The same as you, you shall let other people come here work for a lot less and you shall except it, and become unemployed, your employed at the mo.
RIP UK
- Thread starter larco
- Start date
- Status
Sponsored Links
This country seems hell bent on self destruction, massive handouts to people who don't deserve them, imagine the situation if we went to Rumania and tried to claim benefits off them, if the EU decrees that it's law, then the sooner we get a referendum to get away from these ridiculous laws the better, we are a dumping ground for scroungers.
Wotan
Wotan
nickso";p="2261911 said:
Sponsored Links
Will the last one out turn off the lights please?
T
trollmaster2000
There is no claim, asssertation, or inferrence in either the OP or the linked article, that the woman in question is of Roma Gypsy ethnicity.
This means at least 1 of 2 things:
1. You assume that all Romanians are Gypsies, which is racist.
2. You are attempting to derail the thread into a debate about race, by acusing others of being racist.
yes you are right and i am wrong
its up to 50k but definatly at 43kplease do your homework i do
apart from the obviouse child benefit there are others
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTa...xcredits/Youworkandalsohavechildren/DG_174789
T
trollmaster2000
Correct; and nobody had made any comment or inferrence about her race, until you decided to chime in with the Roma Gypsy comment.
No it isn't. its about a case where someone has bent immigration rules to claim state benefits that they would not ordinarily be entitled to. No issue of race at all.
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2005
- Messages
- 31,282
- Reaction score
- 1,998
- Country
No-one has bent any rules - they are abiding by them.
T
trollmaster2000
The story isn't about a person of (x,y,z) race though, so why bring race into the debate? Its about a person of a nationality, who under current legislation should arguably not be entitled to claim benefits.
But to humour your question: given that the source is the DM, then I'd say any story involving immigrants and benefits would be given equally sensationalist and outrage inducing coverage regardless what colour the purpetrator was.
But to humour your question: given that the source is the DM, then I'd say any story involving immigrants and benefits would be given equally sensationalist and outrage inducing coverage regardless what colour the purpetrator was.
T
trollmaster2000
The title of the thread is a typical reaction from a typical reader to a typical story in the Daily Mail.
To clarify my comment on rule bending, the linked article in the OP states:
How many big issue sellers do you think are tax registered? I am going to suggest that her income derived from selling the BI is less than the £73,000 tax threshold where a self employed person must become tax registered. Therefore by aquiring housing benefit as above, the rules have been bent in her favour.
To clarify my comment on rule bending, the linked article in the OP states:
How many big issue sellers do you think are tax registered? I am going to suggest that her income derived from selling the BI is less than the £73,000 tax threshold where a self employed person must become tax registered. Therefore by aquiring housing benefit as above, the rules have been bent in her favour.
It was a bit of a double whammy yesterday with that terrorist guy who can't be deported and this big issue seller claiming benefits. But it's just the latest in a long list of kicks to the groin
There are a few bigger issues here though
First there is a natural abhorrence to "foreigners" coming to the UK and basically taking the P out of "our system". But would it be equally distasteful if it was just one of the natives doing it?
Then we need to think about what we don't like. Is it the fact that the "foreigners" are more clued up, and the natives are too thick or just can't be bothered to play the system?
Personally, despite how distasteful misuse of the law and the benefit system is, we do have to give them credit for such imaginative misuse, and rather than blame the terrorist, migrant or chav off the estate, we really need to be looking a lot closer to home and blaming ourselves for such a poxy system that lets those smart enough, abuse it
The thing is, we never learn from our mistakes. What we should be doing is saying "Ok, fair enough, you've scammed us this time, well done, but we will now change things so that no-one else does the same thing". But do we? Do we ever learn?
There are a few bigger issues here though
First there is a natural abhorrence to "foreigners" coming to the UK and basically taking the P out of "our system". But would it be equally distasteful if it was just one of the natives doing it?
Then we need to think about what we don't like. Is it the fact that the "foreigners" are more clued up, and the natives are too thick or just can't be bothered to play the system?
Personally, despite how distasteful misuse of the law and the benefit system is, we do have to give them credit for such imaginative misuse, and rather than blame the terrorist, migrant or chav off the estate, we really need to be looking a lot closer to home and blaming ourselves for such a poxy system that lets those smart enough, abuse it
The thing is, we never learn from our mistakes. What we should be doing is saying "Ok, fair enough, you've scammed us this time, well done, but we will now change things so that no-one else does the same thing". But do we? Do we ever learn?
- Status
Sponsored Links
