Independent Leyton Orient Forum

George M wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:42 am

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:39 am

George M wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:32 am

A daughter of a friend of mine is an alcoholic ( recovering but relapsing ) , she has three children under nine by different fathers , and she receives £2000 a month and has done for at least the last five years. Her parents could afford to keep her and have bought her a house. It’s one example of what we are spending and on whom. It may be that they are targeting groups such as this. I can’t make sense of what they propose to target but , in the grand scheme of things , I doubt it will save much

So you don't know what benefits she actually receives, for what reasons, or the family's exact personal or financial situation. Safe to file this under "I don't actually have any evidence".

You really are a cretin. I have known the family for 30 years. I have known the daughter since she was born. The father talks to me about it and I do know all of the elements you claim I don’t. Troll someone else and bore off

Go on then, specify precisely which benefits she's receiving since you have all the facts at your fingertips.

Also, 'being asked to back up what you're saying' isn't being trolled. HTH.

She receives £2000 a month does she? That’s great that is. I’m assuming she lives in a house with a fully paid up mortgage and gets all £2000 for herself right?

CEB2ElectricBoogaloo wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:45 am She receives £2000 a month does she? That’s great that is. I’m assuming she lives in a house with a fully paid up mortgage and gets all £2000 for herself right?

You perhaps need to reread my post where I explained that her parents bought her a house. Another cretinous response

George M wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:48 am Another cretinous response

No need to sign your posts!

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:44 am

George M wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:42 am

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:39 am

So you don't know what benefits she actually receives, for what reasons, or the family's exact personal or financial situation. Safe to file this under "I don't actually have any evidence".

You really are a cretin. I have known the family for 30 years. I have known the daughter since she was born. The father talks to me about it and I do know all of the elements you claim I don’t. Troll someone else and bore off

Go on then, specify precisely which benefits she's receiving since you have all the facts at your fingertips.

Also, 'being asked to back up what you're saying' isn't being trolled. HTH.

You wrongly assumed I didn’t know anything about the family or the circumstances .
At no point did I say what particular benefits make up the £2000 per month , neither did I claim to know.
Again , bore off

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:43 am Genuinely interested in the "without having a negative impact on services" caveat to that question. I would bet a hefty amount that those same people would also decry the current state of those same services.

It’s a split between those who think the cuts won’t effect the service and those who do but still there’s room to cut anyway

Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:51 am

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:43 am Genuinely interested in the "without having a negative impact on services" caveat to that question. I would bet a hefty amount that those same people would also decry the current state of those same services.

It’s a split between those who think the cuts won’t effect the service and those who do but still there’s room to cut anyway

But you agree it needs a shake up ?

George M wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:50 am

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:44 am

George M wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:42 am

You really are a cretin. I have known the family for 30 years. I have known the daughter since she was born. The father talks to me about it and I do know all of the elements you claim I don’t. Troll someone else and bore off

Go on then, specify precisely which benefits she's receiving since you have all the facts at your fingertips.

Also, 'being asked to back up what you're saying' isn't being trolled. HTH.

You wrongly assumed I didn’t know anything about the family or the circumstances .
At no point did I say what particular benefits make up the £2000 per month , neither did I claim to know.
Again , bore off

So you don't have all the facts then. That's cool, thanks for clarifying. You should have just admitted that in the first place!

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:54 am

George M wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:50 am

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:44 am

Go on then, specify precisely which benefits she's receiving since you have all the facts at your fingertips.

Also, 'being asked to back up what you're saying' isn't being trolled. HTH.

You wrongly assumed I didn’t know anything about the family or the circumstances .
At no point did I say what particular benefits make up the £2000 per month , neither did I claim to know.
Again , bore off

So you don't have all the facts then. That's cool, thanks for clarifying. You should have just admitted that in the first place!

You are the reason the benefits system needs reform.

So the 3 kids should be punished and punished hard for having a mother with alcohol addiction problems and different fathers to each other? That'll help.

George M wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:57 am

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:54 am

George M wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:50 am

You wrongly assumed I didn’t know anything about the family or the circumstances .
At no point did I say what particular benefits make up the £2000 per month , neither did I claim to know.
Again , bore off

So you don't have all the facts then. That's cool, thanks for clarifying. You should have just admitted that in the first place!

