in lieu of worthless cash - and so on and so on and so on. So it's a game, and it's been decided which few get to be the Monopoly game bankers, constantly pulling ever more $500 bills out of the cardboard slot, whenever they need it - and those people, aren't you, or I. | ||
| Barbara Roden (Nebuly) Username: Nebuly Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 216.232.181.249 |
Okay, just want to get it straight that I'm fully supportive of benefits systems, and appreciate all that Gary has been saying. They are there, in part, to encourage people to take risks, try something new, better themselves (horrid phrase, but I can't think of anything else to describe it); they are also there to assist people who genuinely can't work, through illness or injury or no fault of their own (shit happens to all of us). What does bother me is people who see going on benefits, when they're fully capable of working and there are jobs available (remember that my co-worker had a full-time job which she elected to quit), as little more than some sort of career option, a nice way to get paid for doing nothing when there's no reason not to work. Her last two days there I heard her, more than once, boast about how she was going to get paid for staying at home with her son over the summer and get a sun tan. Gee, that's nice. I worked for a few years for the local school district: a ten-month position (as are most of the support staff positions in a school district), which means that you get paid from late August until the end of June. End of June you get an RoE (record of employment) showing your last date worked, even though your position will be there come August. Now, these are Union positions; minimum wage for any support staff position was in the $20.00 an hour range, which is pretty decent money. And I was amazed by the number of people who chose to go on EI for the summer, either because they couldn't budget over the ten months they were paid, or decided they wanted a bit more income over the summer and didn't want to work for it. It never even occurred to me to apply for EI over the summer, and I was amazed by the number of people who were astonished that I didn't. It's an accepted fiddle; I once heard a couple of co-workers talk about how to make it look like you're applying for jobs over that period when you're not, really. I'm sorry, but that's not, in my opinion, what benefits are for. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.31.165.34 |
It's impossible to design a support system which isn't exploited in this way. We have to live with that in order to have that support system at all. What bothers me most of all is the misplaced anger that is directed at the exploiters. I have no rose-tinted wet liberal view of such folk - I used to live among them - but I'd still argue that their ignominious attitudes and behaviour are born of desperation. It's the socially irreponsibly rich (including the aforementioned tax evaders) whom I have the real issues with - the real anger. There's no desperation in their circumstances. They have choice. And they choose to say Fuck You All. This brief flurry of anti-banker discourse down the pub won't last. It's far more satisfying to knock dole-scum. Why? Because of hedonic relevance, I guess: we know these people; we live among them; we scent their scumminess. The others folk - the rich - are just suits on telly. Also, the latter on the whole work, which suggests to me that what attacking the workshy is really about is envy: we resent the necessity of earning a living while other folk lack the social/familial responsibility and sense of shame to do the same. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.31.165.34 |
>>>government could write a check for $1,000,000 to every single person today, and nothing would break. ??? Everything would break. Would you scoop the shit out of your pipes? Society by necessity involves competition over limited resources. Otherwise we'd all sit around all day reading Dan Brown novels from unstaffed libraries and puking with dysentry. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 06-2008 Posted From: 86.172.184.103 |
A lot of very good points made by Gary. Meanwhile, it's a synergy of laissez-faire and enforced destiny that suits human survival imperfectly - yet it remains the best possible way: of ends justifying means and means justifying ends, in parallel and in praxis. | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.4.230.175 |
Yes, Gary - but "Some animals are more equal than other animals" has never left the sacred scrolls of any society, throughout history, ever.... People's natural greed always, eventually, overturns a society/civilization. The powers-that-be are always trying to keep it at the right balance; i.e, the powers-that-be enjoying their unholy unfair luxurious levels of power... and the all others, somewhere down there where they belong, feasting on bread and circuses or whatever.... | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.143.129.15 |
Stay at home with family for enough money, see them less for a little more? A possibly scuzzy job in exchange for more time with loved ones? It's not easy, that decision. I reckon they should pay the unemployed in premium bonds, let chance take a hand in things. But no, I do think those on benefits who are able should street clean, stuff like that, or even better something of their own choice. I would do it. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.143.129.15 |
If the monster bankers keep things running a bit more smoothly than in other countries maybe it's an ok sacrifice... after all, we can easy replace the poop-scoopers. Also, if you hate bankers, become a banker and be a good one; I used to always say join a party you hate and change it from within. If not, don't grumble. It's like the time we went on a voluntary litter pick; an old man passed us, saying how terrible a problem it was, the litter. I suggested he help us if he fancied. Guess what happened. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 129.11.77.198 |
