It is only 24 years ago that i left school at just under 16 and went to work at the Co Op on a YTS scheme, i worked 39 hours a week for , i got valuable work experience and the only promise i had was that the scheme was for 2 years, if after 2 years there was a permanent position then it would be mine.
I worked hard,listened and learned and after 18 months was offered the job on a full time basis, i had been trained to do a job and do it well and it sure as hell did me no harm.
Why should people be allowed to sit on their arses all day and be paid to do so, far too many people these days think that they are owed a living and far too many benefits are paid to people who have been brought up to think this way.
Maybe big companies are getting employees on the cheap but in the main those companies are willing to give these youngsters a chance to have some work experience, give them some training, and maybe get some work ethics into them..........
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
jumptoit
Over 90 days ago
Straight Male, 52
Bisexual Female, 45
0 miles · North Yorkshire
Forum
Quote by GnV
this 1 gets wheeled out every year its a tradition id prefer to see the debate on the school summer holiday as the kids no longer help with the harvest lol but i doubt the mail reading teachers would be as keen to loose there long summer break
Good grief :scared:
I thought they read The Guardian without exception!
GNV have you seen the quality of some of our younger teachers these days?????......... most read the Daily Sport far more factual and interesting..........
If the standard of journalism and English expression is anything to go by, no wonder our students are struggling to read and write...
Ah but look on the bright side GNV with the new high tuition fees we are going to have a much higher well spoken class of thicko teaching our children!!!
Quote by GnV
this 1 gets wheeled out every year its a tradition id prefer to see the debate on the school summer holiday as the kids no longer help with the harvest lol but i doubt the mail reading teachers would be as keen to loose there long summer break
Good grief :scared:
I thought they read The Guardian without exception!
GNV have you seen the quality of some of our younger teachers these days?????......... most read the Daily Sport far more factual and interesting..........
Quote by Freckledbird
I think HnS just forgot to cite where he copied the information from:
I think it's being considered to bring the UK in line with Europe, yes. And I'm pretty sure that if HnS has realised, then the eurosceptics in government will also have realised. Not such a cunning plot then.
I think there should be less street lighting anyway, to save energy. Many of our roads are lit unnecessarily, particularly motorways. If you're driving along them at night, you're going to have your headlights on, after all. Total waste. I think all street lighting should be turned off between, say 2am and 5am as a minimum. Not many people likely to be about on foot at those times, and vehicles should have headlights to light their way.
As i think has been proven in the past i am sure burglars would love the street lighting turned off between their "working" hours as it makes sneaking around so much easier for them, this type of crime is already predicted to increase due to unemployment levels and the way things are with the economy without making it easier.
I would however say that i myself would love more daylight hours at the end of the day to be able to get out and do things after work opposed to it being lighter in a morning when i am just getting up and going to work.
I also heard a chap on TV the other week who stated that accident levels would actually decrease overall and not just balance out, the reasoning being that in a morning we are more awake and aware what is happening around us and our reaction time is quicker, than after having a hard day at work and going home thinking about what has happened that day and what is for tea.
Quote by Freckledbird
Oh and for the soldiers and servicemen serving this country it is a lifestyle choice, nobody made them sign up and they really do know what they are letting themselves in for.
Then they should also understand that if they have more children (and Child Benefit becomes only payable for two) then their lifestyle choice might include not having more children so that if they are killed, their surviving partner doesn't have to struggle. Why should servicemen and women be subject to different rules or criteria? People who have different jobs, also die leaving children behind.
I do believe i also stated this.
Now back to the actual topic!!
Benefits are in place for the less well off of our population and those that need help.
Yes some people know how to play the system and how to claim more and receive more cash than they possibly deserve, are they any different to the self employed who know all the tax loops and use them (and openly brag about it) to pay less and line there pockets more.
I am sure someone is sure to say well thats the governments fault for leaving open the loop holes, well like wise with benefits then.
Many people are saying the government are doing the right thing with all the cuts they are proposing and maybe they are, but to means test all benefits claims will cost loads and take an infinite amount of time to do thus costing even more as the tests rumble on.
