Benefit changes yay or nay?

[csgohan4]

Sure , make it clean and respectable via good PR - NLP etc

Make it something " healing " ( both ways )

m

What if the Product only gives and doesn't receive? return for refund, does DSR apply if I order online?

[BobF64]

If they cant support it there should be an abortion option , they shouldnt be allowed to destroy another humans life, like their own.

m

Just increase the abortion cut off to 975 weeks.

[wasabi]

Yeah, I don't agree Zerox. Your reasoning puts undue (IMHO) emphasis on the value of making money above all else. I put forward the case that in reality there are many more contributions one can make to society than wage earning - child rearing, supporting others, carers, artists, musicians, philosophers.. I could go on.

I'm philosopher by the way - give me a free house, food and car. And my mate next door does media studies all day and works very hard on his internet porn thesis.

[melon]

What if I don't like the feel or look of a product after unwrapping the packaging? Surely under Consumer rights here we can ask for a refund or a replacement. The customer is always right

Photos and Data will be supplied with a realistic model sex toy based on her vavoom to compliment your size

5 mins free talk and contract to sign -

all sessions are " monitored " and any penetration seals the ride..

m

[TheAnimus]

Yes, it's part of the definition of a civilised society - the recognition that anyone can have a positive impact on society even if they're not in a position to support themselves financially through work, through no fault of their own.

The problem is, what is poverty?

We have such strange ideas that someone who's living in wales is in poverty if they don't have enough money for food, cigs, alcohol and sky.

Yet someone who is lacking clean water and starving has the term applied to them equally.

Personally, I find it irksome that we give money to people who spend it on alchol,sky,cigs,internet + pcs. Because if it is charity, we could stop people starving with that cash.

The idea that we need to provide a minimum quality of life for all people is for most people a given, the only question is how minimum is it?

For instance the Labour terming of the reforms to housing benefit as a bedroom tax I find disingenuous even for a political, after all why on earth should someone get subsidised housing that is larger than they need, just because they once needed it. If we can't have a grown up talk about such matters as social housing being based on present need, rather than previous, how can we have one?

On a different note, try watching:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...cas_Poor_Kids/
It's only up for 3 days so you might not get chance, but it's interesting to see the problem in the USA, which to most of us here has barbaric ideas of social care (no health care etc).

[csgohan4]

Photos and Data will be supplied with a realistic model sex toy based on her vavoom to compliment your size

5 mins free talk and contract to sign -

all sessions are " monitored " and any penetration seals the ride..

m

You been to a consumer lawyer haven't you, but I don't still get to try and Feel if the product is to my specifications, so I still want my money back, then how? Surely a 14 day money back offer

[csgohan4]

The problem is, what is poverty?

We have such strange ideas that someone who's living in wales is in poverty if they don't have enough money for food, cigs, alcohol and sky.

Yet someone who is lacking clean water and starving has the term applied to them equally.

Personally, I find it irksome that we give money to people who spend it on alchol,sky,cigs,internet + pcs. Because if it is charity, we could stop people starving with that cash.

The idea that we need to provide a minimum quality of life for all people is for most people a given, the only question is how minimum is it?

There lies the problem that political parties only have the masses at heart, not the country. If the majority of voters want to keep their benefits so they can scrounge and use it for Sky TV, the parties will give it to them. I highly suspect that the majority who vote or make up a large proportion of voters are on benefits scroungers and want to keep their sponge like status, tainting those who actually need Benefits and trying to make ends meet while others waste them on Ciggies and Alcohol.

Even if the middle and upper class made their votes count, what other party is the alternative? all are the same, offering goodies for those that vote for them

[peterb]

I've deleted two posts and cleaned up a few more because of language.

For those that haven't read it, you might want to read this

http://forums.hexus.net/faq.php?faq=...q_hex_swearing

[melon]

You been to a consumer lawyer haven't you, but I don't still get to try and Feel if the product is to my specifications, so I still want my money back, then how? Surely a 14 day money back offer

oh, very well , we put u on a meter ( £ ??? per min ) u get a minimum of 10 mins plus 5 min free talk. ( sex toy is not free )

m

[peterb]

oh, very well , we put u on a meter ( £ ??? per min ) u get a minimum of 10 mins plus 5 min free talk. ( sex toy is not free )

m

Perhaps we can get this thread back on topic?

