'I only survive through Cash Converters': Carer mum who can't afford a bed reveals desperate poverty

by Guest Wed Jul 29, 2015 11:49 pm

First topic message reminder :

The documentary goes behind the scenes of the staff and customers, some who are struggling to rub two pennies together

It's a heartbreaking moment for a Cash Converters customer who admits that she and her son are sleeping on an airbed because he can no longer make it upstairs.

Elaine is a full-time carer for 27-year-old Mark, who suffers from the rare degenerative condition Lowe's Syndrome, and she regularly visits the Cash Converter store in Glasgow to try and provide much needed funds to survive.

In the BBC show which goes behind the scenes of the staff and customers of the Renfield Street second-hand trading store in Glasgow, Elaine is a regular customer.

The staff of the store say of one of their favourite customers: "She's a fantastic woman, I've known her for so long."

A £65-a-week carer allowance is not enough for Elaine and her family to survive on, so she scrapes together anything she can including anything she can sell at Cash Converters.

'I only survive through Cash Converters': Carer mum who can't afford a bed reveals desperate poverty - Page 2 Cashing-In-2

'I only survive through Cash Converters': Carer mum who can't afford a bed reveals desperate poverty - Page 2 Cashing-In-2

Mark has a life expectancy of just 30 years old

Her son Mark's condition carries a life expectancy of just 30 years and Elaine says that the recent government cuts have greatly affected her job as her son's full-time carer.

She explains: "We're struggling and I would say we're not getting the help that we need. The help we need is just not there.

"We can't walk away because we're the carers and we have no choice."

In the rest of the show the staff are faced with a shoplifter who swipes a flat-screen television before a quick thinking member of staff runs after the thief to retrieve the expensive item.

The staff also have to stall a phone thief who tries to cash in on a stolen mobile so the police can question the customer.

It's also terrible news for one family who suffer a tragic loss and have to pawn their possessions to afford to pay for a funeral for their stillborn son.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/i-only-survive-through-cash-6117957

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:30 am

victorismyhero wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:It's really Sassy who has an agenda here because she hasn't put it in context. For example, Elaine isn't sleeping on an airbed because she's poor, it's because her son can't get up the stairs to where the real beds actually are.

was that made clear in the program.....or is that another factlet "left for you to find out"?

think about it...becasue THAT matters...

Well she said he can't go up the stairs where the bedrooms are. Tbf, Sassy's quote didn't mention not being able to afford a bed, it just said what I just said.

However, it's not really relevant, so why was it mentioned at all? To tug at your heart strings and make you think that she's too poor to buy a bed, yes? In fact, that's what the thread title said.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:31 am

victorismyhero wrote:My view is quite open

IF the story is as it appears on first sight then something is very very wrong

IF however it isnt as ar first sight it appears then what is the hidden agenda in not showing the whole of the facts around it

why show "half truths" and "convenient fiction" together as one and the same????

ask your self THAT....

Have you actually watched the programme?

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:34 am

Elaine herself hasn't actually complained about the cost of living, she's complaining about the lack of support services. She hasn't said she can't afford a bed. She has quite a large house full of stuff, and two cats which cost money. It's others who are putting the spin in this story.

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:34 am

Part thereof....

As I said...I'm very suspicious of the "motive" ...agenda...of the program makers...beyond that of merely "selling the program"

Its no more reality than your grip on reality .....

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:36 am

Raggamuffin wrote:Elaine herself hasn't actually complained about the cost of living, she's complaining about the lack of support services. She hasn't said she can't afford a bed. She has quite a large house full of stuff, and two cats which cost money. It's others who are putting the spin in this story.

ahh...again

sorry mate you are unwaged...gotta put your pets down....(isnt that what you are implying...that the unwaged shouldnt even be allowed pets???)

the spin is intended to happen by the program makers

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:38 am

victorismyhero wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:Elaine herself hasn't actually complained about the cost of living, she's complaining about the lack of support services. She hasn't said she can't afford a bed. She has quite a large house full of stuff, and two cats which cost money. It's others who are putting the spin in this story.

ahh...again

sorry mate you are unwaged...gotta put your pets down....(isnt that what you are implying...that the unwaged shouldnt even be allowed pets???)

the spin is intended to happen by the program makers

You're putting words into my mouth again. If someone is really on the breadline, they wouldn't be able to afford to feed cats.