So say some of you just stop everyone with 4 or more kids claiming, why this is victimisation at its worst.
I am sure that those of you who are all for the cuts and the cancellation of benefits are sat easy in your ivory towers having already received child benefit for the full time they can and now have grown up children and dont care cos they are no longer eligable to receive it, or dont even live in the Uk so again not affected, or are on sizeable wages and again dont see why others should get help.
Not everyone is the same and peoples circumstances can change in a matter of seconds, so go ahead and means test people on benefits, and then when their circumstances change means test them again and on and on it goes costing more and more and taking more and more time and money.
Rose tinted glasses are one thing but having a 5 bedroom detached house in suburbia, with no little foreign people living there and no single parent famillies around spoiling the view through the rose tinted double glazing you had put in as windows is just not reality.
Benefits are in place for the less well off of our population and those that need help.
Yes some people know how to play the system and how to claim more and receive more cash than they possibly deserve, are they any different to the self employed who know all the tax loops and use them (and openly brag about it) to pay less and line there pockets more.
I am sure someone is sure to say well thats the governments fault for leaving open the loop holes, well like wise with benefits then.
Many people are saying the government are doing the right thing with all the cuts they are proposing and maybe they are, but to means test all benefits claims will cost loads and take an infinite amount of time to do thus costing even more as the tests rumble on.
So say some of you just stop everyone with 4 or more kids claiming, why this is victimisation at its worst.
I am sure that those of you who are all for the cuts and the cancellation of benefits are sat easy in your ivory towers having already received child benefit for the full time they can and now have grown up children and dont care cos they are no longer eligable to receive it, or dont even live in the Uk so again not affected, or are on sizeable wages and again dont see why others should get help.
Not everyone is the same and peoples circumstances can change in a matter of seconds, so go ahead and means test people on benefits, and then when their circumstances change means test them again and on and on it goes costing more and more and taking more and more time and money.
Rose tinted glasses are one thing but having a 5 bedroom detached house in suburbia, with no little foreign people living there and no single parent famillies around spoiling the view through the rose tinted double glazing you had put in as windows is just not reality.
Quote by GnV
next time jumpy, I will quote all your text so there can be no doubt.
You know what you wrote and it was accusatory. You changed the text before my post so there is now no evidence of what you wrote or what you edited in your post but I saw it. A typical cowards response.
You accused me of trying to get you banned, relented and changed your text.
Deny it as much as you like but I know what I saw.
Some people are too clever for their own good and soooo shallow.
Not denying it its still there and never was edited, and i still have the pm`s from you and have saved the posts that got removed too old chap, but i dont like school playgrounds and i was just commenting on my post!!
Hmmmmm you must be confusing me with someone else then.
I can't recall EVER PMing you! Wouldn't frankly waste my time :-?
unless you have a secondary account of course and are being somewhat economical with the truth about who you are....
Isn't there something about that in the AUP?
In response to this i have actually been a member of this site longer than you GNV so why would i have 2 accounts or is that what you do?
I am pleased to see however that you admit that you do send nasty and vicious pm`s normally but just deny doing it to me on this account but have done it to my phantom account, just so laughable.......
Quote by kentswingers777
Yes text was removed.....without any doubt.
Really and you know this how? Nowhere under any of my posts does it say "edited by" etc unlike on other peoples.
Now i dont want to labour on the point but proof please would be lovely as i know what i wrote and it is still there unedited, i will not be accused of things i have not done and i will certainly not stand to be called a liar by either you or GNV.
The fact is Kenty old chummy chap that you put your point forward and if anyone disagrees with you or questions you, your chum and you then attack and bully, it has been seen numerous times on here and has been commented on about.
Quote by GnV
next time jumpy, I will quote all your text so there can be no doubt.
You know what you wrote and it was accusatory. You changed the text before my post so there is now no evidence of what you wrote or what you edited in your post but I saw it. A typical cowards response.
You accused me of trying to get you banned, relented and changed your text.
Deny it as much as you like but I know what I saw.
Some people are too clever for their own good and soooo shallow.