Right, so on the basis of one experience with a litter grumbler, you propose a general theorem: one must not criticise anyone in any position to which one does not aspire. So, let's say I become a banker and a good one. I change banking. Meanwhile the politicians remain corrupt. But according the theorem, I cannot grumble about politicians because, having spent all my time becoming a banker (a good one, mind), I lack the time to become a (good) politician. Ditto nasty lawyers: I must forever hold my tongue about them. I mean, a man can only do so much in this life, and frankly, what with all the energy I've expended becoming a banker and fretting silently about politicians, I have no time for the bloodsucking lawyers! Really, Tony . . . | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 195.166.117.210 |
 | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.143.129.15 |
I'm just weary of the whole moaning-without-doing-anything thing. I like moaners who do stuff about stuff. If you are one of these then excuse me. And I don't think the politicians corrupted the bankers. It's like the tree falling in the wood with no-one there, or the three things needed to create fire; I don't think you can be corrupt in a vaccuum, or when surrounded by responsible people. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 129.11.76.230 |
>>>I don't think you can be corrupt in a vaccuum, or when surrounded by responsible people. By the same token, you can't be honourable when surrounded by the corrupt. So how the hell is one supposed to join in and become a "good banker"? | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.55 |
My post wasn't just about the dolescum. It was actually sparked by watching one of my colleagues at work who was really angry at having to think for himself to get something done. He really thought that he should have been spoonfed everything. Like the poor girl he was going off at said, if she was going to give him everything he was demanding, there'd be no point in his being there because she'd be the one actually doing the job. There does seem to be an endemic laziness going around and it annoys the hell out of me. The bankers are at the top edge of the scale and I agree with everything Mr Fry has said on this thread. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.72 |
Tony - I actually understand what you mean, but I think Gary is coming at it from a more honest, or realistic perspective. I think both of you want the same thing, just that Gary's pointing out that we can't have one thing without negating or neglecting the other. It's almost, almost a complete and vicious circle. Weber - whatever you do, don't ever get involved in the TEFL business of language teaching. You'd end up murdering some of the people. It's full of people who expect to be spoonfed, and if not, rage on all day long, much to the expense of the other people involved. BTW: Did you get my email. Yahoo is okay now. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.55 |
Not yet. was it to my hotmail or my work? | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
It's all about priorities and for some people benefits are a matter of day to day survival while for others they are a way of getting one over on the establishment or as they might put it "kicking against the pricks" (never making a quick buck at the tax-payers expense, as if!) - human nature again. Having said that I would rather see the powers that be tackle high level financial corruption (wankers, fat cats, etc) instead of always concentrating on the easy targets in the street but alas it ruffles less feathers to shoot a sitting duck than a speeding hawk. | ||
| Rhysaurus (Rhysaurus) Username: Rhysaurus Registered: 01-2010 Posted From: 212.219.233.223 |
The truth is that everything anyone does contributes to the economy to some degree. Even fraudsters contribute: if they spend their ill-gotten gains, they are keeping money in circulation and helping the retail or service sectors; if they save their money in banks, they are providing those banks with cash that can be invested in the markets; if they hide their loot in a bag, they are helping to keep inflation low. The economy of the world is so tightly fused into a single organism that both legal and illegal financial transactions are really just a case of moving numbers around. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 129.11.77.198 |
Except that the whole credit crunch was brought about by people spending money which does not exist. | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.5.0.125 |
Yes, Gary - people were in effect, handed little printing presses, and creating money out of their homes. Cottage treasuries, in many different countries. Then, the crash. What about the lying? Here in the States, they encouraged bailouts and such, and it was said the banks needed this so they could continue to make loans - so that borrowing could continue, so people could buy cars again, and so on. Bailouts were made... no lending was forthgiving. Credit was excised by the banks, from innocent bystanders to the disaster, resulting in destroyed credit ratings on financially responsible individuals. The banks have gotten richer through this whole ordeal... the people, starved, though hardly more blameworthy than the banks. No, please... let us not forget the constant, endemic, criminal, malicious, unnecessary, frankly evil LIES that attended this financial f@#$ing mess. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 129.11.76.229 |
Makes a man angry, doesn't it? | ||
| Nathaniel Tapley (Natt) Username: Natt Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 78.146.249.100 |
It was mainly my wife's portrayal of the benefit fraudster in the 'No ifs, no buts' campaign that kept us off benefits in the year out daughter was born... | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.72 |
Nathaniel - do you do comedy, as in stand-up comedy? And no, it's not a reference to your last part of the thread. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.143.129.15 |
' ' I don't know how this laughicon was intended, but how it felt illustrates quite nicely the how the whole banking system came to be. I've been listening to parliament stuff today and have come to the conclusion - and this is after years of being a labour supporter - that as it seems - this government is just what we currently need. I've been reading the policies and listening to the voices and I do not feel scared anymore. I'm not going to go all converted christian on them but I'm no longer anxious of them being in power. The tories - a bit firm - with Jimminy Cricket at their side nudging them in the most ok direction they can muster. And OK is good. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.72 |