In the voiceover, it says that Elaine is still struggling on carer's allowance - that's misleading because it implies that's all they get, which is clearly not the case.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:39 am

victorismyhero wrote:Part thereof....

As I said...I'm very suspicious of the "motive" ...agenda...of the program makers...beyond that of merely "selling the program"

Its no more reality than your grip on reality .....

Well tell that to Sassy - she's the one who started this thread and drew attention to it. She didn't actually comment herself of course - just copied a load of stuff from a newspaper. Perhaps she could clarify what her stance is, and then you can get all outraged at her - not.

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:48 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:

ahh...again

sorry mate you are unwaged...gotta put your pets down....(isnt that what you are implying...that the unwaged shouldnt even be allowed pets???)

the spin is intended to happen by the program makers

You're putting words into my mouth again. If someone is really on the breadline, they wouldn't be able to afford to feed cats.

fallacious argument......and an argument of hate.....just WHAT should the unwaged be "allowed" to have in your tory utopia...
I mean we know what you would NOT let them have

pets
kids
tv's
computers (even though job centers expect you to have one)
bikes and toys for the kids
a mobile phone (even though job centers expect you to have one)
transport (except to the job center and back perhaps...oh no...wait they can walk)
a decent diet (even though you demand they "eat healthy")
decent new clothes
smokes
a beer or two
sex...since that carries always the risk of pregnancy

and ALL this DESPITE the fact that the VAST BULK of them are in the situation they are through NO FAULT of their own.

so tell me...what CAN they have out of lifes little pleasures???

In the voiceover, it says that Elaine is still struggling on carer's allowance - that's misleading because it implies that's all they get, which is clearly not the case.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:50 am

The point is that there's no point bleating that people can't afford to eat if they can afford TVs, cats, computers, toys, bikes, mobile phones, new clothes, fags, and beer - is there?

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:03 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:The point is that there's no point bleating that people can't afford to eat if they can afford TVs, cats, computers, toys, bikes, mobile phones, new clothes, fags, and beer - is there?

Yes there is...

because the reason they are not in reciept of a decnt wage is the abject failure of govt ...over many years ...of all shades....

I take the point that someone on benefits should not be "better off than someone working"

HOWEVER

YOU and TOMMY look at the problem "upside down"

the problem isnt that benefits are too high....its that wages (in the lower 1/3rd) are far too low.....and thats govt bowing down to the greedy corporate interests....

the anomalies should of course be investigated (the odd ones who are getting stupid money)
and in general benefits should pay no more than the lowest working wage in the area 40 miles around the person
and yes "money management" should be taught and encouraged...

but

at the same time minimum wage should be (if you accept that minimum wages are a good idea .....I'm not convinced.....I think theres a better way) at least £10 /hr out side london...

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:09 pm

victorismyhero wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:The point is that there's no point bleating that people can't afford to eat if they can afford TVs, cats, computers, toys, bikes, mobile phones, new clothes, fags, and beer - is there?

Yes there is...

because the reason they are not in reciept of a decnt wage is the abject failure of govt ...over many years ...of all shades....

I take the point that someone on benefits should not be "better off than someone working"

HOWEVER

YOU and TOMMY look at the problem "upside down"

the problem isnt that benefits are too high....its that wages (in the lower 1/3rd) are far too low.....and thats govt bowing down to the greedy corporate interests....

the anomalies should of course be investigated (the odd ones who are getting stupid money)
and in general benefits should pay no more than the lowest working wage in the area 40 miles around the person
and yes "money management" should be taught and encouraged...

but

at the same time minimum wage should be (if you accept that minimum wages are a good idea .....I'm not convinced.....I think theres a better way) at least £10 /hr out side london...

