Strapped For Cash

[Alantiggger]

I think the point is, just because you're happy for someone to insult you in a forum (or even in real life), not everyone feels that way and would rather just spend their time doing something else more pleasant (and why the hell not - life on this world is pretty short). And (in my view), people should be able to put their point across without someone either actively calling them stupid, or insinuating as such through belittling and patronising language. I'm realistic in that I know we don't live in that world, but that doesn't excuse it when it happens.

The idea of a debate is both sides should actually listen and respect each other's viewpoints, even if they disagree. Most of the time, that doesn't happen and debates generally just seem to descend into who can shout the loudest or who can look the smuggest (especially amongst politicians) whilst not even pretending to actually listen to the counter argument.

That's a fair point Prof, but the problem is that some people seem to believe that their world view is sacrosanct, and that anyone else with a counter view is beyond the pale.

I find that naive and immature at best.

Personally, I'm happy to debate and defend my views with anyone, I don't consider myself so morally superior that those who disagree with me need to be kept at arms length.

Indeed, debate IS a healthy thing... always has been, always will be.

 

[Anonymous]

I'd imagine many are astounded at that response

Not really. I'm not the one who is throwing the toys out the pram and flouncing off.

 

[BenLaw]

I guess it is easy to be so magnanimous when you are infallible.

 

[rjb70stoke]

If the Philpotts of this world of this world are your issue then start a new post.

Why would you bring them into this thread or are all people on welfare to be viewed with the same suspicions until we never hear of them?

The Philpotts of this world, are very very low on my list of priorities. I was simply using them as a way of showing how unfortunately the welfare state is now an empty shell of what it was intended for.

Read my original post. Having an uncle who for many many years has struggled with learning difficulties and social issues, I have no suspicions or feelings towards anybody until I know their circumstances.

 

[rjb70stoke]

Its a sad day when members on any forum resort to profanity to make their point, and the site has lost a couple of respected contributers.

While I DONT want to get into the issues of the other thread, surely the events of the last few days in Nottingham prove that debate is needed with regard to the welfare state. I have no problem supporting the unfortunate people who are genuinely out of work, and the poor souls who for whatever reason cannot work, (I have an uncle with quite severe mental issues, who hasnt been able to work for over 30 years), BUT the idea of keeping the Philpotts of this world in their luxurious lifestyle pretty much makes my blood boil.

I would hardly call 11 children in a 3 bedroom house a luxurious lifestyle.

Anyway, I saw a black man in court the other day, we need to have a debate about race in this country.

And who's fault was that?? I would say £46,000 per year for sitting on his backside, driving around in a fuel guzzling 4x4, having a motorhome, 2 50" plasma TV's and much, much more IS a luxurious lifestyle. Our family income is less than £46,000 for two adults working. We love our life, ask for nothing, and if we cant afford it, we dont have it.

 

[The_Lhc]

if I thought mine was a minority viewpoint, I'd probably leave too.

Do you mean that you would exclude yourself from ever making a contribution on the whole forum because other people didn't agree with you on one thing in the miriad of things we [try to] discuss on WHF?

If you felt that that topic in particular was more important than the others (and lets face it hi-fi doesn't really fall under the banner of "important") and that your viewpoint was not only not being listened to but was being actively disparaged in a less than polite manner then I can see why someone might feel that this wasn't somewhere they wanted to hangout anymore.

I mean, this is supposed to be "fun" right?

Now you see I just DO NOT understand this. If one has a valid point or ethos that is worthy of that validity, is it not worth standing up and being counted for? How are you ever going to know if, in pure fact, you have a valid point/argument if you run away as soon as someone challenges you robustly.

And yes T, this is supposed to be fun, but it is good that people can debate, on a Frippery Forum, some of the more important or topical issues. It is good to see how some people deal with the things in life that are more important than the frippery of a new phone/hifi/av blah blah.

I think the point I was trying to make (not very clearly) was that when some people come here they do so because they perhaps DON'T want to discuss deep, important (and obviously divisive) topics, they want to talk about hi-fi, home cinema, etc. So why would SFC get involved in that thread then you ask? Well because sometimes when you see someone putting forward a viewpoint that offends your beliefs so strongly you can't let it go unchallenged. If you then find that a number of people you were previously discussing hi-fi with also hold those views that you find abhorrent and berate and bellittle you for expressing your opinion then, yes, perhaps you would question whether you want to spend any more time with those people, I completely understand that.