Not denying it its still there and never was edited, and i still have the pm`s from you and have saved the posts that got removed too old chap, but i dont like school playgrounds and i was just commenting on my post!!
Quote by kentswingers777
Jump...................out of the figures I supplied can you say any of those are forces wives?
No you cannot.
I will not go into small talk about what I believe armed forces personnel and their families should get.....I have made my points on that very clear over a long period of time.
You obviously do not know that as other wise you would not be making ridiculous assumptions about me or my motives.
" of the 56,490 single mother claimants how many of these women actually had a husband who was say in the forces and was killed in combat that before there husband was killed they could afford the number of children they had, or how many of these women were married to husbands in a high earning job who and was tragically killed suddenly in a car crash.......... no Kenty you cant answer that can you, your statistics are just numbers and numbers alone and do not prove why these people are claiming, but hey with a broad sweeping brush like you have who cares?!?!? Oh and before you start mate i know of 2 guys who left behind widows 1 has 4 kids and 1 has 5 and they are not benefit scroungers but victims of a sad circumstance ".
Valid points I suppose BUT and here is the but....are you ready? Can you tell me how many of these women are exactly like the Karen Mathews of this world??
The figures are there for all to see. They do not separate a deserving Mother or a Mother like Mathews in their figures, these kinds of figures generally do not.
You could use your analogy about every set of figures that ever came out....they are showing how many people who have over four kids are claiming benefits.....even you must be able to work that one out on your own?
Yes I know what you do for a living matey, and you should also know what I think of the armed forces.....I understand your anger there then, and on that note will just let your comments ride on, as I know what I think.
Very lame Kenty answering my question with my own point, but you always do that when you dont have an answer i have noticed.
Using your idea of taking child benefit off everyone with 4 or more kids does not take into account everyones circumstances and you are as usual classing everyone as the same..... how can you.... not evryone is the same or has the same circumstances.
How many of the people in the numbers you quote are catholic and dont use contraception for religious reasons, the numbers add up and yes are factual unfortunately you can read them how you want to to class everyone in the same boat.... wrong so very very wrong and so very Victor Meldrew!!!
Quote by GnV
oh dear, touched a nerve jumpy?
Evidence dear chap that I have tried to get you banned... remember the AUP? but I'm flattered that you think I have the ability to influence these decisions.
in edit:
Oooops, seems you relented and changed your text before I clicked to submit this. Just as well I didn't quote it.
Good man :thumbup:
I can assure you I was not being disrespectful to you in my posting but I do take the point that you don't like me. I'm sure it's been noted on the tally board
http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopic/324334.html
You can always check with Admin to be certain; if they'll tell you of course.
if you look at my post you will see i have changed nothing and edited nothing so go ahead and press submit??? you can assure me of nothing in my opinion you were being disrespectful to me, and please do tell me what your submitting about??? Is it the fact that i can spot a bully in a school yard?
Quote by GnV
of the 56,490 single mother claimants how many of these women actually had a husband who was say in the forces and was killed in combat that before there husband was killed they could afford the number of children they had, or how many of these women were married to husbands in a high earning job who and was tragically killed suddenly in a car crash.......... no Kenty you cant answer that can you, your statistics are just numbers and numbers alone and do not prove why these people are claiming, but hey with a broad sweeping brush like you have who cares?!?!? Oh and before you start mate i know of 2 guys who left behind widows 1 has 4 kids and 1 has 5 and they are not benefit scroungers but victims of a sad circumstance.
That's actually not a fair way to get back at kenty as he has a son serving in Afghanistan (or about to) so it's a bit below the belt if you don't mind me saying so.
I believe he has already made his point quite well; he is not on about people in the circumstances you mention but about those who do nothing for themselves and expect the State to do everything for them.
Widows of Servicemen killed in action are more deserving of aid and assistance than they currently get. If the ConDem Alliance do as they say, this will be addressed and rightly so!
However, I'm sure kenty will be more than capable of pulling you pieces than I am able :thumbup:
And actually NO if you read Kents post it states all the figures without facts and he classes all the people in the figures mentioned in exactly the same way?!?!?
