ARmy Rumour SErvice

**nanotm** · 25-01-2012, 21:50

Originally Posted by Sixty

Evening all.

I know we've done this one before but just for my own curiosity; are you pro or anti the proposed benefits cap currently sailing through the choppy waters of the upper chamber?

My own view is that no one should really be taking home more than the average wage in benefits and this cap also provides a safety net for those who find themselves suddenly unemployed (while acknowledging that cloth would have to be cut).

The reason for the poll though is that the person chosen by the BBC to represent the anti cuts point of view just asked (paraphrased) "why should I have to give up on a good standard of living?" "why should I have to move to somewhere less expensive?" and I wondered if anyone was against the cap but could offer a better reason than whining self-pity.

i'm pro the cuts but the cuts proposed i think are wrong/not strict enough, imho it should be limited to £75 per adult and £50 per child per week up to a maximum of 2 adults + 4 kids for those purely on benefits, not including there rent which IMHO should be a seperate issue and given to the landlords directly, also i feel that proper ID systems should be used and as part of this bill i would like to see them instigate compulsory ID cards for all claiments, paid for by the public purse (the MGS has been producing bits of plastic for people on site for decades now) so that people cant claim more than once use retinal scans wiht face recognition, not just a photo on a bit of plastic, (the yanks would love that data base so they could "share it with them" for a fee and thus export some chod for free)

so yes but it should be much less weekly cash in hand/bank for claiments (if my familly of 6 can get by on less and still have all mod cons and decent food so can the rest of the layabouts)

but keep housing seperate, like make a hard cap on housing allowance but dont include that in the weekly cash allowance per familly

oh and include all aspects of welfare claiments dont exclude imigrants /assylum seekers, there cost of living is no higher after there initial few weeks of aclimatisation (probably dont even need that) more clever thinking less wooly mindedness and more "Fair conditions for all"

**AIR FILTER** · 25-01-2012, 23:39

Originally Posted by nanotm

i'm pro the cuts but the cuts proposed i think are wrong/not strict enough, imho it should be limited to £75 per adult and £50 per child per week up to a maximum of 2 adults + 4 kids.

If this was done you would have a war on your hands.

There are around 3 million SS claimants in this country, the last thing anybody wants is this "Army" on the streets kicking off in the capital in Olympic season (last years riots took care of that) So i would guess that this strange figure of 26K has been very carefully worked out by experts to strike the perfect balance to keep the Status Quo relatively happy.

**nanotm** · 25-01-2012, 23:46

Originally Posted by AIR FILTER

If this was done you would have a war on your hands.

There are around 3 million SS claimants in this country, the last thing anybody wants is this "Army" on the streets kicking off in the capital in Olympic season (last years riots took care of that) So i would guess that this strange figure of 26K has been very carefully worked out by experts to strike the perfect balance to keep the Status Quo relatively happy.

no there designed ot move all the troublesome ethnics out of London to places like Manchester (a long way from the olympics) where the housing costs are a lot cheaper and there are large numbers of ready to occupy properties, the down sides theres no more employment oportunity and any rioting will be well away from the games, and that mgic figure of 26k per anum cash income will be the driving force behind it all.

**CaptainPlume** · 26-01-2012, 00:04

Originally Posted by AIR FILTER

i would guess that this strange figure of 26K has been very carefully worked out by experts to strike the perfect balance to keep the Status Quo relatively happy.

I think Status Quo are technically pensioners rather than benefit recipients. Still, they could top up with a 35th annual farewell tour

**The_Big_Floater** · 26-01-2012, 00:05

Originally Posted by Yorkshire Lad

I wonder if we could work for the same major law firm ;)

I may be wrong with my history here, but didn't Ghenghis take whatever he wanted? We're talking more about giving less rather than taking anything.

On far out and no doubt 'inappropriate' note, I'd approve of bringing in what would effectively be ration books, food/clothes vouches rather than just handing out cash which lets these lethargic b******s pay £60 a month for Sky Sports/Movies and a nice 50" flat screen.

Perhaps I should get myself fired, scrounge off the state and have the free time to keep working on my fitness for the army? On second thoughts, I'll keep hold of my dignity.

I think Pol Pot would be a better choice, let's get the UK back to day zero, and massacre anyone of the lazy chavvy disposition ;)

**ancienturion** · 26-01-2012, 09:36

Originally Posted by nanotm

no there designed ot move all the troublesome ethnics out of London to places like Manchester (a long way from the olympics) where the housing costs are a lot cheaper and there are large numbers of ready to occupy properties, the down sides theres no more employment oportunity and any rioting will be well away from the games, and that mgic figure of 26k per anum cash income will be the driving force behind it all.

Manchester is ideal - BBC - lefties, troublemakers, pc ethnics. Loads of employment for them because the free thinking employees in London draw the line at leaving their pay/expenses/fame to go and work for a living somewhere else. The BBC would then get the employees it deserves from the downtrodden ****** ***** (insert your own description) masses relocated from London because of GB's Olympics.

**Markintime** · 26-01-2012, 09:40

Originally Posted by ancienturion

Manchester is ideal - BBC - lefties, troublemakers, pc ethnics. Loads of employment for them because the free thinking employees in London draw the line at leaving their pay/expenses/fame to go and work for a living somewhere else. The BBC would then get the employees it deserves from the downtrodden ****** ***** (insert your own description) masses relocated from London because of GB's Olympics.

I was watching a documentary on Channel 4 last Tuesday at 2200. It showed what life was like on a typical Mancunian estate. A really fascinating insight and well worth a watch if you get the chance.

**sunami** · 26-01-2012, 09:53

Originally Posted by Markintime

I was watching a documentary on Channel 4 last Tuesday at 2200. It showed what life was like on a typical Mancunian estate. A really fascinating insight and well worth a watch if you get the chance.

The last time I was in that shit-hole was over 25yrs ago. We'd been to a dojo at a leisure centre in Moss Side & when we came out I caught a couple of dusky types trying to remove the 4 into 1 from my bike.

**nanotm** · 26-01-2012, 09:54

Originally Posted by Markintime

I was watching a documentary on Channel 4 last Tuesday at 2200. It showed what life was like on a typical Mancunian estate. A really fascinating insight and well worth a watch if you get the chance.

i spent some time in one of the lesser estates a few years back visiting familly, we cut our trip short due ot the area, half the houses have metal shutters on windows and doors rather like they do in newcastel under lyme, proper shitholes where the chavs all walk around tooled up its amazing the place isnt a complete no go zone, i thinnk throwing all the uneployed from londinium to that area would be a fantastic way of allowing nature to take its course and reduce some of the surplus populations, all those gangs in one place would be fucking brill.... and as a bonus htey might just manage to take out the jezzer show studios (not the people) as the violence expands and the caos takes hold, its not liek they have the option of using water cannons or sending in the troops to control things (one is against there human rights the other is too small a force to be any use or deployed)

hell a beter idea would be to tell fished that a sudden influx of welfare bludgers north of the wall would be a bonus in terms of attempting ot get into europe as a seperate nation, then when we gift them there independance we loose extra's and save a fortune

**Markintime** · 26-01-2012, 09:56

Originally Posted by nanotm

no there designed ot move all the troublesome ethnics out of London to places like Manchester (a long way from the olympics) where the housing costs are a lot cheaper and there are large numbers of ready to occupy properties, the down sides theres no more employment oportunity and any rioting will be well away from the games, and that mgic figure of 26k per anum cash income will be the driving force behind it all.

Let that be a warning to you younger members - don't do drugs.