Prospective MP in blame the fans shock

jabba the gut ecfc wrote:

I know people on benefits too, including my brother. who after 30 years working like a dog found himself having to claim disability benefits - and who despite having been sectioned after suffering from bipolar disorder, being forced to wear an eye-patch and now unable to walk more than 100 yards due to a form of arthritis, with two knee replacement operations pending, was denied benefit by the evil ATOS before being awarded it on appeal.

He gets a little more than Jobseekers Allowance. The idea that he can afford takeaways and Sky TV is completely laughable. The only way he can afford even the occasional luxury is because of the odd donation from cash-strapped family members. He has a thoroughly miserable existence from what I can see.

Quote :

You can scour the net for as many left wing facts and figures as you want but i'll believe what i see thanks.

I don't read the daily mail, i said i live in the real world and i see it with my own eyes...

That is an almost meaningless method of judging people's circumstances. I'd be surprised if you even knew a couple of hundred people personally and more than ten or twenty intimately. That is a truly miniscule proportion of those on benefits. Moreover I very much doubt that everyone on benefits you come across spills intimate details of their private lives. especially since the government and rabid right-wingers like yourself succeeded in reducing benefit claimants to the level of social pariahs and folk devils.

Quote :

i even know people who are swinging the lead and who think people who go to work are mugs.

What you think you see is irrelevant. The DWP's own figures put the level of benefit fraud as 0.6%. The "shop a scrounger" phone line found that the vast majority of tip-offs they received were unfounded. I assure you that no-one on benefits I know thinks working people are mugs.

As a famous scientist once said  - "anecdote is not data".

Anyway, the thread is being derailed by this off-topic discussion, so I'm not going to be dragged into trading insults with you. I see that you seem to enjoy that sort of thing, so knock yourself out.

If you were trying to offend with that ridiculous quote i'm afraid you failed, i've got very little interest in politics whether they be left, right or centre.
As for your guesstimation at the amount of people i know on benefits, i know thousands............ this is Plymouth we're talking about, not your Guardian reading chino land.
Congrats to your brother on winning his appeal.

jabba the gut ecfc wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

Jabba makes some strange comparisons when trying to point-score.

I'm not trying to point score. I'm trying to make you understand

My eyes started glazing over a touch after getting this far. 

I battled on though! Glad I did because I won a little bet with myself on the density clause. 

South Hampshire must have moved up a couple places in the last few years. They used to be 8th.

Jack Sheppard wrote:

hairy j wrote:

The whole fans on the internet issue isn't an issue for perhaps every one other than maybe 35-50 people. It isn't an issue for me and I'm more than aware of it.

Here's a list of reasons:

Someone doesn't like football = non attendance at Argyle
Those who work on Saturdays = unable to go
Those on benefits = unable to afford it (benefit claimants should perhaps get a large discount - charge then £5)
People who support other teams = like football but won't attend
People that are I'll/too old to go = can't attend
People that did go but don't see the point in wasting time and money = no longer go
People with young families that work Monday to Friday = under pressure not to go
People that play football on Saturday afternoon = DJM (that should change as it's our next generation of fans)

There's a lot of factors.

With regard to Jameson's post - it's been done a hundred times by many other posters and he uses the classic phrase "tin hat on" - it's barely registered with me as it's a lame argument and it's hardly controversial.

Not on your nelly, a fair proportion of people on benefits are as well off if not better off than a fair proportion of people who go to work............and yes i do live in the real world and am regularly in contact with people who live on benefits, many of whom can afford fags, booze, takeaway food, sky tv and taxis.

What a load of wank is talked about people on benefits, I don't give a fook who you know but tell me how someone on JSA of £64 a week can afford fags, booze, takeaway food, sky TV and taxis?
A packet of fags is about £8, bottle of wine £5, takeaway £6, Sky £10/wk, taxis lets say £10? So our scrounger has had one Trip into town in a taxi bought a bottle, a takeaway, a packet of fags and is now going home to watch sky telly, he's just spent £39 of his £64 and has six days of the week left to stretch his £25?  Not just devious these scrounges they ate FOOKIN clever.