Quote by GnV
of the 56,490 single mother claimants how many of these women actually had a husband who was say in the forces and was killed in combat that before there husband was killed they could afford the number of children they had, or how many of these women were married to husbands in a high earning job who and was tragically killed suddenly in a car crash.......... no Kenty you cant answer that can you, your statistics are just numbers and numbers alone and do not prove why these people are claiming, but hey with a broad sweeping brush like you have who cares?!?!? Oh and before you start mate i know of 2 guys who left behind widows 1 has 4 kids and 1 has 5 and they are not benefit scroungers but victims of a sad circumstance.
That's actually not a fair way to get back at kenty as he has a son serving in Afghanistan (or about to) so it's a bit below the belt if you don't mind me saying so.
I believe he has already made his point quite well; he is not about people in the circumstances you mention but about those who do nothing for themselves and expect the State to do everything for them.
Widows of Servicemen killed in action are more deserving of aid and assistance than they currently get. If the ConDem Alliance do as they say, this will be addressed and rightly so!
However, I'm sure kenty will be more than capable of pulling you pieces than I am able :thumbup:
Yep and Kenty also knows what i do for a living been there done that, typical of you though GNV to comment on my post and pour scorn as it as we have a history of you trying to get me banned do we not? No wonder hardly anyone posts on here anymore as it is like the Pinky and Perky show nowadays where either you or Kenty start something, somebody else opposes it and then the other one of you backs the other up, your both no better than school yard bullies in my opinion. Oh and for the soldiers and servicemen serving this country it is a lifestyle choice, nobody made them sign up and they really do know what they are letting themselves in for.
Quote by kentswingers777
NEARLY 100,000 people living on benefits have four or more children, new figures revealed last night.
The vast "shameless generation" includes more than 900 claimants with EIGHT or more children.
The figures lay bare how Britain's benefits culture has spawned an underclass of kids brought up on welfare.
Imagine for one second how much money is spent on these amounts of people, with their broods.
Of the 97,350 people on benefits who have four or more kids, 7,000 have six; 2,260 seven; and 910 eight or more. More than half of those with four or more - 56,490 - are on single parent benefits.
A further 23,410 claim incapacity benefit. The rest are on Jobseekers' Allowance.
I want to see this kind of mentality stopped, and the Mothers who have untold amounts of kids to take some form of responsibility.....I wonder how many of these people would have had any more than two kids IF there was not the benefits open to them?
I bet the population would shrink somewhat....maybe that is what is needed, a complete look at benefits for people who have a whole long line of kids.
of the 56,490 single mother claimants how many of these women actually had a husband who was say in the forces and was killed in combat that before there husband was killed they could afford the number of children they had, or how many of these women were married to husbands in a high earning job who and was tragically killed suddenly in a car crash.......... no Kenty you cant answer that can you, your statistics are just numbers and numbers alone and do not prove why these people are claiming, but hey with a broad sweeping brush like you have who cares?!?!? Oh and before you start mate i know of 2 guys who left behind widows 1 has 4 kids and 1 has 5 and they are not benefit scroungers but victims of a sad circumstance.
Quote by ForestFunsters
I can't find it online, but I remember a statistic from when I did my toxicology degree - more people in the UK have died from choking on breakfast cereal than from cannabis or ecstasy usage.
Time to ban those murderous cornflakes?
Erm maybe more people eat breakfast cereal than use the above mentioned drugs??
For example 3 of us in my household eat breakfast cereal on a daily basis 7 days a week but none of us use cannabis or ecstasy, so i would imagine the chances of me dying from the drugs a greatly lower than choking on my all bran?!?!?
People on this forum are always moaning about this being a "nanny state" and losing our freedom to do as we please, so how is reverting this law any different?
I choose to drink on a regular basis both out and at home, i do not however get drunk.
I sometimes go out at 11 pm when most people are pissed and going home, but being able to actually go out at this time of night suits my lifestyle and working life, these licensing hours are far from unique to the UK i can go most places in the world and get a drink at 4am!
