Colin M Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Dancing in a nightclub is comfortably equal, if not greater, in the attention-seeking stakes than taking shots. In what sense? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
port-ton Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Dancing in a nightclub is comfortably equal, if not greater, in the attention-seeking stakes than taking shots. I take shots in a nightclub because they're the only thing that gets me drunk. I don't start my attention seeking until i start dancing like a cross between a drunken Michael Jackson/ Freddie Mercury/ Barney the Dinosaur/ Granddad at a wedding. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullywee Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 the point of a nightclub, other than drinking later than usual in an establishment with pals, is to pick up someone of the opposite sex (or same sex if you want). to do this you need their attention. shots get you to a stage of drunkness where the actions required to gain someone's attention seem ok. it may be wanky, but it's necessary. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisa Cuddy Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Again with the generalisations. Oh, be quiet! When it comes to this kind of thing, how can you work on anything other than a generalisation though? All systems, surely, need to be based on what fits best for the majority, as there is never going to be one system that will cover everyone and every situation. Unfortunately, there's always going to be someone making out like a bandit and someone getting unfairly punished. Another point I would make is that giving someone who is looking for a job a reason to get up in the morning is beneficial also to mental health. You often find people that are out of work and have no useful occupation can end up depressed, which causes a vicious cycle of being too ill to work, which makes the depression worse. That boost of getting up maybe two days a week and doing something with their time, giving them the chance to interact with other people can be just the sort of encouragement that helps. Again, it's something that's not going to work for everyone, but the chances are, if you're sick enough that it's not going to help you, you'll be claiming an incapacity benefit rather than jobseekers. How many generalisations did I manage there? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 the point of a nightclub, other than drinking later than usual in an establishment with pals, is to pick up someone of the opposite sex (or same sex if you want). to do this you need their attention. shots get you to a stage of drunkness where the actions required to gain someone's attention seem ok. it may be wanky, but it's necessary. There are plenty people who go to clubs for no real reason other than they like the music and like to dance to it. It depends on the club, really. I've done plenty dancing that I'd rather nobody could see 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 They would be perfectly entitled to some support. Would they? If they were effectively "voluntarily unemployed" I'd have thought not. i.e. if they got support they would also have to show they were actively seeking employment as well? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 the point of a nightclub, other than drinking later than usual in an establishment with pals, is to pick up someone of the opposite sex (or same sex if you want). to do this you need their attention. shots get you to a stage of drunkness where the actions required to gain someone's attention seem ok. it may be wanky, but it's necessary. Do people who aren't single not go to nightclubs? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 In what sense? Unless you're one of those groups who dance in the unbreakable all male circle formation, normally drinking the crap pints from behind the bar, then one of the main points of reference in just about any nightclub is interaction with the opposite sex. That's the primary purpose of the dancefloor. Attention-seeking. Those in the male-circle formation are the minority in the same way that there are people who drink shots because they just happen to like the drink and don't make a fuss about it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 "If you are a housewife and haven't worked for an employer in a significant period of time, you won't be able to claim unemployment benefits for yourself. However, your unemployed spouse may be able to claim you as a dependent and receive additional benefits for your family. If you are currently receiving unemployment benefits you should ensure that your homemaking duties do not interfere with your job search or the ability to take new employment." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Unless you're one of those groups who dance in the unbreakable all male circle formation, normally drinking the crap pints from behind the bar, then one of the main points of reference in just about any nightclub is interaction with the opposite sex. That's the primary purpose of the dancefloor. Attention-seeking. Those in the male-circle formation are the minority in the same way that there are people who drink shots because they just happen to like the drink and don't make a fuss about it. Again with the generalisations 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 There are plenty people who go to clubs for no real reason other than they like the music and like to dance to it. It depends on the club, really. See above, plenty of people like to drink shots because they happen to like the taste. And of course, the question remains as to why that club is the environment for dancing, as opposed to I dunno, dancing in a pub when the same song comes on. I've done plenty dancing that I'd rather nobody could see Haven't we all, some of that though has been misguided attempts to pull though. Would they? If they were effectively "voluntarily unemployed" I'd have thought not. i.e. if they got support they would also have to show they were actively seeking employment as well? It seems fairly easy to evade the 'actively seeking' point though. Pop down to the Job Centre on a few choice hours, get through the regular meetings. It'd arguably be easier if you started pre-family in a more established, niche occupation, you could claim to be looking for jobs in the same field, with the demand for experience. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Again with the generalisations The difference is, Mrs M is advocating a reform of the welfare system, I'm contesting the relative attention-seeking factor of club activities. As someone who frequently dances horrendously in said establishment and takes shots, I'm taking no moral stance either way. Or advocating change. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 "If you are a housewife and haven't worked for an employer in a significant period of time, you won't be able to claim unemployment benefits for yourself. How will they be able to define that though? It's not compulsory for people to sign on, nor to work, the onus seems dependent on the person in question letting slip. For all they know she could have been living from the bank of mum and dad for years, a slightly older version of Ad Lib. