Wildcat Posted September 19, 2010 Share Posted September 19, 2010 1/10 Must do better. Would you like to respond to the simple question posed rather than a different one. You are more than capable of getting your mind around the language and you do yourself no credit by inventing personal attacks where there are none to be made. The question you posed me was.....'is that the 'right' that you refer to wildcat?' I'm sure that espadrille can speak for themselves but on the general point wouldn't that depend on whether they should be receiving benefits through the current system rather than earning for themselves and/or having some transitional or alternative arrangement? Benefits aren't a right to be 'fought for'. They are a safety net. Your view of rights takes us back to a position pre-second world war. http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a23 People have fought for and won these rights. You can't just pick your definition to define them out of existence. Less fortunate in what way? Less fortunate that they need a safety net? Or less fortunate that their work gene has been switched off - is that the 'right' that you refer to wildcat? So far as I can see I have answered that question fully in the two posts.....25, here and also here in post 26. Basically I spoke about rights and you seem to be asking me about a specific one. Article 25, a right I obviously support, as should everyone. A right to be defended not dismissed as a safety net. Indeed I even answered the parts asked of what Keith Rich will have meant by the 'less fortunate'. Everything is covered in my answers. What do you not like about my answers? what have I missed out? Or don't you actually have a relevant point to make? Let's be fair wildcat, I can twirl you like this all day but there must be better things to discuss so how about you move it on? It's boring. This macho posturing is all one way so far as I can tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted September 19, 2010 Share Posted September 19, 2010 Why does every thread change from it's original question to a thread about benefits? Many on here are so obsessed with benefits and alleged scroungers, that they can't discuss anything else. Try looking at the title of the thread! To be fair the reasons the Councillor gave for defecting was specifically to do with the cuts. ............. Mr Curran, who represents Walkley and was voted onto the council in May, said his decision was made due to the "lack of resistance" shown by the Lib Dems locally to the cutbacks and the "disgraceful decision" to cancel a government loan to local company Forgemasters. He said: "I was bitterly disappointed with where the party was going nationally with Nick Clegg and I was also left disillusioned with the lack of resistance shown by the Lib Dems locally with all the savage cuts that have hit this city. "The disgraceful decision to cancel the Forgemasters loan is a case in point. "As Sheffield Lib Dem councillors, we were asked to defend what turned out to be a completely unjustifiable decision and it soon transpired that all the reasons in favour of cancelling the loan were just a pack of lies. "My personal values haven't changed but the political landscape has." He was welcomed by Sheffield Labour Group' leader Julie Dore, who said: "In fact, the doors are wide open for any other Lib Dems who feel uneasy with the Tory-led coalition and who are sick to death of these spiteful cuts, which are being made too far, too fast and hitting the most vulnerable hardest." ....... Link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-11347619 That said I agree with your general point, that the inevitable discussion of 'spongers' is a bit depressing when there are 2 million more unemployed than jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mossdog Posted September 19, 2010 Share Posted September 19, 2010 This was under GBs watch and the banks were ALLOWED to have a free reign with credit. What everyone also seems to forget is that it takes 2 to tango and for the banks to give credit they have to have customers.Many individuals should really be looking at themselves and asking if they actually took on too much debt without any consideration as to whether they could afford to pay it back. Ah but this is hard isnt it? Much easier to deflect the blame elsewhere. It is interesting that in a crisis instead of accepting any sort of responsibility there are always people who want to have someone or something to blame. The majority of people in this country have lived way beyond their means for a long long time and now it is pay back time. A bit like the feeling after Christmas and New Year is over and you have eaten too much turkey and the diet has to start. There really is only one solution. Dont over indulge then you can truly be in control of your own behaviour and your own life Socialists are never concerned about who will foot the bill! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted September 19, 2010 Author Share Posted September 19, 2010 Socialists are never concerned about who will foot the bill! How about bankers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mossdog Posted September 19, 2010 Share Posted September 19, 2010 I didn't know that people still followed The Methodist faith. The people responsible for the debacle recently passed are the wheeler dealers and running dogs of the capitalists, no one else. Don't try and blame Joe Soap for taking a few quid over the odds, when the sonderkinder of the city are getting six figure bonuses for cocking up. The entire system is rotten to the core. The only thing is what everyone forgets, is that there is a Joe Soap somewhere in nearly every house hold in Britain........................there lies the true problem,£100 billion in uncollected/unpaid taxes,from the wealthy and the less wealthy! but by far the largest proportion from the less wealthy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitch_1980 Posted September 19, 2010 Share Posted September 19, 2010 The only thing is what everyone forgets, is that there is a Joe Soap somewhere in nearly every house hold in Britain........................there lies the true problem,£100 billion in uncollected/unpaid taxes,from the wealthy and the less wealthy! but by far the largest proportion from the less wealthy! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11359306 Just seen this on the BBC website Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mossdog Posted September 19, 2010 Share Posted September 19, 2010 How about bankers?How about the dumb Socialist created FSA that should have regulated the banks whilst Gordon was laughing all the way to the bank with huge tax revenues generated by the banks! thereby able to create more non jobs and bonuses in the public sector! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted September 19, 2010 Share Posted September 19, 2010 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11359306 Just seen this on the BBC website That's a lot of cash in hand work up the spout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted September 19, 2010 Author Share Posted September 19, 2010 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11359306 Just seen this on the BBC website No wonder Lord Ashcroft's off! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted September 19, 2010 Author Share Posted September 19, 2010 How about the dumb Socialist created FSA that should have regulated the banks whilst Gordon was laughing all the way to the bank with huge tax revenues generated by the banks! thereby able to create more non jobs and bonuses in the public sector! Do you think the Tories would have plumped for a more 'hands on' approach then??? Don't bother to answer, I'll do it for you: :hihi::hihi::hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.