You are the reason the benefits system needs reform.

The benefits system needs reform because people challenge the desire to base policies on anecdotal evidence and hearsay? I'm not sure I understand your rationale.

George M wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:54 am

Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:51 am

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:43 am Genuinely interested in the "without having a negative impact on services" caveat to that question. I would bet a hefty amount that those same people would also decry the current state of those same services.

It’s a split between those who think the cuts won’t effect the service and those who do but still there’s room to cut anyway

But you agree it needs a shake up ?

Shake the top end first then we can worry about going after the handful of people swinging the lead/abusing the system.

The one time I er, forgot, to declare some income while I *might* have been in receipt of JSA, they pinged me straight away and I ended up having to pay it back. There's plenty of mechanisms already in place to weedle out fraud. And even if there wasn't, 1000s and 1000s of people would have to be on the take to make up even a tiny percentage of what we lose to Amazon et al's tax avoidance. It's so simple, and yet...

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 10:09 am The one time I er, forgot, to declare some income while I *might* have been in receipt of JSA, they pinged me straight away and I ended up having to pay it back. There's plenty of mechanisms already in place to weedle out fraud. And even if there wasn't, 1000s and 1000s of people would have to be on the take to make up even a tiny percentage of what we lose to Amazon et al's tax avoidance. It's so simple, and yet...

How do we get Amazon to pay more UK tax?

Do some laws or something. I'll leave that up to Reeves, I'm sure she'll strive to come up with the answer since the only reason she went into politics was to help out disadvantaged kids.

Hoover Attack wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:58 am So the 3 kids should be punished and punished hard for having a mother with alcohol addiction problems and different fathers to each other? That'll help.

I didn’t say that either. Of course not. I was asked to give my example of where some benefits are going. It’s a huge problem and one we can’t afford. Therefore it needs meaningful reform

Hoover Attack wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:59 am

George M wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:54 am

Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:51 am

It’s a split between those who think the cuts won’t effect the service and those who do but still there’s room to cut anyway

But you agree it needs a shake up ?

Shake the top end first then we can worry about going after the handful of people swinging the lead/abusing the system.

They will be doing both

When will the government be cracking down on Corporate welfare and their false claims?

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 10:18 am Do some laws or something. I'll leave that up to Reeves, I'm sure she'll strive to come up with the answer since the only reason she went into politics was to help out disadvantaged kids.

Shame, expected at least the effort of a Guardian comment piece or a Tax Justice link from 6 years ago

Is this any use?

https://www.thenational.scot/news/25031 ... ald-trump/

Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 10:27 am

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 10:18 am Do some laws or something. I'll leave that up to Reeves, I'm sure she'll strive to come up with the answer since the only reason she went into politics was to help out disadvantaged kids.

Shame, expected at least the effort of a Guardian comment piece or a Tax Justice link from 6 years ago

Got a game to ref, byeeeeee.

Heh

George M wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 10:23 am

Hoover Attack wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:59 am

George M wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:54 am

But you agree it needs a shake up ?

Shake the top end first then we can worry about going after the handful of people swinging the lead/abusing the system.

They will be doing both

George M wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 10:21 am

Hoover Attack wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:58 am So the 3 kids should be punished and punished hard for having a mother with alcohol addiction problems and different fathers to each other? That'll help.

I didn’t say that either. Of course not. I was asked to give my example of where some benefits are going. It’s a huge problem and one we can’t afford. Therefore it needs meaningful reform

But that's what will happen if you slash this woman's income. Sounds as if their lives are already traumatic enough without pushing them into poverty as well.

We can afford it. There is enough wealth around to ensure no one is in poverty.

It’s very lucky that George M knows someone where

1: her parents are wealthy enough to buy her a house outright
2: despite this wealthy background, she has been diagnosed with alcohol addiction and her wealthy parents, unable to provide a support network instead reveal this to neighbours
3: that this daughter of wealthy parents bucks every trend by having children relatively early in life, without having the financial or relationship security most people would put in place
4: discloses to her parents exactly how much she gets in benefits each month, even though her parents disapprove of her claiming benefits, so there would be no motivation to make such a disclosure


It’s *almost* as if George M is talking utter, utter poo poo