If I go to a pub, I go to relax, have a quiet drink, play a few games of pool. If I subsequently discovered that the pub was a base for (just as an example, I'm NOT drawing a direct comparison, I'm using an extreme example to make a point) the EDL, I wouldn't go back to that pub, because I wouldn't want to share the space with people that I so fundamentally disagree with.

 

[toyota man]

If i may i'd like to give a liitle example.

Last friday i spoke to one of our housing estate officers.

The association i work for has set-up a small fencing business,employing those tenents that are long term unemployed.

She told me that a father of three,who was basically a sudo alchaholic was a complete changed man...after just one month of regular work.

To my mind i would say that guy had found some self-worth.

This too me this is were our welfare state is heading.It is not just about how much money and who is entitled to it,it is about helping people to help themselves.

What do they say''give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day,teach him how to catch fish and he'll eat everyday''

I think that the idea of the association giving these people a job repairing fencing etc is a great idea and as you say a fealing of self worth is a realy good thing

 

[bigboss]

if I thought mine was a minority viewpoint, I'd probably leave too.

Do you mean that you would exclude yourself from ever making a contribution on the whole forum because other people didn't agree with you on one thing in the miriad of things we [try to] discuss on WHF?

If you felt that that topic in particular was more important than the others (and lets face it hi-fi doesn't really fall under the banner of "important") and that your viewpoint was not only not being listened to but was being actively disparaged in a less than polite manner then I can see why someone might feel that this wasn't somewhere they wanted to hangout anymore.

I mean, this is supposed to be "fun" right?

Now you see I just DO NOT understand this. If one has a valid point or ethos that is worthy of that validity, is it not worth standing up and being counted for? How are you ever going to know if, in pure fact, you have a valid point/argument if you run away as soon as someone challenges you robustly.

And yes T, this is supposed to be fun, but it is good that people can debate, on a Frippery Forum, some of the more important or topical issues. It is good to see how some people deal with the things in life that are more important than the frippery of a new phone/hifi/av blah blah.

I think the point I was trying to make (not very clearly) was that when some people come here they do so because they perhaps DON'T want to discuss deep, important (and obviously divisive) topics, they want to talk about hi-fi, home cinema, etc. So why would SFC get involved in that thread then you ask? Well because sometimes when you see someone putting forward a viewpoint that offends your beliefs so strongly you can't let it go unchallenged. If you then find that a number of people you were previously discussing hi-fi with also hold those views that you find abhorrent and berate and bellittle you for expressing your opinion then, yes, perhaps you would question whether you want to spend any more time with those people, I completely understand that.

If I go to a pub, I go to relax, have a quiet drink, play a few games of pool. If I subsequently discovered that the pub was a base for (just as an example, I'm NOT drawing a direct comparison, I'm using an extreme example to make a point) the EDL, I wouldn't go back to that pub, because I wouldn't want to share the space with people that I so fundamentally disagree with.

Agreed.

 

[Anonymous]

Now you see I just DO NOT understand this. If one has a valid point or ethos that is worthy of that validity, is it not worth standing up and being counted for? How are you ever going to know if, in pure fact, you have a valid point/argument if you run away as soon as someone challenges you robustly.

And yes T, this is supposed to be fun, but it is good that people can debate, on a Frippery Forum, some of the more important or topical issues. It is good to see how some people deal with the things in life that are more important than the frippery of a new phone/hifi/av blah blah.

I think the point I was trying to make (not very clearly) was that when some people come here they do so because they perhaps DON'T want to discuss deep, important (and obviously divisive) topics, they want to talk about hi-fi, home cinema, etc. So why would SFC get involved in that thread then you ask? Well because sometimes when you see someone putting forward a viewpoint that offends your beliefs so strongly you can't let it go unchallenged. If you then find that a number of people you were previously discussing hi-fi with also hold those views that you find abhorrent and berate and bellittle you for expressing your opinion then, yes, perhaps you would question whether you want to spend any more time with those people, I completely understand that.

