www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20887547
How about closing some of these down?



en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Overseas_Territories#Military

I've not had time to read the article yet, but am infuriated at the prospect of them snatching back the allowances from elderly people. These wankers who are proposing it don't have a proper appreciation of what being on the breadline is to start with, with their fat wages & extravagant expense claims. I don't know how they dare!

And capital gains tax is out & out robbery.

Gilly wrote:
They are doing it because they can, we all know what to do, boycott those who harm us, if the worse comes to the worst, as acommunity ee could all give to our local olds, fifty pence each to buy a couple of bags of coal to keep them warm, or share a mornings heat in house when its really cold.

Gilly wrote:
Because we're daft enough to fall for divide and conquer tactics of blaming benefit claimants and daft enough to continue voting for them.

People who paid into an 'insurance' scam their entire working lives are now being billed as burdens, scroungers and cheats for attempting to claim on that investment.

But bankers and offshore dodging cunts will be cared for, no worries there.

The thing that amuses me about it is that the ideological explanation for all of these things now is to make "the system fair". It doesn't matter what they do, they just claim that it's to make things fairer. They could come out and say "we're taking the first born child of everyone with an income of under £35,000 pa. and giving them to bankers to throw on their fireplaces to make the benefit system fairer", and The BBC would probably still report it completely uncritically!

Andyh is correct.
People keep falling for the "Uhoh, That unemployed, disabled, pensioner is coming for your stash" routine as a distraction for the rich bastards actually ripping off your stash.

feather wrote: Totally agree, Feather. They're very good at presenting things in such a way that people who are paid a moderate salary will not only go along with it, but will be adamant that it's a good thing.

We should never forget the following, though:

Many debates like we see here, concentrate upon the yesterday, what is happening, but rarely what we are going to do to avoid such steering factors. Kissenger said control the food and control the masses. This food or spice as I often call it, IS ourselves, what we act upon is after the fact scenario's, I hate to say, but its already too late by then.

If one knows what to do you can actually make a living for yourself from the downturn, but you must be brave, hard pelfing and help those who want to help themselves and in time you will see the colours of your spice and others.

Why do you think journeymen, true masons, protected their trades, you have all heard the term, a closed shop, in those days one had to pay with your labour to learn a trade, apprentiship, today we let others decide where we will work and for how much, we are being bred out and moth balled, put into hibernation, by supporting our own demise at the cost of another.

Not so much devided, but cocooned behind six foot fences in front of the monitor feeling safe in the moment, this is why the flashing light and the big bad yesterdays news comes thicker and faster, let it go and one will awaken a little further, From experience, try hiding the remote for a day to feel the force.

Try hiding what remote - I'm sorry, Apprentice, but I'm not sure what you mean.

wow - they're really starting to bum people harder & harder.
Fuel bills rise - benefits cut.
Scam after scam after swindle. I've really had enough of these cunts & their phoney war on debt.
.

They are about to throw another log on the older folks.
If you have a spare room and you recieve any housing benefit you will be hit with a 14% deduction on your housing benefit.
So in other words, you'll have to find that extra cash out of nowhere.
You could ask to be moved into smaller accomodation, but there's a housing shortage eh, so your stuck. Pay up suckah!

Heat or eat? time again for even more folks.

i feel like boycotts and protests do nothing at all. more and more im of the opinion the only way to change anything is through blood sweat and tears.

Gilly wrote:
To change the channels.

When things are not done properly they often break down, when this payment was first brought into being, it was deemed by the government of the day, that it would be cheaper just to give everyone in its category the payment because it was found to be more expensive to means test everybody. Then people being people took, not many gave it back that could afford it to another who could'nt, I know a few myself.

Then wecome back to my grandfathers saying, Giving someone something for nothing and making others work for nothing does'nt work.

Blood sweat and tears is being spent and spilt and for all the wrong reasons, by a whole who wilfully allows it so, the majority continue to walk upon childerick at the cost to their own, the penny will drop eventually.

Its the work for nothing that irritates me most of all.
It leads to justification of the social payments. Were people earning the right money and paying the right prices for goods then none of this shit would be necessary.

andyh wrote:
Most of our skills will be replaced, inevitably, but mankind has always made things of beauty and they always will. Their creations will be different, we are different from all other animals and from machines because of our imagination our creativity, our vision of how things might be, what we may loose is our closeness to nature, our link with the earth, and the range of the human spirit.

When the machine eventually stops, those who can think differently will prevail.

The Apprentice wrote:
I must be misunderstanding you then, since I doubt you'd be trying to imply that we're all sitting in front of the TV all day!

I've heard this argument before regarding it having been too expensive to means test people initially. They're using the same reasoning behind taking family benefits off people too.

Why would people give it back, when it was introduced as a universal benefit that was supposed to acknowledge respect for the old and the family unit regardless of circumstances?

I didn't hear anyone ask why it's cheaper to means test now. Paper, ink, envelopes, postage, staff to administer & collate, computer systems. I'd like to know how much that lot costs - are they using existing resources, such as allocating this to already inept & overloaded social services workforce?

Slightly off topic (ish) but ffs!.............

That would be funny if it wasn't obscene!!!

There's enough subcutaneous fat to insulate a nursing home contained in that suit!