General Politics Thread

[DrewDon]

[Miguel Sanchez]

13 hours ago, Baxter Parp said:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/04/liam-fox-meets-philippine-president-rodrigo-duterte

Dismay over Liam Fox's claim of 'shared values' with Duterte's brutal regime

Look who we're cuddling up to now that the EU aren't our best chums.

Fun fact: When you type "Liam Fox" into google, there are no suggestions for anything relating to the word "defence." I wonder how this happened, given he used to be the Defence Secretary. You'd think this would be somewhat notable and a reasonable suggestion to make to people googling Liam Fox. Yet no.

[Benjamin_Nevis]

10 minutes ago, Miguel Sanchez said:

Fun fact: When you type "Liam Fox" into google, there are no suggestions for anything relating to the word "defence." I wonder how this happened, given he used to be the Defence Secretary. You'd think this would be somewhat notable and a reasonable suggestion to make to people googling Liam Fox. Yet no.

Interesting. 

"Liam Fox c**t" yielded 386,000 results. 

[dogmc]

Just blame the English. It's always their fault. I mean it's not as if it could possibly be the fault of the SNP, left wing wastrels that are meant to be running Scotland.

Cant actually find a quote where someone is genuinely blaming 'the English' type post imo ^^^^

[Fide]

4 hours ago, jupe1407 said:

Interesting. 

"Liam Fox c**t" yielded 386,000 results. 

"Liam Fox useless w****r" gives 2,620,000 results.

[JamieThomas]

"Liam Fox pumped a dug" jumps into the lead with 2,790,000 results.

[Baxter Parp]

16 hours ago, strichener said:

Are you referring to the 50p or the other £384.60 per week that you conveniently omitted?

I didn't write the report, therefore I omitted nothing.

16 hours ago, strichener said:

Are your trying to justify someone not working for 9 years and subsequently having their benefits cut?  What period of time is acceptable to be out of work for whilst claiming the equivalent of the average wage (before statutory deductions)? 

I'm not trying to justify anything, you're trying to justify using one case to punish all benefit claimants.

16 hours ago, strichener said:

I really don't have sympathy for anyone that has decided to use the welfare system as their main source of income whilst being perfectly able to work.

Which is a complete irrelevance to the actual facts, cheers.

[Baxter Parp]

15 hours ago, Blue-Toon said:

Your answer was - "And £20,000 including rent food power clothes between two adults and four kids is peanuts".

I wouldn't say £20,000 is peanuts. You would need to earn almost £25,000 before tax to clear £20,000.

It's peanuts if you're trying to maintain a house, two adults and four kids. There's no way you can get away from that.

Also:

State benefits that are taxable

The most common benefits that you pay Income Tax on are:

• the State Pension
• Jobseeker’s Allowance
• Carer’s Allowance
• Employment and Support Allowance (contribution based)
• Incapacity Benefit (from the 29th week you get it)
• Bereavement Allowance
• pensions paid by the Industrial Death Benefit scheme
• Widowed Parent’s Allowance
• Widow’s pension

Edited April 6, 2017 by Baxter Parp

[Baxter Parp]

f**k me.

[strichener]

18 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

It's peanuts if you're trying to maintain a house, two adults and four kids. There's no way you can get away from that.

Also:

State benefits that are taxable

The most common benefits that you pay Income Tax on are:

• the State Pension
• Jobseeker’s Allowance
• Carer’s Allowance
• Employment and Support Allowance (contribution based)
• Incapacity Benefit (from the 29th week you get it)
• Bereavement Allowance
• pensions paid by the Industrial Death Benefit scheme
• Widowed Parent’s Allowance
• Widow’s pension

Talking of irrelevance.  You do know that the benefit cap only applies if you are getting universal credit and/or housing benefit?  Neither of these are taxable.

Given that people who receive DLA or PIP are exempt from the cap, it is more important than ever that these payments are made to those that need them.  Anyone that does not legitimately qualify for these payments should not be complaining about having an income that can exceed that of a working person in the same situation.

28 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

I didn't write the report, therefore I omitted nothing.

Yes, you clearly did in your commentary

29 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

I'm not trying to justify anything, you're trying to justify using one case to punish all benefit claimants.

Limiting the safety net of the welfare system at the existing levels is not punishing all benefit claimants.

30 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

Which is a complete irrelevance to the actual facts, cheers.

So the facts aren't that people on benefits could claim more than those in the same circumstances but who actually make the effort to go out an work?  This is completely relevant facts.

[doulikefish]

1 minute ago, Baxter Parp said:

f**k me.

Been raped and got knocked up?Here fill in this form

f**k me(but dont get me pregnant)

[Baxter Parp]

37 minutes ago, strichener said:

Given that people who receive DLA or PIP are exempt from the cap, it is more important than ever that these payments are made to those that need them.  Anyone that does not legitimately qualify for these payments should not be complaining about having an income that can exceed that of a working person in the same situation.