[kalniel]

There lies the problem that political parties only have the masses at heart, not the country. If the majority of voters want to keep their benefits so they can scrounge and use it for Sky TV, the parties will give it to them. I highly suspect that the majority who vote or make up a large proportion of voters are on benefits scroungers and want to keep their sponge like status, tainting those who actually need Benefits and trying to make ends meet while others waste them on Ciggies and Alcohol.

Even if the middle and upper class made their votes count, what other party is the alternative? all are the same, offering goodies for those that vote for them

Well that's a problem our philosopher friend should be very familiar with Crazy as it sounds, Iran probably has a better solution to that than our current democracy (system partially based on Plato's philosopher kings).



disclaimer: I'm also partially a philosopher, by training at least - from a certain school of thought that believes it's required for responsible science

[Kumagoro]

I think you have to be tight with benefits as people will exploit the system as much as they can. However if you are then more will suffer. I am of the opinion that the biggest problem isn't that there are many long term unemployed but that there are too many shat people with to many kids. They really need to stop paying any more benefits past two kids. Therefore less child benefit, less housing benefit and less tax credits.
The government both past and present and no doubt future seem to only think in the short term. They wouldn't do the above as it would be to shocking for people to cope with but if they implemented it over a 10 to 15 period by lowering the limit by one a year it would give people time top adapt.

[csgohan4]

If people can't make sensible choices for themselves, the state must do it for them i.e only benefits for up to 2 kids. If you are poor you should be sensible to do the math that you can't afford more children. You see in the old days people used to have 5 or more children because of benefits and more money rather than because they wanted kids, it's a joke really.

[melon]

If people can't make sensible choices for themselves, the state must do it for them i.e only benefits for up to 2 kids. If you are poor you should be sensible to do the math that you can't afford more children. You see in the old days people used to have 5 or more children because of benefits and more money rather than because they wanted kids, it's a joke really.

low self esteem is big part of it too ( look at women in that video ) and you will see many are obese too .

ultimately doing poor jobs reminds them , they are poor and not the spice girls or other images of success they grew up on and prob brain washed with - so no wonder they avoid those jobs, easier to indulge in their self pity and greed to compensate.

Same with men too , what man could be proud of having multiple kids ( sometimes to different woman ) ?

I would kill myself if I existed like that, so basically your talking about people with nothing to lose - no sense of anything in themselves and thats why they feel justified - because self pity
makes them feel entitled and that people owe them things - hence the lack of responsibility

This is where religion / philosophy should of succeeded but hasnt thanks to their social conditioning and lack of meaning in their life .

A lot of folk in the army I feel suffer this too ( hence high suicide rates in the US ) but at least some there see it as some kind of higher purpose - even if it ultimately serves a bad one.

Of course without that rich wouldnt have their armies or poor to unbalance the middleclass so they become even more dominant, so why would they change it when it suits them fine ?

When we're so poor we're reduced to slavery or crime they'll just enforce us using a police state as they've planning all the time.

m

[wasabi]

Crazy as it sounds, Iran probably has a better solution to that than our current democracy (system partially based on Plato's philosopher kings).

Mmmm. Very favourable comparison there. I'd say it is a bit more like the divine rule of kings concept however. Putting any brand of god-botherers in charge anywhere scares the carp out of me the though - they tend to be misogynist pigs who reinforce 'traditional' paternalistic social values and oppress the unbelievers.

[TooNice]

Choice of how to spend money is part of what we consider acceptable living. Take that away and you're no better off than a slave.

Hmm, no one has tried to dispute this point, but I disagree. For a start, I think that slaves are generally forced to work. A kid, with no pocket money can *still* be spoilt but still have far more acceptable standard of living than what slaves did.