Off Topic General Election

[Whitejock]

Very true Jock so why vote that way when you can vote for the real thing, if you choose to.

I'd rather put my dick in a bacon slicer!

 

[Millwallsteve]

I'd rather put my dick in a bacon slicer!

Depends how big it would need to be Jock.

 

[Whitejock]

Depends how big it would need to be Jock.

It would be no great loss to society.

 

[Millwallsteve]

It would be no great loss to society.

You said that not me Jock.

 

[lifecheshirewhite]

I embrace immigration. So does your tory government, btw. They know that we don't have the birth rate to support our ageing population. You see, they might have menial jobs (which often Brits won't touch), but they still pay the taxes that support things like the NHS.

Ask your local (no doubt tory) MP if he would support zero immigration. He won't. He knows the economy would collapse in jig time if it was stopped.

You always answer to the extreme jock,no one said zero,we don't want ones who have to have tax credits for families living abroad who are a burden on the economy,quality immigration not quantity.

 

[lifecheshirewhite]

Go on then, provide some evidence to support that. I think you'll find there isn't any. They have changed fcuk all re. the offshore dependants. The EU would take them to task if they did, as the agreement is cast in stone. They'd much rather go for the disabled - and have done. Typical tory Nazis.

Don't keep up to date much do you jock,maybe you should watch the news now and again,reduced the amount you can claim housing benefits and limited to 2 kids amount you can claim for,but maybe you need to look things up for yourself or get out more.

 

[lifecheshirewhite]

Not been wrong about anything yet, except my belief people wouldn't be so stupid as to vote leave

Not been wrong about anything yet except that means you have been wrong m8

 

[Whitejock]

You always answer to the extreme jock,no one said zero,we don't want ones who have to have tax credits for families living abroad who are a burden on the economy,quality immigration not quantity.

Define quality. A BSc to to be a plumbers mate? Sadly, many of the jobs we require immigrants for would not attract quality, for example, fruit pickers, shellfish gatherers, factory workers, etc.

So quality doesn't work either. It's the opposite extreme.

 

[Whitejock]

Don't keep up to date much do you jock,maybe you should watch the news now and again,reduced the amount you can claim housing benefits and limited to 2 kids amount you can claim for,but maybe you need to look things up for yourself or get out more.

Perfectly aware of that, but you're changing the subject, as you always do when you start losing the argument. We were talking about offshore dependants. Not one piece of legislation affects them, because it's agreed within the EU. So try again! Evidence or shut up.

 

[lifecheshirewhite]

Perfectly aware of that, but you're changing the subject, as you always do when you start losing the argument. We were talking about offshore dependants. Not one piece of legislation affects them, because it's agreed within the EU. So try again! Evidence or shut up.

No I wasn't talking just that case I was talking benefits,so show me where I said I'm only talking offshore dependants or shut up.

 

[lifecheshirewhite]

Define quality. A BSc to to be a plumbers mate? Sadly, many of the jobs we require immigrants for would not attract quality, for example, fruit pickers, shellfish gatherers, factory workers, etc.

So quality doesn't work either. It's the opposite extreme.

2 million unemployed can do them jobs,no need to bring people in for them.

 

[Whitejock]

No I wasn't talking just that case I was talking benefits,so show me where I said I'm only talking offshore dependants or shut up.

Posts 57 & 105. You did mention benefits in general once too, but your big bugbear appears to be benefit money going out to offshore dependants, which you assured me that the tories have been whittling away at. They haven't and you know it, and by the looks of it will remain in denial. You tories still blame Blue Labour, yet you've had 7 years to take the matter in hand. 7 years. Not minutes, days, weeks or months. Years! Long enough to give themselves 7 whopping pay rises, I might add. Always find the time for that.

 

[Whitejock]

2 million unemployed can do them jobs,no need to bring people in for them.

Again, you tories have had 7 years to solve that puzzle. Another failure.

I will acknowledge that it's something that no government has ever achieved, but you seem to think it's easy. I'd get writing them a letter if I was you. We've waited hundreds of years for a solution, so they'll be champing at the bit to put it in place. Go for it!

 

[lifecheshirewhite]

Again, you tories have had 7 years to solve that puzzle. Another failure.

I will acknowledge that it's something that no government has ever achieved, but you seem to think it's easy. I'd get writing them a letter if I was you. We've waited hundreds of years for a solution, so they'll be champing at the bit to put it in place. Go for it!

WORK IN PROGRESS WJ.reduce the benefits enough and they will work.

 

[lifecheshirewhite]

Posts 57 & 105. You did mention benefits in general once too, but your big bugbear appears to be benefit money going out to offshore dependants, which you assured me that the tories have been whittling away at. They haven't and you know it, and by the looks of it will remain in denial. You tories still blame Blue Labour, yet you've had 7 years to take the matter in hand. 7 years. Not minutes, days, weeks or months. Years! Long enough to give themselves 7 whopping pay rises, I might add. Always find the time for that.

So as you say ,YOU got it wrong I was talking benefits in general,you made the only offshore dependants claim up.

 

[Whitejock]

WORK IN PROGRESS WJ.reduce the benefits enough and they will work.

WIP? Took 6 years to get started, and they start by chopping £30 out of the disabled's benefits - the ones that still get them, that is. And they're the very ones that cannot work! Du-uh!

And to get back on message, what the hell has that got to do with offshore dependants, and why did they wait for 6 years before starting this strategic brilliance? If this is the solution & they continue at this rate of implementation, we should see off the problem in about 300 years.

 

[Whitejock]

So as you say ,YOU got it wrong I was talking benefits in general,you made the only offshore dependants claim up.

I think you need to go back & read the thread again, matey. Pathetic attempt right out of the tory handbook.

 

[wakeybreakyheart]

WIP? Took 6 years to get started, and they start by chopping £30 out of the disabled's benefits - the ones that still get them, that is. And they're the very ones that cannot work! Du-uh!

And to get back on message, what the hell has that got to do with offshore dependants, and why did they wait for 6 years before starting this strategic brilliance? If this is the solution & they continue at this rate of implementation, we should see off the problem in about 300 years.

and this argument will still be running.

 

[lifecheshirewhite]

WIP? Took 6 years to get started, and they start by chopping £30 out of the disabled's benefits - the ones that still get them, that is. And they're the very ones that cannot work! Du-uh!

And to get back on message, what the hell has that got to do with offshore dependants, and why did they wait for 6 years before starting this strategic brilliance? If this is the solution & they continue at this rate of implementation, we should see off the problem in about 300 years.

My parents are both disabled,and they get very good benefits,they are not means tested on it and can save enough out of it to cruise around the world if they like.
offshore dependants will be sorted in 2 years time

 

[lifecheshirewhite]

I think you need to go back & read the thread again, matey. Pathetic attempt right out of the tory handbook.

Clutching straws again m8,talking general benefits as you now know full well,you lost game set and match.just man up and admit you got it wrong and I never said I'm only talking offshore dependants.