Iggy wrote:

Jack Sheppard wrote:

hairy j wrote:

The whole fans on the internet issue isn't an issue for perhaps every one other than maybe 35-50 people. It isn't an issue for me and I'm more than aware of it.

Here's a list of reasons:

Someone doesn't like football = non attendance at Argyle
Those who work on Saturdays = unable to go
Those on benefits = unable to afford it (benefit claimants should perhaps get a large discount - charge then £5)
People who support other teams = like football but won't attend
People that are I'll/too old to go = can't attend
People that did go but don't see the point in wasting time and money = no longer go
People with young families that work Monday to Friday = under pressure not to go
People that play football on Saturday afternoon = DJM (that should change as it's our next generation of fans)

There's a lot of factors.

With regard to Jameson's post - it's been done a hundred times by many other posters and he uses the classic phrase "tin hat on" - it's barely registered with me as it's a lame argument and it's hardly controversial.

Not on your nelly, a fair proportion of people on benefits are as well off if not better off than a fair proportion of people who go to work............and yes i do live in the real world and am regularly in contact with people who live on benefits, many of whom can afford fags, booze, takeaway food, sky tv and taxis.

What a load of wank is talked about people on benefits, I don't give a fook who you know but tell me how someone on JSA of £64 a week can afford fags, booze, takeaway food, sky TV and taxis?
A packet of fags is about £8, bottle of wine £5, takeaway £6, Sky £10/wk, taxis lets say £10? So our scrounger has had one Trip into town in a taxi bought a bottle, a takeaway, a packet of fags and is now going home to watch sky telly, he's just spent £39 of his £64 and has six days of the week left to stretch his £25?  Not just devious these scrounges they ate FOOKIN clever.

And i don't give a f*ck how you try to twist what i said:
I said "a fair proportion", not all.........could be 10%, 20%, 50%.
I said "as well off if not better off than a fair proportion of people who go to work" i stand by that comment..........a low paid worker who works 40-50 hours a week but may only take home £200-£250 will probably be no better off than someone who receives JSA, housing benefit, council tax benefit, child tax credits, free prescriptions................
I said " many of whom can afford fags, booze, takeaway food, sky tv and taxis" well, as i've already said, i regularly see people who i know don't go to work but are in a position to do some/all of the aforementioned things.

You said "What a load of wank is talked about people on benefits" a self fulfilling prophesy i fear.
You then go on to use the word "scrounger"..........an awful generalisation.  

You are David Cameron or if not you wouldn't be able to tell you apart. Tell me then how my maths is wrong?

People on benefits (I'm talking those who have no paid employment) are generally only transient benefit claimers; the actual percentage of people who never work is tiny. If someone could once afford to go to Argyle but loses his/her job, they are going to go through a period where they can't afford to. If we (the club) can keep them attending, once they get another job, they'll hopefully go back to being a fully paying attendee. If they stop going for a year/half a season, it's a possibility they won't ever return.
I think Jack should become an MP as he'd fit right in. Benefit scum!

The whole budget for welfare is about an eighth of the amount that is unpaid in tax avoidance schemes by the biggest earning companies in the country.

OH that reminds me of Nandos lol

I aware of some 'career dole boys' and all I can say is they have better mobiles, tvs, clothes & sleep patterns than I do !

that aside they use loan firms ie buy now pay 700quid in interest etc, they know what they are going to get 'paid' and live to it.
Some will claim disability and they're the ones who get big dollar, if youre 'supposedly' disabled and have a kid with 'issues' then that's more money to spend.
you'll find a lot have disabilities that really aren't yet those with dire needs are placed in the queue with them.
but what is classed as disabled ? an able bodied child with diabetes is, yet a child who cant walk without assistance is treated the same. which of two gets more help ?

they get the same.

Iggy, i've already put you to bed, best we just do the mutual ignore thing comrade.

Hairy, i promised myself never to engage in pointless debate with a troll, yesterday i broke that promise, it won't happen again comrade.

arguing on the net is like siving bathwater

LOL - a troll. You complete bell end.

Someone disagrees with my small minded view on a complex issue = troll

You commented on my post in the first place and you did so with anecdotal 'evidence' that's been completely discounted by other people (I.e. not me). How that makes me a troll, I'm not quite sure.