Why should the supermarkets not sell booze at whatever price they want, it is against the law to sell to under 18`s and i am sorry but the last time i looked anyone over the age of 17 is classed as an adult and responsible for there own lives and action.
We do not live in a muslim state (that again many on here critisise) and it is not against the law to drink, i can imagine the outrage on this forum if this was the Muslim leaders calling for booze bans or pub and club hours being cut!!
This is simply the poor weak government we did not vote for as a majority, trying to flex there weak little muscles and saying "look what we can do" there are so many more poor weak laws in this country that need to be changed,but no lets pick one that stops the people of this country doing what they want when they want, lets ban sex outside of marriage i say!!
And whilst i am ranting i see the government are now taking away free swimming for over 65`s and possibly kids, oh how caring and health conscious is that, bring on the fat kids, lets make sure that the oap`s cant stay fit if they can not afford it and die before they reach the new retirement age of 107 and the fat kids will obviously become obese adults and again die before retirement thus saving the country loads of money.
Welcome to the next 5 years of a government with no majority who are gonna take away all the fun things in life and make us work till we cant walk or breathe, i really am better off in Afghanistan!!
I choose to drink on a regular basis both out and at home, i do not however get drunk.
I sometimes go out at 11 pm when most people are pissed and going home, but being able to actually go out at this time of night suits my lifestyle and working life, these licensing hours are far from unique to the UK i can go most places in the world and get a drink at 4am!
Why should the supermarkets not sell booze at whatever price they want, it is against the law to sell to under 18`s and i am sorry but the last time i looked anyone over the age of 17 is classed as an adult and responsible for there own lives and action.
We do not live in a muslim state (that again many on here critisise) and it is not against the law to drink, i can imagine the outrage on this forum if this was the Muslim leaders calling for booze bans or pub and club hours being cut!!
This is simply the poor weak government we did not vote for as a majority, trying to flex there weak little muscles and saying "look what we can do" there are so many more poor weak laws in this country that need to be changed,but no lets pick one that stops the people of this country doing what they want when they want, lets ban sex outside of marriage i say!!
And whilst i am ranting i see the government are now taking away free swimming for over 65`s and possibly kids, oh how caring and health conscious is that, bring on the fat kids, lets make sure that the oap`s cant stay fit if they can not afford it and die before they reach the new retirement age of 107 and the fat kids will obviously become obese adults and again die before retirement thus saving the country loads of money.
Welcome to the next 5 years of a government with no majority who are gonna take away all the fun things in life and make us work till we cant walk or breathe, i really am better off in Afghanistan!!
Quote by Kaznkev
The locals will probably get him first,very protective of their sheep round Rothbury.
He shot at a policeman,i reckon there has been an unofficial shoot to kill policy since then.
No he shot a policeman, there is a difference, the guy is lucky to be alive having been shot in the face and chest, i have my fingers crossed that this madman does not kill himself but is taken out by a sniper who has trained for this as that is justice the right way.
I find it staggering that you feel that giving our already underpaid nurses,soldiers,firemen,police etc etc a pay cut, yes that is what it amounts to and has been agreed by the right honourable twat in charge of the country as in effect being a pay cut, is a fair budget, but of course if your a tyranical business owner with a good accountant everything will look rosey,cos you can keep claiming back the vat, tell your staff they cant have a rise because of the state of the economy and keep coining it in for yourselves!!
And when its all done and dusted not one of us will have made a difference and life will go on as it has since time began, with the same people moaning and whining about the current government (the same ones who moaned about the past government) the politicians doing what is best for them and still robbing us blind, the immigrants will keep coming, the dole dossers will keep dossing, the rich and powerful will get more rich and powerful and the poor will get shit on from a great height and continue to work 3 jobs and 70 hours a week and hopefully Leeds United will have been promoted and Chelsea will have stopped the scum from winning the premiership.
Life is for living and doing what is best for you and the ones you care about,with what you have to work with, do any of you seriously think Cameron,Brown or Clegg give a flying fuck about what anyone of us thinks or wants....... dream on!!