The Government is upping the minimum wage quite a lot, and people are still complaining. If you suddenly raise it to £10, that would mean that some businesses couldn't afford to employ as many people, and then you and others would moan about unemployment again, and the people who do have a job would moan that they're overworked and say they're too stressed to work.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:09 pm

And yes, I'm in favour of a minimum wage. Without it, some companies would pay even less than they already do.

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:50 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:And yes, I'm in favour of a minimum wage. Without it, some companies would pay even less than they already do.

there is a better way..... 'I only survive through Cash Converters': Carer mum who can't afford a bed reveals desperate poverty - Page 2 202592697

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:52 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:

Yes there is...

because the reason they are not in reciept of a decnt wage is the abject failure of govt ...over many years ...of all shades....

I take the point that someone on benefits should not be "better off than someone working"

HOWEVER

YOU and TOMMY look at the problem "upside down"

the problem isnt that benefits are too high....its that wages (in the lower 1/3rd) are far too low.....and thats govt bowing down to the greedy corporate interests....

the anomalies should of course be investigated (the odd ones who are getting stupid money)
and in general benefits should pay no more than the lowest working wage in the area 40 miles around the person
and yes "money management" should be taught and encouraged...

but

at the same time minimum wage should be (if you accept that minimum wages are a good idea .....I'm not convinced.....I think theres a better way) at least £10 /hr out side london...

The Government is upping the minimum wage quite a lot, and people are still complaining. If you suddenly raise it to £10, that would mean that some businesses couldn't afford to employ as many people, and then you and others would moan about unemployment again, and the people who do have a job would moan that they're overworked and say they're too stressed to work.

that ...is the govts problem...which they caused in the first place....and is historical.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:54 pm

victorismyhero wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

The Government is upping the minimum wage quite a lot, and people are still complaining. If you suddenly raise it to £10, that would mean that some businesses couldn't afford to employ as many people, and then you and others would moan about unemployment again, and the people who do have a job would moan that they're overworked and say they're too stressed to work.

that ...is the govts problem...which they caused in the first place....and is historical.

How did the Government cause it?

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:55 pm

victorismyhero wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:And yes, I'm in favour of a minimum wage. Without it, some companies would pay even less than they already do.

there is a better way.....

Like what?

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 1:09 pm

Here's an interesting article about Cash Converters. It's from a few years ago.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2087290/Cash-Converters-buys-second-hand-goods-rock-prices-adds-huge-mark-ups-selling-on.html

In some instances the company sells products on for more than double the cost it paid to sellers who are seeking help after Christmas as the country threatens to fall back into recession.

So people are broke after Christmas. Whose fault is that? Their own fault of course. If they didn't go mad and spend money on tons of stuff, they wouldn't be broke.

Cash Converters buy stuff and sell it at a profit. Well wow! Are they supposed to sell it at a loss? If the person selling the stuff isn't happy with the price they're getting, they're free to go elsewhere and sell it, or sell it themselves.

You can pawn stuff there, and pay the price you got for the item, plus a certain percentage. Assuming that the customer knows this in advance, why is it anyone else's fault that they have to pay extra to get their goods back?

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:00 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:Here's an interesting article about Cash Converters. It's from a few years ago.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2087290/Cash-Converters-buys-second-hand-goods-rock-prices-adds-huge-mark-ups-selling-on.html

In some instances the company sells products on for more than double the cost it paid to sellers who are seeking help after Christmas as the country threatens to fall back into recession.

So people are broke after Christmas. Whose fault is that? Their own fault of course. If they didn't go mad and spend money on tons of stuff, they wouldn't be broke.

now that we can agree on......

Cash Converters buy stuff and sell it at a profit. Well wow! Are they supposed to sell it at a loss? If the person selling the stuff isn't happy with the price they're getting, they're free to go elsewhere and sell it, or sell it themselves.

agreed to an extent, however ther is a clear line between profit and profiteering

You can pawn stuff there, and pay the price you got for the item, plus a certain percentage. Assuming that the customer knows this in advance, why is it anyone else's fault that they have to pay extra to get their goods back?

again some agreement, however the "certain percentage" is excessive, some control is needed....

