Cyclone Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Chem1st is all for stealing land, he thinks it's justified because sometime around a 1000 years ago it was all stolen, although probably not from him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Chem1st is all for stealing land, he thinks it's justified because sometime around a 1000 years ago it was all stolen, although probably not from him. I suspect he has a very cunning plan... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Umpley Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 would a nervous OAP really want a stranger digging in her garden? an englishmans home is his castle etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bypassblade Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I have noticed over the last few weeks, there have been a lot of threads on this forum that have been lets say, less than complimentary to the not so well off, people on benefits. Perhaps people would prefer to see some sort of cleansing to eradicate the world of these people, live & let live; some people genuinely cannot help the circumstances they find themselves in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 The thread title is misleading; the poor are allowed to grow their own food and they don´t need the permission of the council to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Umpley Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 passbyblade the problem is that are are 2 distinct different types of people on benefits. those who have lost their jobs or come across some form of hardship. those to whome benefits are a lifestyle choice. from those 2 groups one are to be assisted in every way, the other group could be culled and society would benefit as a result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bypassblade Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 passbyblade the problem is that are are 2 distinct different types of people on benefits. those who have lost their jobs or come across some form of hardship. those to whome benefits are a lifestyle choice. from those 2 groups one are to be assisted in every way, the other group could be culled and society would benefit as a result. Whilst I agree about the 2 lifestyles, why should the bone idle be eradicated, yes they are a blight, but as you say see benefits as a lifestyle choice. I don't agree with it, it is society that has developed these people. I've worked with people over the years who are bone idle, but get away with it they are just as bad as the scroungers on benefits, as they get a wage by doing sweet fanny Adams. Like the play about with my name, quite amusing, but there is a reason for it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Umpley Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 ahh sorry. nope there was no reason for the wrong name other than a combination of lack of reading ability and lack of care in double checking, sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bypassblade Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 ahh sorry. nope there was no reason for the wrong name other than a combination of lack of reading ability and lack of care in double checking, sorry. Eh we all make mistakes, take it easy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regatta Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 would a nervous OAP really want a stranger digging in her garden? an englishmans home is his castle etc. There is an oap who lives a few houses away from me, he lets two fellas grow veg, in his back garden and he is quite happy not having to buy it from the shops, they give him an ample share, and he's happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.