Life is for living and doing what is best for you and the ones you care about,with what you have to work with, do any of you seriously think Cameron,Brown or Clegg give a flying fuck about what anyone of us thinks or wants....... dream on!!
Quote by Ben_welshminx
I cant google how people feel or think thats why forums can be interesting.
You might have a long wait Ben as i am still waiting for someone to tell me what "patriotic" actually means to the people spouting about it (not the dictionary meaning) as all i am getting at the moment is and yes its only my opinion, tacky flags and car stickers?!?!?!?
Quote by bouncy332
Can someone please define for me what "being patriotic" actually means?
Does it mean slagging off the Nation and its governments?
Does it mean moaning about the laws and rules in the country?
Does it mean picking fault in everything thats happened and finding someone to blame?
Does it mean disagreeing with who the actual "Saint for the day" is
If so, there are people in this forum who are so patriotic it must hurt!!!
Why do people feel that waving a flag and saying they are patriotic for 1 day a year actually makes them patriotic, when the rest of the time the self same people are running down everything to do with England and saying how they wish they lived elsewhere or even do live elsewhere it just stinks to me!
I wont be going out getting pissed, putting a cheap tacky flag on my car or wearing a ridiculous hat but that does not mean i am not patriotic, i love my country and would without hesitation die for my country and i dont need 1 day a year to show it.
Maybe if the oh so patriotic of this country got off there arses and did something to make the place we live in a better more friendly place to live, maybe did some volountry work or work in there community with people who need it, without recompense, others would follow and patriotism would then strengthen?
:thumbup:
can't mean me cause i is perfect :smug:
You sure is perfect lady!X!X
Quote by kentswingers777
Now how did I know this thread was going to go down this route....no suprises at all.:shock:
What route? i asked a question.............. define patriotic? you started the thread so i assumed i would get an answer from you with regards my question?
Or do i assume that patriotism is indeed sticking a tacky flag on my car/house and pretending to be a true Englishman/woman for the day???????!?!?!?!?!!?
Can someone please define for me what "being patriotic" actually means?
Does it mean slagging off the Nation and its governments?
Does it mean moaning about the laws and rules in the country?
Does it mean picking fault in everything thats happened and finding someone to blame?
Does it mean disagreeing with who the actual "Saint for the day" is
If so, there are people in this forum who are so patriotic it must hurt!!!
Why do people feel that waving a flag and saying they are patriotic for 1 day a year actually makes them patriotic, when the rest of the time the self same people are running down everything to do with England and saying how they wish they lived elsewhere or even do live elsewhere it just stinks to me!
I wont be going out getting pissed, putting a cheap tacky flag on my car or wearing a ridiculous hat but that does not mean i am not patriotic, i love my country and would without hesitation die for my country and i dont need 1 day a year to show it.
Maybe if the oh so patriotic of this country got off there arses and did something to make the place we live in a better more friendly place to live, maybe did some volountry work or work in there community with people who need it, without recompense, others would follow and patriotism would then strengthen?
Does it mean slagging off the Nation and its governments?
Does it mean moaning about the laws and rules in the country?
Does it mean picking fault in everything thats happened and finding someone to blame?
Does it mean disagreeing with who the actual "Saint for the day" is
If so, there are people in this forum who are so patriotic it must hurt!!!
Why do people feel that waving a flag and saying they are patriotic for 1 day a year actually makes them patriotic, when the rest of the time the self same people are running down everything to do with England and saying how they wish they lived elsewhere or even do live elsewhere it just stinks to me!
I wont be going out getting pissed, putting a cheap tacky flag on my car or wearing a ridiculous hat but that does not mean i am not patriotic, i love my country and would without hesitation die for my country and i dont need 1 day a year to show it.
Maybe if the oh so patriotic of this country got off there arses and did something to make the place we live in a better more friendly place to live, maybe did some volountry work or work in there community with people who need it, without recompense, others would follow and patriotism would then strengthen?
Right i have read what you guys have put, i have watched the live stage managed debate on tv and baring in mind the job i do and this is really the first time i have shown any real interest in politics this is my view on it all.