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:02 pm

Isn't it better to let the customers decide for themselves Victor? If they don't like the profit margins, or the percentage they have to pay to get their stuff back, they can go elsewhere. If enough people don't like it, Cash Converters would go bust or change the way they work.

by captain Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:07 pm

victorismyhero wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

You're putting words into my mouth again. If someone is really on the breadline, they wouldn't be able to afford to feed cats.

fallacious argument......and an argument of hate.....just WHAT should the unwaged be "allowed" to have in your tory utopia...
I mean we know what you would NOT let them have

pets
kids
tv's
computers (even though job centers expect you to have one)
bikes and toys for the kids
a mobile phone (even though job centers expect you to have one)
transport (except to the job center and back perhaps...oh no...wait they can walk)
a decent diet (even though you demand they "eat healthy")
decent new clothes
smokes
a beer or two
sex...since that carries always the risk of pregnancy

and ALL this DESPITE the fact that the VAST BULK of them are in the situation they are through NO FAULT of their own.

so tell me...what CAN they have out of lifes little pleasures???

In the voiceover, it says that Elaine is still struggling on carer's allowance - that's misleading because it implies that's all they get, which is clearly not the case.

"We can't walk away because we're the carers and we have no choice."

This is incredibly sad. Most carers genuinely care and I should think especially family, so they are not ripping the system off because they are doing a job for very little money.
Animals are healing and a great comfort for anyone lonely or suffering an illness not to mention that a human that can relate too these creatures other than the human beings. Sharing a little of our food is well worth it. Sad for those that can't see this.

By the way this lack of feeling for other peoples dire situations has to be tragic for the human affected as it is after all a form of mental disease, so I must admit feel sorry for those suffering from these conditions. It must be horrendous living with such hatred day in and day out. Just look at Katie Hopkins, she has serious mental problems and is used like a piece of dead meat put on show. Rolling Eyes

It is worrying because someone could harm her one day, for all her vile mentally screwed up opinions.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:13 pm

captainJane wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:

"We can't walk away because we're the carers and we have no choice."

This is incredibly sad. Most carers genuinely care and I should think especially family, so they are not ripping the system off because they are doing a job for very little money.
Animals are healing and a great comfort for anyone lonely or suffering an illness not to mention that a human that can relate too these creatures other than the human beings. Sharing a little of our food is well worth it. Sad for those that can't see this.

By the way this lack of feeling for other peoples dire situations has to be tragic for the human affected as it is after all a form of mental disease, so I must admit feel sorry for those suffering from these conditions. It must be horrendous living with such hatred day in and day out. Just look at Katie Hopkins, she has serious mental problems and is used like a piece of dead meat put on show. It is worrying because someone could harm her one day, for all her vile mentally screwed up opinions.

I see you've swallowed Victor's spin on what I said. I didn't say people shouldn't have cats, I said that they can't be that broke if they do. I don't think that lady is broke tbh - they will get a lot more than carer's allowance. I think what she probably needed is some practical help re beds, and also some emotional support. Anyway, they're in a new flat now, so no airbed is required.

Do you know who I feel sorry for? Those who have awful jobs like the kind where they sit in a cubicle phoning people up who don't want to talk to them. They can apply for other jobs, but in the meantime they are trapped. The lady has no choice other than to be a carer because he's her son. I daresay they manage to have some fun together.

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:32 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:£65 a week... plus how much in other benefits/income...?

Sounds more like loads of things weighed in to cash cons on buy back and spending too much money on interest charges.

Well first of all, the womans Carers Allowance is £62.10 per week, topped up with Income support to give her a total of £107 per week.

Then her son would be claiming ESA plus DLA of both the care and mobility components, a total of at least £200 per week,

So all in all, they have over £300 per week to keep them.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:34 pm

Christie wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:£65 a week... plus how much in other benefits/income...?