[quote="Jack Sheppard"]Iggy, i've already put you to bed, best we just do the mutual ignore thing comrade.

Buuuulllllssshhhhhiiiitttttt you have, you still haven't answered my facts with any of your own, just how are these people who get £64 a week better off than you? I presume that you earn more than that? Is it maybe that you aren't very good with money and some people that have to exist on small budgets are? You can ignore me all you like, probably best that you do with no real arguments and just throw away daily mail one liners up your sleeve, personally I will never fail in my quest to educate the ignorant.

Some people who work want to see those who don't in rags, begging with cups, starving and pleading for help. These people are called cnuts. cnuts are smug. cnuts think they're the centre of the universe as they have a job. cnuts also fear, beyond everything else, losing their jobs. cnuts generally do feck all at work other than Facebook. Most, almost all, of people who don't have a job, want a job.
cnuts are also likely to be off sick when they need to re-decorate the hallway, claim they've had a full meal on expenses but had a £1 sandwich from Tesco. They steal a box of paper from work as it's a perk, they claim overtime as their workload is so massive (as they've been on Facebook all day) and they moan about 'other people'.

I defy anyone to have a champagne lifestyle on benefits. It's a massive myth that's spread by the Daily Mail. I would also expect Mr Shep to have evidence of asylum seekers being allowed to have sex with the Queen, disabled people having £10m for a stairlift and black people being allowed to be in the police force.

Mr Shep - I'm calling you a cnut. You probably aren't perfect - nobody is. Accept humanity and stop being a selfish prick.

hairy j wrote:

Some people who work want to see those who don't in rags, begging with cups, starving and pleading for help. These people are called cnuts. cnuts are smug. cnuts think they're the centre of the universe as they have a job. cnuts also fear, beyond everything else, losing their jobs. cnuts generally do feck all at work other than Facebook. Most, almost all, of people who don't have a job, want a job.
cnuts are also likely to be off sick when they need to re-decorate the hallway, claim they've had a full meal on expenses but had a £1 sandwich from Tesco. They steal a box of paper from work as it's a perk, they claim overtime as their workload is so massive (as they've been on Facebook all day) and they moan about 'other people'.

I defy anyone to have a champagne lifestyle on benefits. It's a massive myth that's spread by the Daily Mail. I would also expect Mr Shep to have evidence of asylum seekers being allowed to have sex with the Queen, disabled people having £10m for a stairlift and black people being allowed to be in the police force.

Mr Shep - I'm calling you a cnut. You probably aren't perfect - nobody is. Accept humanity and stop being a selfish prick.

I agree with the politics of what you're saying hairy..... and so eloquently put  

Just for clarification, are you actually suggesting that Jack has done things like cheating on his sick-leave or their expenses, nicking paper and wasting work-time so he can claim over-time? You responded with anger recently when people were suggesting that you did that sort of thing at work at the expense of the tax-payer. Whether Jack is a cnut or not is open to the judgement of others - both you and I carry that description proudly.

The bit I take most exception to is the suggestion that nobody is perfect.

knecht wrote:

hairy j wrote:

Some people who work want to see those who don't in rags, begging with cups, starving and pleading for help. These people are called cnuts. cnuts are smug. cnuts think they're the centre of the universe as they have a job. cnuts also fear, beyond everything else, losing their jobs. cnuts generally do feck all at work other than Facebook. Most, almost all, of people who don't have a job, want a job.
cnuts are also likely to be off sick when they need to re-decorate the hallway, claim they've had a full meal on expenses but had a £1 sandwich from Tesco. They steal a box of paper from work as it's a perk, they claim overtime as their workload is so massive (as they've been on Facebook all day) and they moan about 'other people'.

I defy anyone to have a champagne lifestyle on benefits. It's a massive myth that's spread by the Daily Mail. I would also expect Mr Shep to have evidence of asylum seekers being allowed to have sex with the Queen, disabled people having £10m for a stairlift and black people being allowed to be in the police force.

Mr Shep - I'm calling you a cnut. You probably aren't perfect - nobody is. Accept humanity and stop being a selfish prick.