If I go to a pub, I go to relax, have a quiet drink, play a few games of pool. If I subsequently discovered that the pub was a base for (just as an example, I'm NOT drawing a direct comparison, I'm using an extreme example to make a point) the EDL, I wouldn't go back to that pub, because I wouldn't want to share the space with people that I so fundamentally disagree with.

Which is fair enough. But. Before you left that pub to find another one with a clientele more to your taste, would you jump up on the bar and make a sanctimonious speech about why you were leaving, like you expected anyone to give a stuff ?

 

[chebby]

If I go to a pub, I go to relax, have a quiet drink, play a few games of pool. If I subsequently discovered that the pub was a base for (just as an example, I'm NOT drawing a direct comparison, I'm using an extreme example to make a point) the EDL, I wouldn't go back to that pub, because I wouldn't want to share the space with people that I so fundamentally disagree with.

Which is fair enough. But. Before you left that pub to find another one with a clientele more to your taste, would you jump up on the bar and make a sanctimonious speech about why you were leaving, like you expected anyone to give a stuff ?

Only if he wanted to test out the local hospital's intensive care facilities.

 

[altruistic.lemon]

Haven't read all this thread, but really benefit fraud and people taking advantage of the welfare state is zero in the overall scheme of things. What about all those people who ruthlessly exploit tax, the money market, banks etc? The same people whoi nearly brought the country (not Australia - safeguards there) to its knees are now sitting in their penthouses in Canary Wharf patting themselves on the back and giving themselves nice pay rises whenever the mood suits.

That's not mentioning all those businesses who routinely ship their money to banks in Switzerland or Luxembourg which can't be traced, and who have their headquarters in tax havens like the Cayman Islands or Luxembourg, head offices being a secretary, a filing cabinet and a phone.

It isn't the poor welfare recipient we should be pursuing, but those b**t*rds who are scr*wing us and laughing all the way to the bank with their dirty millions!

 

[The_Lhc]

Now you see I just DO NOT understand this. If one has a valid point or ethos that is worthy of that validity, is it not worth standing up and being counted for? How are you ever going to know if, in pure fact, you have a valid point/argument if you run away as soon as someone challenges you robustly.

And yes T, this is supposed to be fun, but it is good that people can debate, on a Frippery Forum, some of the more important or topical issues. It is good to see how some people deal with the things in life that are more important than the frippery of a new phone/hifi/av blah blah.

I think the point I was trying to make (not very clearly) was that when some people come here they do so because they perhaps DON'T want to discuss deep, important (and obviously divisive) topics, they want to talk about hi-fi, home cinema, etc. So why would SFC get involved in that thread then you ask? Well because sometimes when you see someone putting forward a viewpoint that offends your beliefs so strongly you can't let it go unchallenged. If you then find that a number of people you were previously discussing hi-fi with also hold those views that you find abhorrent and berate and bellittle you for expressing your opinion then, yes, perhaps you would question whether you want to spend any more time with those people, I completely understand that.

If I go to a pub, I go to relax, have a quiet drink, play a few games of pool. If I subsequently discovered that the pub was a base for (just as an example, I'm NOT drawing a direct comparison, I'm using an extreme example to make a point) the EDL, I wouldn't go back to that pub, because I wouldn't want to share the space with people that I so fundamentally disagree with.

Which is fair enough. But. Before you left that pub to find another one with a clientele more to your taste, would you jump up on the bar and make a sanctimonious speech about why you were leaving, like you expected anyone to give a stuff ?

That wasn't the point I was addressing. Perhaps that's why you don't think you've ever seen anything that contradicts your opinion, you don't actually read anything that anyone else says properly. Either that or you simply don't understand it. Anyway, don't stop, you're making me look great, I've never been so popular!

 

[Anonymous]

That wasn't the point I was addressing. Perhaps that's why you don't think you've ever seen anything that contradicts your opinion, you don't actually read anything that anyone else says properly. Either that or you simply don't understand it. Anyway, don't stop, you're making me look great, I've never been so popular!

:rofl: :rofl:

Self delusion takes many forms

 

[Anonymous]

Haven't read all this thread, but really benefit fraud and people taking advantage of the welfare state is zero in the overall scheme of things. What about all those people who ruthlessly exploit tax, the money market, banks etc? The same people whoi nearly brought the country (not Australia - safeguards there) to its knees are now sitting in their penthouses in Canary Wharf patting themselves on the back and giving themselves nice pay rises whenever the mood suits.