Sounds more like loads of things weighed in to cash cons on buy back and spending too much money on interest charges.

Well first of all, the womans Carers Allowance is £62.10 per week, topped up with Income support to give her a total of £107 per week.

Then her son would be claiming ESA plus DLA of both the care and mobility components, a total of at least £200 per week,

So all in all, they have over £300 per week to keep them.

They would also get rent paid no doubt.

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:36 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Christie wrote:

Well first of all, the womans Carers Allowance is £62.10 per week, topped up with Income support to give her a total of £107 per week.

Then her son would be claiming ESA plus DLA of both the care and mobility components, a total of at least £200 per week,

So all in all, they have over £300 per week to keep them.

They would also get rent paid no doubt.

Very much so, they would get housing benefit on top of that.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:55 pm

Loads of money then really.

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:15 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
captainJane wrote:

"We can't walk away because we're the carers and we have no choice."

This is incredibly sad. Most carers genuinely care and I should think especially family, so they are not ripping the system off because they are doing a job for very little money.
Animals are healing and a great comfort for anyone lonely or suffering an illness not to mention that a human that can relate too these creatures other than the human beings. Sharing a little of our food is well worth it. Sad for those that can't see this.

By the way this lack of feeling for other peoples dire situations has to be tragic for the human affected as it is after all a form of mental disease, so I must admit feel sorry for those suffering from these conditions. It must be horrendous living with such hatred day in and day out. Just look at Katie Hopkins, she has serious mental problems and is used like a piece of dead meat put on show. It is worrying because someone could harm her one day, for all her vile mentally screwed up opinions.

I see you've swallowed Victor's spin on what I said. I didn't say people shouldn't have cats, I said that they can't be that broke if they do. I don't think that lady is broke tbh - they will get a lot more than carer's allowance. I think what she probably needed is some practical help re beds, and also some emotional support. Anyway, they're in a new flat now, so no airbed is required.

Do you know who I feel sorry for? Those who have awful jobs like the kind where they sit in a cubicle phoning people up who don't want to talk to them. They can apply for other jobs, but in the meantime they are trapped. The lady has no choice other than to be a carer because he's her son. I daresay they manage to have some fun together.

what disingenious twaddle

"I didn't say he cant be gay...I just said he cant have equal rights if he is"

" I didnt say she should not be allowed kids and be single I just said she's a whore for doing it"

" i didnt say he cant be a jew, I just said he should expect whats comming to him"

????do the right wing REALLY think like THIS FFS ??????

I didnt say....but....... Rolling Eyes

the "secret speech of the hen house"

here ...ethel I'm not saying that pam at desk 5 is shagging the boss BUT.............

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:19 pm

translation....

hen house

that place that stiil exists in some bigish businesses, which used to be known as "the typing pool"

oh and this was told me by someone that works in one...

she reckoned all you hear all day is the "cluck cluck cluck" of people that cant mind their own and all have a

"I'm not saying (whatever) but"

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:24 pm

victorismyhero wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

I see you've swallowed Victor's spin on what I said. I didn't say people shouldn't have cats, I said that they can't be that broke if they do. I don't think that lady is broke tbh - they will get a lot more than carer's allowance. I think what she probably needed is some practical help re beds, and also some emotional support. Anyway, they're in a new flat now, so no airbed is required.

Do you know who I feel sorry for? Those who have awful jobs like the kind where they sit in a cubicle phoning people up who don't want to talk to them. They can apply for other jobs, but in the meantime they are trapped. The lady has no choice other than to be a carer because he's her son. I daresay they manage to have some fun together.

what disingenious twaddle

"I didn't say he cant be gay...I just said he cant have equal rights if he is"

" I didnt say she should not be allowed kids and be single I just said she's a whore for doing it"

" i didnt say he cant be a jew, I just said he should expect whats comming to him"

????do the right wing REALLY think like THIS FFS ??????