I agree with the politics of what you're saying hairy..... and so eloquently put  

Just for clarification, are you actually suggesting that Jack has done things like cheating on his sick-leave or their expenses, nicking paper and wasting work-time so he can claim over-time? You responded with anger recently when people were suggesting that you did that sort of thing at work at the expense of the tax-payer. Whether Jack is a cnut or not is open to the judgement of others - both you and I carry that description proudly.

The bit I take most exception to is the suggestion that nobody is perfect.

If your suggesting that i said he nicked paper or fiddled overtime then thats bollocks you smarmy lying cnut! you got anything to say to me knecht come out and say it.

I think knecht was referring to hairy being accused of stealing from work by Newell on Pasoti.

I actually took exception to hairy comparing Jack to someone who steals from work etc. I don't see how he can say that when he didn't like it being said of him. I wanted clarification of what hairy meant as we were discussing it in the mod room.

I think an apology is very much in order to knecht SS68

Sufferedsince68 wrote:

........If your suggesting that i said he nicked paper or fiddled overtime then thats bollocks you smarmy lying cnut! you got anything to say to me knecht come out and say it.

OK, I had hoped to keep this our little secret but what the hell. I think I love you and will you marry me?

Greenjock wrote:

I think knecht was referring to hairy being accused of stealing from work by Newell on Pasoti.

I actually took exception to hairy comparing Jack to someone who steals from work etc. I don't see how he can say that when he didn't like it being said of him. I wanted clarification of what hairy meant as we were discussing it in the mod room.

I think an apology is very much in order to knecht SS68

Like fvck i will, i know exactly who he was having a pop at!

Greenjock wrote:

I think knecht was referring to hairy being accused of stealing from work by Newell on Pasoti.

I actually took exception to hairy comparing Jack to someone who steals from work etc. I don't see how he can say that when he didn't like it being said of him. I wanted clarification of what hairy meant as we were discussing it in the mod room.

I think an apology is very much in order to knecht SS68

No, Jock, you're wrong. I was remembering that hairy got accused on ATD of wasting tax-payers money by not doing his job properly and he responded by pointing out that his posts were done in his own time. I was checking if hairy really was making those similar accusations against Jack.

Sufferedsince68 wrote:

.......Like fvck i will, i know exactly who he was having a pop at!

Your ability to read minds from afar is one of your most impressive abilities.

knecht wrote:

Sufferedsince68 wrote:

........If your suggesting that i said he nicked paper or fiddled overtime then thats bollocks you smarmy lying cnut! you got anything to say to me knecht come out and say it.

OK, I had hoped to keep this our little secret but what the hell. I think I love you and will you marry me?

You arse kissing the troll is one thing, but when you lie about what i said, thats something else you creepy cvnt!

I didn't mean Jack did those things - for the record. It's more a 'people in glass houses situation'. I cannot abide the current scapegoating of benefit claimants. It really drives me up the wall. I'm basically using a stereotype to discount a stereotype. There'sway too much finger pointing in life - we're all people and we're all stuck on this planet for a finite time yet loads of people just spend their lives resenting other people.

Also, there are people on this site on benefits who would have read Jack's post and felt a bit angry.

Would it really bother anyone if someone got a reduced ticket price as they were on benefits? I certainly wouldn't and I receive no concesion at all.

hairy j wrote:

I didn't mean Jack did those things - for the record. It's more a 'people in glass houses situation'. I cannot abide the current scapegoating of benefit claimants. It really drives me up the wall. I'm basically using a stereotype to discount a stereotype. There'sway too much finger pointing in life - we're all people and we're all stuck on this planet for a finite time yet loads of people just spend their lives resenting other people.

Also, there are people on this site on benefits who would have read Jack's post and felt a bit angry.

Would it really bother anyone if someone got a reduced ticket price as they were on benefits? I certainly wouldn't and I receive no concesion at all.

Thanks for clarifying, hairy.

For the sake of peace, I'll flog myself later with a large wellie boot, post it on Youtube and hopefully, suffered will be happy.

People are well proper precious on here sometimes. Bunch of flower arranging pansies most of 'em. Chill out people, it's almost christmas.