Re: Benefits Cap Is Legal : Sun Nov 10, 2013 2:00 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

Nope, once again you are quite wrong.

And attempting a wind-up too, LOL, it doesn't work with me ...

How was I wrong, pray tell

Re: Benefits Cap Is Legal : Sun Nov 10, 2013 3:03 pm  

Standee wrote:

How was I wrong, pray tell

Whats the point, you aren't interested, your comment(s) are purely designed to inflame opinion against you in some sort of weird self-abuse, its become your signature style as those who have met you in person have testified, you admit to getting some sort of kick out of winding people up with inflammatory posts - its f'kin weird to me and makes no sense at all.

My suggestion would be to register under another user name and not act like a tw@ or find another forum to wind up.

Re: Benefits Cap Is Legal : Sun Nov 10, 2013 4:36 pm  

There's no fun in that.
The cognoscenti would have to fall out with themselves.

Re: Benefits Cap Is Legal : Sun Nov 10, 2013 4:48 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

Whats the point, you aren't interested, your comment(s) are purely designed to inflame opinion against you in some sort of weird self-abuse, its become your signature style as those who have met you in person have testified, you admit to getting some sort of kick out of winding people up with inflammatory posts - its f'kin weird to me and makes no sense at all.

My suggestion would be to register under another user name and not act like a tw@ or find another forum to wind up.

Oh dear, an irrelevant old man has been exposed for being irrelevant, what type of self styled tw@ would have a blog save for self importance.

silly little person, you used to be so much better, never nind, I'll send flowers

Re: Benefits Cap Is Legal : Sun Nov 10, 2013 4:53 pm  

Standee wrote:

Oh dear, an irrelevant old man has been exposed for being irrelevant, what type of self styled tw@ would have a blog save for self importance.

silly little person, you used to be so much better, never nind, I'll send flowers

The routine is getting tedious.

Take a break.

Re: Benefits Cap Is Legal : Sun Nov 10, 2013 5:25 pm  

Standee wrote:

Oh dear, an irrelevant old man has been exposed for being irrelevant, what type of self styled tw@ would have a blog save for self importance.

silly little person, you used to be so much better, never nind, I'll send flowers

Re: Benefits Cap Is Legal : Sun Nov 10, 2013 8:21 pm  

Standee wrote:

social housing has always been about need, if your in-laws blocked a social home for someone whilst not striving to achieve to move out then that explains your point of perspective. 6 kids was a very selfish thing to do as well.

you make the case for everyone against profligate breeding and expecting the state to provide

Why is having 6 kids selfish? The government and economists keep telling us we've not got enough younger people as workers and consumers. We've had to pay to import immigrants because not enough people have been breeding.

Re: Benefits Cap Is Legal : Sun Nov 10, 2013 9:26 pm  

Dally wrote:

Why is having 6 kids selfish? The government and economists keep telling us we've not got enough younger people as workers and consumers. We've had to pay to import immigrants because not enough people have been breeding.

It's because he has chosen not to father children and doesn't see why a single penny of his taxes should be used to help anyone who does. This, along with his "politics of envy" mantra, has been a core element of his postings for some years now. Whenever someone points out that if previous generations had the same mind-set, he wouldn't have enjoyed the level of education and healthcare that got him where he is now, he tends to vanish for a while.

Re: Benefits Cap Is Legal : Sun Nov 10, 2013 9:58 pm  

The funny thing is that the example that I quoted, the one that he said was a case of profligate breeding and expected the state to provide was my wifes family, her father worked every day of his life from the age of 15 to 65, never claimed a penny in benefits apart from the usual child benefit, and his six children consist of two serving police officers, two social workers in child care and probation (one in a senior position), one in hotel management and the other in a senior admin role, the state has probably had far more in tax from that family than he has ever paid

Re: Benefits Cap Is Legal : Mon Nov 11, 2013 5:11 am  

cod'ead wrote:

It's because he has chosen not to father children and doesn't see why a single penny of his taxes should be used to help anyone who does. This, along with his "politics of envy" mantra, has been a core element of his postings for some years now. Whenever someone points out that if previous generations had the same mind-set, he wouldn't have enjoyed the level of education and healthcare that got him where he is now, he tends to vanish for a while.

But who really are the envious ones?
Those of us who believe in social equality, inclusion and a decent standard of living for all or people like Martin who are happy with division, the haves and have nots, and the race to the top?
I suspect many of us really understand who the selfish, jealous ones are!