I didnt say....but.......

the "secret speech of the hen house"

here ...ethel I'm not saying that pam at desk 5 is shagging the boss BUT.............

I didn't say any of those things. Really Victor, are you on drugs? The things you come out with ...

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:25 pm

victorismyhero wrote:translation....

hen house

that place that stiil exists in some bigish businesses, which used to be known as "the typing pool"

oh and this was told me by someone that works in one...

she reckoned all you hear all day is the "cluck cluck cluck" of people that cant mind their own and all have a

"I'm not saying (whatever) but"

That wouldn't be a sexist post now would it Victor?

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:31 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:translation....

hen house

that place that stiil exists in some bigish businesses, which used to be known as "the typing pool"

oh and this was told me by someone that works in one...

she reckoned all you hear all day is the "cluck cluck cluck" of people that cant mind their own and all have a

"I'm not saying (whatever) but"

That wouldn't be a sexist post now would it Victor?

seeing as how that was related to me by a girl who worked in one I can hardly see its sexist

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:39 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:

what disingenious twaddle

"I didn't say he cant be gay...I just said he cant have equal rights if he is"

" I didnt say she should not be allowed kids and be single I just said she's a whore for doing it"

" i didnt say he cant be a jew, I just said he should expect whats comming to him"

????do the right wing REALLY think like THIS FFS ??????

I didnt say....but.......

the "secret speech of the hen house"

here ...ethel I'm not saying that pam at desk 5 is shagging the boss BUT.............

I didn't say any of those things. Really Victor, are you on drugs? The things you come out with ...

and you are thus stupid...
I didnt claim you said those things

they are examples of the type of thinking that goes round in folks tiny minds when they embark on the
"i'm not saying whatever BUT"

to indulge in such thoughts is moral cowardice

your point of "I didn't say people shouldn't have cats, I said that they can't be that broke if they do."

is exactly the same....

you are in fact saying that you are too cowardly to come straight out and say the unwaged shouldnt have pets, so instead you imply it

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:54 pm

victorismyhero wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

I didn't say any of those things. Really Victor, are you on drugs? The things you come out with ...

and you are thus stupid...
I didnt claim you said those things

they are examples of the type of thinking that goes round in folks tiny minds when they embark on the
"i'm not saying whatever BUT"

to indulge in such thoughts is moral cowardice

your point of "I didn't say people shouldn't have cats, I said that they can't be that broke if they do."

is exactly the same....

you are in fact saying that you are too cowardly to come straight out and say the unwaged shouldnt have pets, so instead you imply it

It's not exactly the same - in fact it's nothing like the same thing. You do have this unfortunate habit of getting things wrong, and putting words into people's mouths. Maybe all those things you said are what you think, and you're just projecting ...

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:57 pm

I will say though that I get tired of hearing about all these "poor" people who get their rent paid, their living expenses paid, who have thousands spent on them for special equipment or alterations to their houses, and then people like you still whine that not enough is spent on them.

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 5:11 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:

and you are thus stupid...
I didnt claim you said those things

they are examples of the type of thinking that goes round in folks tiny minds when they embark on the
"i'm not saying whatever BUT"

to indulge in such thoughts is moral cowardice

your point of "I didn't say people shouldn't have cats, I said that they can't be that broke if they do."

is exactly the same....

you are in fact saying that you are too cowardly to come straight out and say the unwaged shouldnt have pets, so instead you imply it

It's not exactly the same - in fact it's nothing like the same thing. You do have this unfortunate habit of getting things wrong, and putting words into people's mouths. Maybe all those things you said are what you think, and you're just projecting ...

thats called being in denial....

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 5:16 pm

victorismyhero wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

It's not exactly the same - in fact it's nothing like the same thing. You do have this unfortunate habit of getting things wrong, and putting words into people's mouths. Maybe all those things you said are what you think, and you're just projecting ...

thats called being in denial....

No, it's called knowing what I said, and what I meant. It's also about you trolling and pretending to be a "leftie" when all the time you're just as self-serving as the rich people you whinge on about.