First of all David Cameron is a smug toff who will look after the rich and make them mega rich, whilst trying to pretend he has actually at anytime lived in the real world and will pick up all the toff votes of the sheltered folks south of Birmingham and beyond!
Secondly Gordon Brown maybe a buffoon but everything that happens is not all his fault but he gets the blame cos he is in charge...move on 3 years from now and IF we have a new leader the same people on here who slagged off Brown will be slagging off the new leader, as far as our forces go Brown does care and can only act on what our senior officers and Millitary advisors tell him!
Thirdly Nick Clegg seem a nice guy with loads of good ideas but i wish i had a tenner for everytime i hear " i would vote Lib Dem but they have no chance" of course they have a chance if all the bloody people saying "i would but" actually voted for them instead of only voting for the "big 2" cos thats what your all brainwashed to do.
As far as the increase in NI goes of course all the people with businesses are going to moan cos its going to cost them a small amount of profit and after all they are already multi millionaires so will be voting for the toff regardless, i myself do not mind paying an increase in my NI if it means we start to pay off the deficit and our health,education,police etc get to maintain the funding and much improved service they have given us since the Tories lost power.
However in a nutshell to me politics is all about divide and rule, why do the partys never agree on anything, easy really, if they had nothing to argue about and to disagree over we would not need as many of the overpaid thieves and fraudsters and things would run too smoothly, the press would have nothing to report and life would be boring, why oh why can they not all stand together for the good of the country they say they are here to serve agree on a mainline plan and get a solutuion that works for all, afterall they are all quick to tell us how good they are!
First of all David Cameron is a smug toff who will look after the rich and make them mega rich, whilst trying to pretend he has actually at anytime lived in the real world and will pick up all the toff votes of the sheltered folks south of Birmingham and beyond!
Secondly Gordon Brown maybe a buffoon but everything that happens is not all his fault but he gets the blame cos he is in charge...move on 3 years from now and IF we have a new leader the same people on here who slagged off Brown will be slagging off the new leader, as far as our forces go Brown does care and can only act on what our senior officers and Millitary advisors tell him!
Thirdly Nick Clegg seem a nice guy with loads of good ideas but i wish i had a tenner for everytime i hear " i would vote Lib Dem but they have no chance" of course they have a chance if all the bloody people saying "i would but" actually voted for them instead of only voting for the "big 2" cos thats what your all brainwashed to do.
As far as the increase in NI goes of course all the people with businesses are going to moan cos its going to cost them a small amount of profit and after all they are already multi millionaires so will be voting for the toff regardless, i myself do not mind paying an increase in my NI if it means we start to pay off the deficit and our health,education,police etc get to maintain the funding and much improved service they have given us since the Tories lost power.
However in a nutshell to me politics is all about divide and rule, why do the partys never agree on anything, easy really, if they had nothing to argue about and to disagree over we would not need as many of the overpaid thieves and fraudsters and things would run too smoothly, the press would have nothing to report and life would be boring, why oh why can they not all stand together for the good of the country they say they are here to serve agree on a mainline plan and get a solutuion that works for all, afterall they are all quick to tell us how good they are!
Quote by Bluefish2009
I have no particular love for foxes...I despise most of the types who hunted them with hounds...so bollocks to them.
P.S. If fox hunting is about controlling the fox population ...why did many hunts breed them ? why are they not shot or poisoned ? why are hordes of tossers required to trample crops and generally destroy the land they're supposed to be protecting from the evil fox?
P.P.S. if Cameron says it's alright then it can't be....it's the rules
I have never encountered any TYPE! People from every walk of life, social background and status form the hunting community, from the poorest farm employee to the very well off land owner, and every one in between. There is no one type. It is a common misconception.
Really and these none types and the very poor can afford thoroughbread hunters too!!!
Swinging Heaven features sexually explicit material. To access this site you must be of the legal age to engage with the material of an adult site.
By entering Swinging Heaven you agree to the following;
- I am deemed an adult where I live, and I am at least 18 years old
- I am allowed to access & view sexually explicit material
- I accept responsibility for accessing this site