In Poland, Tony, a few people asked me why all the apocalyptic musings, they said Tories were nothing compared to the religious right of the Pis party. But I have a long memory and the Tories = fuck the people for me. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.143.129.15 |
Me too! But people do change. This feels suddenly different. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.72 |
I wish I could share your sentiments, Tony, but I don't, and unfortunately, I doubt I ever will. But I feel that way about all political parties. | ||
| Nathaniel Tapley (Natt) Username: Natt Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 78.146.249.100 |
Yes, Frank, I do. Next gig next Monday... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.17.252.126 |
I'm with you, Frank. David Cameron is very much an old school Thatcherite for all his talk of "modernisation" - a dirty word in the public sector already under New Labour and set to become much dirtier. As a barometer of how this new government is really doing I suggest we keep an eye on Nick Clegg's smile during Prime Minister's Questions over the coming months. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.37.199.45 |
Here's a link to the best article I've so far read on the elction and what it means. The Socialist Party's Hannah Sell has grasped that what we need to focus on is economic policy and what it means for ordinary people, not how well Cameron and his advisers have mastered the 'warm words' technique of Blair. They can afford to sound moderate and inclusive: they have the iron fist in the velvet glove. This article reminds us just how serious the prospect of this 'coalition' of public schoolboys and millionaires is for anyone relying on the NHS, public education, social services, public transport, a pension or a job in the public sector. This isn't a recipe for 'consensus', this is a viciously divisive agenda for social destruction in the interests of 'the markets'. http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/print/9537 | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 06-2008 Posted From: 86.172.184.103 |
Interesting article - seems to have stolen my 'Con-demmed' quip and is also in the spirit of my Maggie Clegg discovery. :0 However, the Election result (the way we the public voted) seemed to have the logical conclusion of a Lib-Dem Coalition? | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 195.166.117.210 |
Hannah Sell is rather an unfortunate name for a socialist... Just saying, like. | ||
| Mark_samuels (Mark_samuels) Username: Mark_samuels Registered: 04-2010 Posted From: 86.145.226.3 |
I fear I'm a victim of what Marxist theory would term "false consciousness", because I just can't bring myself to fall in with the Militant Tendency. Not least because of stuff like this: http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/latest/8965/05-03-2010/michael-foot-the-end-of- an-era When Michael Foot is regarded as being some kind of crypto-reactionary, well... it doesn't seem honest. Agree about the charges levelled against the Lib-Dems in that other Hannah Sell article though. I won't make the mistake of voting for them twice. I expect all that's left for me is to hope for the best with a "rejuvenated" (Next) Labour Party. Mark S. | ||
| Rhysaurus (Rhysaurus) Username: Rhysaurus Registered: 01-2010 Posted From: 212.219.233.223 |
That article on Michael Foot is just silly. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 06-2008 Posted From: 86.172.184.103 |
Should we battle in the streets against the elected government? | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.72 |
Nathaniel - have you ever done a gig in Northampton? I ask because your name really rings a bell, and I'm wondering if it's because some friends of mine saw you a couple of years back? Des - Yes, we should battle in the streets, but politely (; | ||
| Mark_samuels (Mark_samuels) Username: Mark_samuels Registered: 04-2010 Posted From: 86.142.169.99 |
Diane Abbott enters the Labour Leadership race. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8693687.stm I doubt she has much chance, but I hope she does win! Mark S. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
She'd get my vote! | ||
| Nathaniel Tapley (Natt) Username: Natt Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 78.149.116.138 |
Afraid not, Frank, I've never played Northampton... | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.31.165.34 |
Bradford City has. They lost 2-0. Boom tish. | ||
| Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey) Username: Ramsey Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 195.93.21.74 |
Ms Abbott wouldn't get my vote. http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/mp.php?mpn=Diane_Abbott | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.31.239.78 |
Those bankers, they've stolen candy from a baby: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10146734.stm | ||
| Nathaniel Tapley (Natt) Username: Natt Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 78.147.130.227 |
Oddly, the link you provided, Ramsey, made me instantly feel a lot warmer to her; having voted against: cutting social security payments for single mothers, Michael Martin as Speaker, pay rises for MPs, the Terrorism Bill of 2001 (shame she didn't also vote against its 2000 counterpart), the Iraq War, the ditching of trial by jury, tuition fees, ID cards, the Terrorism Act of 2005, and the Digital Economy Act, she's just jumped by far to the top of my list. So much so, that if she or John McDonnell can get on the ballot I will join the Labour Party to vote for them. Maybe. The Labour Party still did all the abominable things she voted against... | ||
| Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey) Username: Ramsey Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 195.93.21.74 |
Sorry, Natt - I completely misread that site (that is, I overlooked the "Rebel" column). I'm with you! | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Told ya.  |