Oh, and if you want to complain about someone having a go about Jews, try Sassy - she doesn't like them much.

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 6:34 pm

OFGS, thought you had more brains than Didge, obviously not. I have absolutely nothing against Jews and have been corresponding with the Jewish peace groups in Israel for about 30 years. I have a huge beef with the actions of the Israeli government and fundamentalist Zionist settlers living in illegal settlements built on legally owned Palestinian land and terrorising Palestinians, and so do millions of Jews around the world, including holocaust survivors, who are in the forefront of the protests against Zionists.

And no, you didn't say the words that Victor said, what he was pointing out was that the mindset of what you actually have been saying leads to that, just slightly further down the path.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 6:47 pm

sassy wrote:OFGS, thought you had more brains than Didge, obviously not. I have absolutely nothing against Jews and have been corresponding with the Jewish peace groups in Israel for about 30 years. I have a huge beef with the actions of the Israeli government and fundamentalist Zionist settlers living in illegal settlements built on legally owned Palestinian land and terrorising Palestinians, and so do millions of Jews around the world, including holocaust survivors, who are in the forefront of the protests against Zionists.

And no, you didn't say the words that Victor said, what he was pointing out was that the mindset of what you actually have been saying leads to that, just slightly further down the path.

So Victor tells me what I meant, and now you tell me what Victor meant. You lefties certainly have faith in your power to read minds don't you?

So what I said about owning cats leads to people saying that Jews should expect what's coming to them? I would say that your mindset is more likely to lead to that actually.

You see how we can play this game for as long as you want? That's all it is to you and Victor - a game to see how well you can convince others that you're virtuous and "caring". Wink

by eddie Thu Jul 30, 2015 7:20 pm

victorismyhero wrote:sigh ...cant you read

the con is

the woman clearly isnt ONLY going to get £65/week as has been said

however

the program runs with that (lie...con...)

there is the "more " for the public to find out

so then we have the "public" being shown that she is a con

and the public (well you at leats) are then going to apply the same reasoning to ALL claimants

and it works very well....YOU prove it time after time.....

as posted above

"AND

I would not be surprised to find that in fact this whole thing is going to be shown a twisted story.

I would not be surprised to find out that in fact this woman is NOT what she appears

a "false flag job"

lets face it the BEEB and its govt masters know well that anyone will be able to "find out some "back ground"

so lets show her pleading poverty...the "public will find out its a con"

HEY LOOK EVERYONE shes a con...just like ALL the others out there

those in true povery rarely advertise the fact....

this is just more of the tory "hate the poor propaganda"

tricksy twisters.....

and ragga and tommy will dive head first down the crapper to cling to it as proof the poor are "unworthy"

Actually Vic, most people will not go off and do their own detective work and realise anything is a con. Most people won't think this is a double bluff.
They will watch it, comment on it, drink tea and eat biscuits and go to bed and think no more of it.

I think you're giving too much credit to the ordinary Joe who watches TV to unwind more than anything else

by Ben Reilly Thu Jul 30, 2015 7:47 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:I will say though that I get tired of hearing about all these "poor" people who get their rent paid, their living expenses paid, who have thousands spent on them for special equipment or alterations to their houses, and then people like you still whine that not enough is spent on them.

I will say, then, that that's not the case in the U.S.

Extent to which taxes and transfer programs reduce the relative poverty rate, selected OECD countries, late 2000s
'I only survive through Cash Converters': Carer mum who can't afford a bed reveals desperate poverty - Page 2 Ib339-figureF.png

'I only survive through Cash Converters': Carer mum who can't afford a bed reveals desperate poverty - Page 2 Ib339-figureF.png

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 8:08 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:

thats called being in denial....

No, it's called knowing what I said, and what I meant. It's also about you trolling and pretending to be a "leftie" when all the time you're just as self-serving as the rich people you whinge on about.

since when have I been a "leftie" pfft

and self serving...example please...
you just cant take being called out.....

