I read the Daily Mail today. Gobsmacked.

[boyfriday]

Well I disagree old lad ...... OK !

Besides, it would not be like you to narrow down the thought process in your favour, what's up don't you like the DM either

 

Read it online everyday old boy, it's teeth gnashingly wonderful to catch up with the pitchforkers and gobfrothers from further afield on their online forum...surprised you're unacquainted with it?

[esme]

Mod Note

 

Insulting posts removed along with any that quoted them, keep it civil please, attack the argument and not the person making it.

[MrSmith]

Get real Michael - how could the welfare system make him dangerous and evil?

 

It's an absurd notion from the outset.

 

Are we a product of our environment?

Starting from the 70s, studies in the US pointed more and more at the link between unemployment, poverty and crime.

 

But most important of all, the unmistakable characteristic of poverty and crime is that they’re both geographically concentrated in the same areas. In other words, where you find poverty is also where you find crime. And this reveals the strong connection between the two issues.

 

 

 

Lazy people used to have four options, they could work to survive, scrounge to survive, die, or steal to survive.

If he worked he would have likely had fewer children.

If he died he would have had none.

If he thieved he would have likely been caught and put in prison.

If he scrounged its likely he would only have scrounged enough food for himself.

We gave him another choice, a life on benefits which gave him more money for each child he had, clearly without the benefits system he wouldn’t have turned out the way he is.

[fishy_taste]

Are we a product of our environment?

 

 

 

 

Lazy people used to have four options, they could work to survive, scrounge to survive, die, or steal to survive.

If he worked he would have likely had fewer children.

If he died he would have had none.

If he thieved he would have likely been caught and put in prison.

If he scrounged its likely he would only have scrounged enough food for himself.

We gave him another choice, a life on benefits which gave him more money for each child he had, clearly without the benefits system he wouldn’t have turned out the way he is.

 

So, let's solve the problem and abolish the welfare system, eh?

[MrSmith]

So, let's solve the problem and abolish the welfare system, eh?

 

Work for benefits would solve the problem, the more money you need the more work you have to do to get it.

[I1L2T3]

Are we a product of our environment?

 

 

 

 

Lazy people used to have four options, they could work to survive, scrounge to survive, die, or steal to survive.

If he worked he would have likely had fewer children.

If he died he would have had none.

If he thieved he would have likely been caught and put in prison.

If he scrounged its likely he would only have scrounged enough food for himself.

We gave him another choice, a life on benefits which gave him more money for each child he had, clearly without the benefits system he wouldn’t have turned out the way he is.

 

Without the benefits system he was still a deranged and highly dangerous individual.

 

---------- Post added 04-04-2013 at 13:35 ----------

 

Work for benefits would solve the problem, the more money you need the more work you have to do to get it.

 

If Mick Philpott had been in a job he wouldn't have been dangerous? Is that what you are saying?

[MrSmith]

Without the benefits system he was still a deranged and highly dangerous individual.

 

If Mick Philpott had been in a job he wouldn't have been dangerous? Is that what you are saying?

 

Clearly then he should never have been paid to have children, what kind of country pays a scumbag like that to breed. We need to encourage healthy intelligent caring people to have children, but instead, we tax them so we can pay scum like him to have children.

[I1L2T3]

Clearly then he should never have been paid to have children, what kind of country pays a scumbag like that to breed. We need to encourage healthy intelligent caring people to have children, but instead, we tax them so we can pay scum like him to have children.

 

You didn'nt answer my question.

 

Do you think he is a typical welfare claimant?

[MrSmith]

You didn'nt answer my question.

 

Do you think he is a typical welfare claimant?

 

I know a couple like him, never worked a day in the life, not as many kids but the money they get for the kids is spent on booze, fags and gambling, the kids see very little of what is meant for them.

[fishy_taste]

Clearly then he should never have been paid to have children, what kind of country pays a scumbag like that to breed. We need to encourage healthy intelligent caring people to have children, but instead, we tax them so we can pay scum like him to have children.

 

The govt pay people to have children?? When did they pass that legislation? I must let my wife know - we've got some catching up to do!!!

 

He abused the system. Some do. Many do not. Many, who genuinely deserve help, get less than they are entitled to because of pride or lack of understanding of the system and what they are entitled to.

 

So, because of 'scum' like him (I get the sense that 'scum' extends to anyone claiming benefit or are they just 'scroungers'?) you want to radically overhaul the system so that 'scum' like him still find ways of abusing the system, and those who really deserve help get more and more squeezed or put off by the process (and just disappear off the scale)?

 

The problem in this case (and many others where children are involved) is that anything that is done to him (or his ilk) affect the innocents - the children - who are an unwilling, unwitting side effect of this.

 

You squeeze the benefits given for the benefit of the children, you penalise the children.

 

So, your civil, social, caring conscience extends to hurting the children because, well, they're related to scum and will no doubt become the next generation of scum in years to come.

 

Why not expel them from the UK or round them up and put them in some sort of commune or camp where they are forced to work for a pittance? Better still, go the whole hog and do what Hitler did to those sections of society he didn't much like....

 

Philpott may be all you say he is, but that does not mean everyone else claiming benefits is 'scum' or a 'scrounger'.