That's not mentioning all those businesses who routinely ship their money to banks in Switzerland or Luxembourg which can't be traced, and who have their headquarters in tax havens like the Cayman Islands or Luxembourg, head offices being a secretary, a filing cabinet and a phone.

It isn't the poor welfare recipient we should be pursuing, but those b**t*rds who are scr*wing us and laughing all the way to the bank with their dirty millions!

:wall:

Well, I suggest you go read it all then, you may well educate yourself.

Isn't it curious that the people with no argument on this always resort to "tax avoiders", as though they were a different side of the same coin. I appreciate it is something frequently trumpeted by the 2 Eds. but that alone should warn you that it may well not be the best argument to try and make.

 

[altruistic.lemon]

Curious how you can't refute (or deny) the arguments - on second thoughts, it isn't.

 

[professorhat]

I'd imagine many are astounded at that response

Not really. I'm not the one who is throwing the toys out the pram and flouncing off.

Unsurprisingly, I wasn't including yourself in the "many"...

 

[Anonymous]

Curious how you can't refute (or deny) the arguments - on second thoughts, it isn't.

I don't need to Lemon - I have already done so. You have come to the party far to late I'm afraid. As I say, do some research, come back and try again.

 

[Anonymous]

I'd imagine many are astounded at that response

Not really. I'm not the one who is throwing the toys out the pram and flouncing off.

Unsurprisingly, I wasn't including yourself in the "many"...

Really Prof ? Are you sure ? Are you really really sure ? I'm so disappointed............

 

[altruistic.lemon]

Curious how you can't refute (or deny) the arguments - on second thoughts, it isn't.

I don't need to Lemon - I have already done so. You have come to the party far to late I'm afraid. As I say, do some research, come back and try again.

Obviously not on this site, then.

Who would you rather throw in gaol - some poor sod who's trying to get by in what may be their only chance at life by scrounging the odd penny or someone who's defrauding us of more per week than you or I will earn in our lives?

You need to sort out your priorities, mate!

 

[mr malarky]

cloverleaf146 wrote:

professorhat wrote:

I'd imagine many are astounded at that response

Not really. I'm not the one who is throwing the toys out the pram and flouncing off.

Unsurprisingly, I wasn't including yourself in the "many"...

Quite so Professor - hard to reconcile a claim that a person is open to debate and discussion, with a stated position by the same person that they have never, not once, in all their life, ever been presented with a single fact or piece of information that led them to question their opinion.

 

[BenLaw]

hard to reconcile a claim that a person is open to debate and discussion, with a stated position by the same person that they have never, not once, in all their life, ever been presented with a single fact or piece of information that led them to question their opinion.

An interesting inference from this is that any such individual must always have held the same views. So whatever age cloverleaf is now, he holds the same views as when he was, say, 15. Or, indeed, 5. This obviously rings true with his childlike opinions and reasoning, but is really rather pathetic.

 

[mr malarky]

Certainly seems to preclude any concept of "learning" or personal development, and suggests everything he'll ever know in life is merely everything he knows now - nothing more, nothing less.

still, guess it avoids the need for any of the tricky "thinking" stuff.

 

[Anonymous]

Obviously not on this site, then.

Who would you rather throw in gaol - some poor sod who's trying to get by in what may be their only chance at life by scrounging the odd penny or someone who's defrauding us of more per week than you or I will earn in our lives?

You need to sort out your priorities, mate!

Speak for yourself. "Mate". :wave:

 

[Anonymous]

An interesting inference from this is that any such individual must always have held the same views. So whatever age cloverleaf is now, he holds the same views as when he was, say, 15. Or, indeed, 5. This obviously rings true with his childlike opinions and reasoning, but is really rather pathetic.

Hilarious from someone who's Avatar was never more appropriate :rofl:

Keep the insults coming chaps, you might give yourself some time to come up with some facts in the meantime.

 

[BenLaw]

An interesting inference from this is that any such individual must always have held the same views. So whatever age cloverleaf is now, he holds the same views as when he was, say, 15. Or, indeed, 5. This obviously rings true with his childlike opinions and reasoning, but is really rather pathetic.

Hilarious

Explain how I'm wrong.