Oh, and if you want to complain about someone having a go about Jews, try Sassy - she doesn't like them much.

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 8:10 pm

eddie wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:sigh ...cant you read

the con is

the woman clearly isnt ONLY going to get £65/week as has been said

however

the program runs with that (lie...con...)

there is the "more " for the public to find out

so then we have the "public" being shown that she is a con

and the public (well you at leats) are then going to apply the same reasoning to ALL claimants

and it works very well....YOU prove it time after time.....

as posted above

"AND

I would not be surprised to find that in fact this whole thing is going to be shown a twisted story.

I would not be surprised to find out that in fact this woman is NOT what she appears

a "false flag job"

lets face it the BEEB and its govt masters know well that anyone will be able to "find out some "back ground"

so lets show her pleading poverty...the "public will find out its a con"

HEY LOOK EVERYONE shes a con...just like ALL the others out there

those in true povery rarely advertise the fact....

this is just more of the tory "hate the poor propaganda"

tricksy twisters.....

and ragga and tommy will dive head first down the crapper to cling to it as proof the poor are "unworthy"

Actually Vic, most people will not go off and do their own detective work and realise anything is a con. Most people won't think this is a double bluff.
They will watch it, comment on it, drink tea and eat biscuits and go to bed and think no more of it.

I think you're giving too much credit to the ordinary Joe who watches TV to unwind more than anything else

ordinary joe says BAAAAA ???????????????????????

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 8:12 pm

income support is a means tested benefit and is the amount the government estimates you need to live on

Carers Allowance is deducted from income support or any other benefit because its classed as and income so there is no net gain

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 8:22 pm

if an elderly person or disabled person was put in to local council care its would cost on average £399 a week

of cause we could just euthanize the elderly and disabled that would save money .....hold on a sec didn`t we win the war against Hitler ?

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 8:23 pm

Ragga

at 0:43

I saw this and thought of you
'I only survive through Cash Converters': Carer mum who can't afford a bed reveals desperate poverty - Page 2 3489511464

'I only survive through Cash Converters': Carer mum who can't afford a bed reveals desperate poverty - Page 2 3489511464

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 8:25 pm

Victor the troll loses again, and has to resort to silly videos. Laughing

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 8:35 pm

oooh its about "winning" for you is it, sad woman...

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 8:37 pm

oh and

since when have I been a "leftie" pfft

and self serving...example please...

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 30, 2015 8:44 pm

victorismyhero wrote:oooh its about "winning" for you is it, sad woman...

Well it's not difficult against a troll like you Victor. Cool

by Guest Thu Jul 30, 2015 8:58 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:oooh its about "winning" for you is it, sad woman...

Well it's not difficult against a troll like you Victor.

ah yes when in corner shout troll.....
oh and

since when have I been a "leftie" pfft

and self serving...example please...

by Tommy Monk Thu Jul 30, 2015 9:07 pm

It's funny to see the lefties constantly changing and twisting their arguments here.

Yes, JSA isn't a huge sum, and yes it isn't supposed to be either!

It is designed to provide a basic level of survival to those who don't work but can work and should work, for a relatively short period of time until they do get into work.

And if the claimant is really actually looking for work and prepared to take any type of work then they will get work.

The sad reality is that many of these people don't want to work and until recently have been able to pretend to look for work to the job centre and became long term unemployed.

Often doing little bits of cash work on the side to boost income as well as getting rent paid etc.

I am in favour of a system that provides for those short term unemployed while they get back into work... but the rest who have been playing the system must have stiffer rules applied to them for their behaviour to be forced into change.

This is a totally different subject to provisions for the genuine people who can't work because of illness of disability.

And the over generous hand outs to others who have children is a different subject again.

Those who genuinely can't work should be looked after better and those unemployed with kids should not be getting more than many working People.

Victor claims wages are too low but the reality is that costs of living are too high, having increased hugely and disproportionately And wages also suppressed because of mass immigration by labour!!!

by Sponsored content