An interesting video, brought to my attention by Edward Spalton, one most definitely worth watching and from which the heading to this post is taken Although based on America, it does have resonance with the United Kingdom. From the video, I paraphrase:
"Have you ever once seen a person in receipt of benefits ever thank those who made their benefits possible?"*
Where Bill Whittle compares two graphs does beg the question what results would a similar survey produce over here? So, is there such classifications as 'rich' and 'poor', or is it more a graduation of the degrees of 'rich'?
* The question is not just aimed at those on social security benefits, but also to our politicians!
18 comments:
A very good, concise analysis of just what is wrong with "welfare", both in the US and in England.
Generations of welfare dependants here now consider their hand-outs as entitlements, that they are actually OWED money for which they have not worked.
I know a number of people who have been on welfare hand-outs for years and they all have newer cars than I can afford; they all have Skye subscriptions which I cannot afford and they all pay far less than I do to enjoy better accommodation than I can afford.
Something is very wrong in England, and it has to be sorted out.
s.s Thank you. On the 'sorting out' bit, you may like to go back and read Constitution (1), (2) and (3). Also watch out for (4) and (5) to appear shortly.........
Even though this is from the New York Slimes, it's definitely worth reading. I thought you would have something witty to say about the tyranny mentioned in the article dealing with internet censorship and the riots.
Here's the money quote:
Some of the nations that have been criticized by the West for their own draconian crackdowns on inconvenient freedoms of speech have watched Britain’s recent struggles with barely disguised glee. In China, The Global Times, a government-controlled newspaper, praised Mr. Cameron’s comments, writing that “the open discussion of containment of the Internet in Britain has given rise to a new opportunity for the whole world.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/26/world/europe/26social.html
AR: Apologies for lack of wit or muc comment. As the last woman in my life repeatedly said: not in the mood at the moment........
Seriously, rather busy with my constitutional thingy.......
I figured that the article would be relevant to your constitutional concepts focus with the issue of free speech and all. Other than that, I agree with what was said in the video. This is what class warfare is all about. Getting other people angry at each other for political gain. There is no progress in Progressivism and no liberation in (American) Liberalism. Plus, Stephen Colbert is unfunny.
This attitude of entitlement goes as far as immigration. Just experience the way third world immigrants behave towards the indigenous population. There is not on iota of gratitude for being allowed to live amongst us, there is an arrogance and air of superiority that dares us to object to their presence. Those who truly feel as though they have been given a precious gift of security and the opportunity to contribute to our wonderful society would exhibit that sentiment clearly every day that they come into contact with us. That they don't (and I walk about places such as Stretford Arndale and the Trafford Centre in Greater Manchester) is manifest. The growing resentment of this influx will eventually boil over into serious violence. I wouldn't want to be an ethnic when it begins.
John: I was in the Trafford Centre this evening and remarked to my wife (who is half Afro-Carribean)that Asian shoppers seemed to be in the majority. It is strange feeling like a visitor in one's own country. I noticed that the Asian womenfolk wore various levels of burkha (or whatever they are called) and wondered whether that denoted how devout they were, or how devout their husbands were.
I must stress however that I wish them no harm; but I do wish harm to the evil politicians that have changed the demography of my country to such an extent.
Adam R
You are quite right. A neighbour is married to a Chinese lady who saw the TV reports of the Chinese government statement you mention. They pointed out that Chinese internet censorship was designed to protect the people against this sort of thing.
My neighbour says that Chinese people generally like to feel that the government is strong and in control. He also remarked that he feels a great deal safer in down-town Shanghai than he would in an English town centre in the evenings around the alcohol-fuelled week end.
This for me is the big open goal for those who wish to improve the lot of the working class in this country and why I think the modern Labour party and their political ilk are the biggest con going.
People that promote this big statist spending on the poor are in my opinion, poverty enablers. To them it is vital they treat them like veal calves, unable to stand on their own two feet and live their live through their own endeavours.
They do it because they know it buys them votes, ergo their actions are designed not for the poor but to ensure they remain in power by keeping these people people in poverty. They know the threat their place at the trough comes only if the poor are able to stand on their feet and no longer need them.
Have you noticed how rates of replication are highest for those in receipt of welfare benefits, whether immigrant or native ?
It is as if those who work for a living cannot afford to sustain a family - job insecurity, financial obligations - but those with guaranteed incomes and housing can re-populate the country with more of themselves ?
Studies in Germany revealed similar, plus which fewer men >40 have children than women >40, and graduate women are more likely to be childless.
It may be better to say that rates of replication data is published more for those for who data is available. I would also like to point-out that state pensioners are also benefit claimants.......the people who do not work, but claim benefit, will also be entitled to a state pension.
AR: Yes it is helpful for my project - wonder how cases of 'hurt' under HR laws would fare if there was no law on which to rely?
jic: That there are some in the immigrant population that appear to openly dare anyone to say anything, which then gives them the opportunity to instigate a court action......
k: Likewise I wish them no harm - if they accept our way of life and don't attempt to change it - and do wish harm, like you, to the bloody politicians!
ES: Be interesting to know what your neighbour's Chinese wife would say if she had not been 'conditioned' to believe in strong govt and how she felt about the increased 'freedom' she has here as against were she in China.....
RB: True, but it is also true that by setting one section of society against another the politicos guarantee that the people will not notice far greater 'controls' being put in place.
TT: Odd that you should mention that as having watched the video a second time last night, that same though had struck me.
J: Perhaps those that have not worked should receive the continuation of JS benefit only and no pension as they have not paid into the system?
"He also remarked that he feels a great deal safer in down-town Shanghai than he would in an English town centre in the evenings around the alcohol-fuelled week end"
Get him to say the government sucks and see how safe he feels. I can protect myself from drunks quite happily, the government are for more tyrannical and violent looters.
Single Acts of Tyranny,
I think that is rather a snide remark, given the completely different history and experience of our countries.
Generally speaking, China has had either a strong ruler or the anarchy of banditry and warlords. Guess which type of rule most ordinary people prefer. They hope, of course, that the ruler will be just and the officials not too corrupt and grasping.
There has been no experience or expectation of limited government, bound by law and constitution - something we are in the process of losing anyway.
For the time being, it seems that the present Chinese rulers (who are presiding over the most remarkable economic transformation) continue to enjoy "the mandate of heaven".
I suppose it is a little similar to Russia where most Russians seem to prefer Vladimir Putin and friends to hold things together.
When you have a huge land area, borders which are not easily defensible and many diverse ethnic groups in one state, the alternative to strong government may be the most appalling anarchy and strife.
Saot Agreed, oh how I do agree.....!
ES: Please do not accept my agreement of Saot's comment as snide.
The fact that the Chinese had a choice between those you mention and chose what they thought would be the most beneficial to them - which wasn't is understandable. However, what they got was totalitarianism and a dictatorship, one in which as with all such systems meant the people suffered whilst the elite did not.
Re your 3rd paragraph - I repeat an earlier comment. It would be interesting to hear your neighbour's wifes comment about the lack of freedom in China, even today, and the few freedoms she has in the UK today - which must be more than she would have in China?
I will make some enquiries when the opportunity offers. She is a very lively personality but her mindset is on its own wavelength.
Family loyalty and mutual support, respect for ancestors and traditional things like that play a far greater part than ideas about politics, I think.
ES: Fair comment and yes, you are right about family loyalities etc etc - something which I have always felt was an important part of Chinese society and something we in the UK have lost sight of.......
Post a Comment