Having never argued for payments going to people who do not qualify this is quite irrelevant.  My argument is that it isn't much fucking money depending on circumstances.

37 minutes ago, strichener said:

Yes, you clearly did in your commentary

The only time 50p appears in my post is a cut and paste of the headline from the link which you clearly haven't read, dimwit.

39 minutes ago, strichener said:

Limiting the safety net of the welfare system at the existing levels is not punishing all benefit claimants.

You're trying to justify cuts to the benefits system based on one case where the claimant may be a cheat.  That punishes those in genuine need.

45 minutes ago, strichener said:

So the facts aren't that people on benefits could claim more than those in the same circumstances but who actually make the effort to go out an work? 

"Make the effort" is a phrase used to demonise claimants as lazy and feckless. There's no place for it in a civilised society.

[Baxter Parp]

2 hours ago, doulikefish said:

Been raped and got knocked up?Here fill in this form

f**k me(but dont get me pregnant)

Can't have the undeserving receiving benefits, right?

[Wee Willie]

1 hour ago, Baxter Parp said:

"Make the effort" is a phrase used to demonise claimants as lazy and feckless. There's no place for it in a civilised society.

and there's no place for c**ts working the system (and that includes the Windsor family) in a civilised society.

[Fide]

7 hours ago, JamieThomas said:

"Liam Fox pumped a dug" jumps into the lead with 2,790,000 results.

Sadly, "Liam fox's maw is a pure ride and he is a wee riddy" only gets 12,600 results.

[Baxter Parp]

11 minutes ago, Wee Willie said:

and there's no place for c**ts working the system (and that includes the Windsor family) in a civilised society.

Quite apart from the merry Windsors, what makes you think the system is easily workable? The government spends millions on assessing disability and makes you jump through hoops just to get Jobseekers. People are getting sanctioned for missing meetings that don't exist and being assessed as able to work despite having terminal cancer.  If you think the system is ripe for exploitation you're living in the past.

[Fide]

3 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

Quite apart from the merry Windsors, what makes you think the system is easily workable? The government spends millions on assessing disability and makes you jump through hoops just to get Jobseekers. People are getting sanctioned for missing meetings that don't exist and being assessed as able to work despite having terminal cancer.  If you think the system is ripe for exploitation you're living in the past.

The Tories crackdown on disabled benefits is entirely ideological.

The success rate in PIP decision tribunals is well over 75%.  If the Tories really were interested in a money saving exercise only, they would invest more in ensuring applicants are assessed fairly at the point of entry to save the cost of so many ATOS assessments and tribunals.

The system stinks and it's entirely ideological.

[Wee Willie]

45 minutes ago, Wee Willie said:

and there's no place for c**ts working the system (and that includes the Windsor family) in a civilised society.

 

30 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

Quite apart from the merry Windsors, what makes you think the system is easily workable? The government spends millions on assessing disability and makes you jump through hoops just to get Jobseekers. People are getting sanctioned for missing meetings that don't exist and being assessed as able to work despite having terminal cancer.  If you think the system is ripe for exploitation you're living in the past.

I didnae say the system is easily workable.
I'm just making the statement that there's no place for c**ts who work it to their own benefit.
I entirely agree with you that the government is a c**t.
That is one of the reasons I vote for independence.
In an independent Scotland I would expect there would be a fair and proper assessment of claimants.
Lets face it, it would be a lot easier to maintain a benefits system for a population of 5m+ as against 60m+.

BTW if the Windsor family had to appear in front of a benefits board dae ye think they would pass?

Edit: If you think the system is ripe for exploitation you're living in the past
I've been retired for 10 years so in a way I am 'living in the past'

Edited April 6, 2017 by Wee Willie

[Wee Willie]

I've just received a voting guide for the Scottish Council Election on 4th May, 2017.

In page 4 it says 'in this election you can make as many or as few choices as you wish'.
On page 5 there is a dummy ballot paper with 8 candidate.
At the bottom of the page it says:
use numbers to vote.
Number the candidates in order of your choice using 1,2,3 and so on.
You don't have to number every candidate.

Can someone please tell me how the winners are decided.
If I number say five out of eight of them, how does that help their final standing?

[doulikefish]

I've just received a voting guide for the Scottish Council Election on 4th May, 2017.
In page 4 it says 'in this election you can make as many or as few choices as you wish'.
On page 5 there is a dummy ballot paper with 8 candidate.
At the bottom of the page it says:
use numbers to vote.
Number the candidates in order of your choice using 1,2,3 and so on.
You don't have to number every candidate.
Can someone please tell me how the winners are decided.
If I number say five out of eight of them, how does that help their final standing?

Just mark your 1 and 2 give the rest feck all