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisa Cuddy Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Would they? If they were effectively "voluntarily unemployed" I'd have thought not. i.e. if they got support they would also have to show they were actively seeking employment as well? "If you are a housewife and haven't worked for an employer in a significant period of time, you won't be able to claim unemployment benefits for yourself. However, your unemployed spouse may be able to claim you as a dependent and receive additional benefits for your family. If you are currently receiving unemployment benefits you should ensure that your homemaking duties do not interfere with your job search or the ability to take new employment." Single parents certainly seem to be able to claim Income Support, rather than Jobseekers Allowance, so don't have to show that they are looking for work. For two-parent families, I'm not really sure what happens. If one parent is in work and the other stays at home, it would depend on the family income whether or not they'd qualify for IS, kind of as a "top-up". If both are out of work for no good reason, one would need to claim Jobseekers for him/herself, and I think IS on top of that for dependents. My only issue with stay-at-home-parents and IS is that there is the problem of childcare should they return to work. It's bloody expensive. Were my son in full time, it would cost around £500 a month at his current nursery. When he turns 3, I think there is a form of childcare scheme whereby you get vouchers which would cover a part-time nursery place, and then of course when he's 5, he'll be in school full time. What schools call full tiime and what employers call full time tend to be two different things though and so without the help of family, friends or neighbours, or the extra cost of after-school care, a parent can be limited to part-time work, within school hours, which also limits potential earnings. I don't really know what my solution to that would be if I'm honest. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 See above, plenty of people like to drink shots because they happen to like the taste. And of course, the question remains as to why that club is the environment for dancing, as opposed to I dunno, dancing in a pub when the same song comes on. Post acid house (arguably post disco) there is a culture of "clubbing" that is about more than the traditional social elements of the nightclub, for many the whole purpose of going to a club is to enjoy the music and to dance to it. The answer to the question posed is that pubs don't tend to cater for this culture, musically, to the same extent (if at all). Not that these places don't also involve a large degree of social interaction, attention seeking and people being arseholes, but there are many where people go specifically with the intention of "losing themselves" in the music/environment - this implies reaching the point where they don't care about anyone around them. Losing your inhibitions (ie where alcohol/drugs come into play) is often about being able to enjoy yourself without being self-concious about any attention that may be drawn to yourself. Obviously if we're talking about going to the Garage and tanking Jaeger Bombs and then trying to trick young freshers into a quick fumble then none of the above applies 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 How will they be able to define that though? It's not compulsory for people to sign on, nor to work, the onus seems dependent on the person in question letting slip. For all they know she could have been living from the bank of mum and dad for years, a slightly older version of Ad Lib. Your tedious jibe aside, how is it remotely difficult to determine whether someone has been unemployed for a significant length of time? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullywee Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Do people who aren't single not go to nightclubs? of course they do, and in that case they stick to the main point of just drinking with pals. shots might be wanky, but i enjoy being drunk and they are a quick way to reach this enlightened state. anyone who stands there scowling as a few people take shots at the bar needs to lighten up a bit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Single parents certainly seem to be able to claim Income Support, rather than Jobseekers Allowance, so don't have to show that they are looking for work. For two-parent families, I'm not really sure what happens. If one parent is in work and the other stays at home, it would depend on the family income whether or not they'd qualify for IS, kind of as a "top-up". If both are out of work for no good reason, one would need to claim Jobseekers for him/herself, and I think IS on top of that for dependents. My only issue with stay-at-home-parents and IS is that there is the problem of childcare should they return to work. It's bloody expensive. Were my son in full time, it would cost around £500 a month at his current nursery. When he turns 3, I think there is a form of childcare scheme whereby you get vouchers which would cover a part-time nursery place, and then of course when he's 5, he'll be in school full time. What schools call full tiime and what employers call full time tend to be two different things though and so without the help of family, friends or neighbours, or the extra cost of after-school care, a parent can be limited to part-time work, within school hours, which also limits potential earnings. I don't really know what my solution to that would be if I'm honest. Free nursery places are 4 sessions a week. Sessions, IIRC, are 9.30 to 1230 and something like 1.30 to 4.30. If you want your child to go earlier or stay later then, as you say, you have to pay. Of course, childcare expense isnt really an issue for a lot of single mothers claiming child tax credits 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Your tedious jibe aside, how is it remotely difficult to determine whether someone has been unemployed for a significant length of time? It is the 'housewife' element that is difficult to determine. In fact, as such a subjective (and arguably, strongly outdated term) I'd be surprised if that could be given much emphasis at all. It's not the fucking 1950s, families have different spells of emphasis on employment and greater flexibility. And of course when it comes to the 'actively seeking employment' part of benefits, there are plenty of means (and better ones) than going to the Job Centre. He/she could pop onto the likes of Gumtree each and every day, apply for x amount of jobs and receive hee-haw feedback. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uni Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Despite today's news that Scholes retired I do not think he is a legend nor a good player. He was a no good thug who assaulted players and couldn't tackle at all, sounds exactly like Roy Keane to me... -2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.