And to think CB started off by saying: "Lets try and (sic) talk instead of nasty comments."
That went down well...
Poor people
-
max_tranmere
- Posts: 4734
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
cockneygeezer2009
"Max obviously thinks all poverty or all 'poor' people are that way because it is self inflicted??? To put him straight only in the minority of cases is poverty self inflicted. Minorities are not the majority (unless you have deep seated prejudices). Just because one millionaire evades tax doesn't mean all millionaires are tax evading scum."
Not sure where you're coming from here. I never said poverty was self-inflicted, I said people should prioritise and spend their money on eating FIRST then anything left over can go on luxuries like smoking and getting pissed. Let's say you saw me counting the change I had on me and you noticed numerous pound coins in my hand that I then place in my pocket. I then say to you "I'm off to the food bank for a bag of pasta and a loaf of bread, they cost a pound each but I can't afford to but them". I'm sure you're response would be: "but what about all those pound coins I just saw you putting in your pocket? They would more than cover the cost of the pasta and bread". I reply with: "well they would but I intend spending that on a packet of fags and some cans of beer, that is my priority, food is secondary - and by the way there's the food bank to give me all that isn't there? You'd probably think I was someone who did not have my priorites in reasonable order and was someone who clearly was NOT so skint that he had to attend the food bank. This is true of most who go, how the hell can they afford to smoke and drink (as most do) yet don't have a pound or two pounds for food?
"Most ridiculous post on this forum this year. Can anyone beat this ridiculous post?"
I think you'll find there have been more ridiculous posts on this forum this year than mine.
"So everyone on benefits is living it up and certainly 'not poor'. Lol. Everything you see on TV isn't true either."
People are not 'living it up' on Benefits, the question at the top of this thread asked about defining what being poor is, and I've answered that question. I defined a certain line in my earlier post and anyone who falls below that is 'poor' and anyone who is above it is not. People who might be just above the line are not particularly well-off but are not poor either. Anyone who can afford to smoke like a chimney, when a packet of fags comes to about half the WEEKLY food bill of a student, and can afford eight cans of Fosters, at ?7.00 a go, clearly has money for day to day expenditure and should not be regarded as poor. Do you really think that people who have money for fags and beer should be taken seriously when they say they haven't got a pound for a loaf of bread? Do you think food banks should help them? I don't.
Not sure where you're coming from here. I never said poverty was self-inflicted, I said people should prioritise and spend their money on eating FIRST then anything left over can go on luxuries like smoking and getting pissed. Let's say you saw me counting the change I had on me and you noticed numerous pound coins in my hand that I then place in my pocket. I then say to you "I'm off to the food bank for a bag of pasta and a loaf of bread, they cost a pound each but I can't afford to but them". I'm sure you're response would be: "but what about all those pound coins I just saw you putting in your pocket? They would more than cover the cost of the pasta and bread". I reply with: "well they would but I intend spending that on a packet of fags and some cans of beer, that is my priority, food is secondary - and by the way there's the food bank to give me all that isn't there? You'd probably think I was someone who did not have my priorites in reasonable order and was someone who clearly was NOT so skint that he had to attend the food bank. This is true of most who go, how the hell can they afford to smoke and drink (as most do) yet don't have a pound or two pounds for food?
"Most ridiculous post on this forum this year. Can anyone beat this ridiculous post?"
I think you'll find there have been more ridiculous posts on this forum this year than mine.
"So everyone on benefits is living it up and certainly 'not poor'. Lol. Everything you see on TV isn't true either."
People are not 'living it up' on Benefits, the question at the top of this thread asked about defining what being poor is, and I've answered that question. I defined a certain line in my earlier post and anyone who falls below that is 'poor' and anyone who is above it is not. People who might be just above the line are not particularly well-off but are not poor either. Anyone who can afford to smoke like a chimney, when a packet of fags comes to about half the WEEKLY food bill of a student, and can afford eight cans of Fosters, at ?7.00 a go, clearly has money for day to day expenditure and should not be regarded as poor. Do you really think that people who have money for fags and beer should be taken seriously when they say they haven't got a pound for a loaf of bread? Do you think food banks should help them? I don't.
-
max_tranmere
- Posts: 4734
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
EssexLad
I've answered cockneygeezer's points in my post just now.
If I had my way people who attended food banks would not be people who smoked or drank. They see that as more important than eating, as I've explained in my recent comments. Arginald confirms my view, that a lot of food bank attendee's see fags and beer as being more important than food, with the examples he gives. It's odd that a charity facility, a food bank, exists to give people one or two pounds worth of food, because they're apparently so poor they haven't got one or two pounds, yet they HAVE got many multiples of that for 20 B&H and 7 cans of Fosters.
If I had my way people who attended food banks would not be people who smoked or drank. They see that as more important than eating, as I've explained in my recent comments. Arginald confirms my view, that a lot of food bank attendee's see fags and beer as being more important than food, with the examples he gives. It's odd that a charity facility, a food bank, exists to give people one or two pounds worth of food, because they're apparently so poor they haven't got one or two pounds, yet they HAVE got many multiples of that for 20 B&H and 7 cans of Fosters.
-
Cuntybollocks
- Posts: 378
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Cunty
"Nasty comments like this, you mean?"
Yes David, that's exactly what I mean. Poor Number 6. My only defence is that I was somewhat dismayed that he likened me to "shit off my shoes" or something like that, and I reacted without composing myself.
I will try to never let it happen again. !wink!
Yes David, that's exactly what I mean. Poor Number 6. My only defence is that I was somewhat dismayed that he likened me to "shit off my shoes" or something like that, and I reacted without composing myself.
I will try to never let it happen again. !wink!
-
cockneygeezer2009
- Posts: 516
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: cockneygeezer2009
"Anyone who can afford to smoke like a chimney, when a packet of fags comes to about half the WEEKLY food bill of a student, and can afford eight cans of Fosters, at ?7.00 a go, clearly has money for day to day expenditure and should not be regarded as poor."
If they are on benefits I disagree. They shouldn't be classed as poor. They should be classed as stupid idiotic poor.
The addicts on benefits should explain their actions. I don't think they will somehow. Not all people going to food banks are drinkers and smokers though.
If they are on benefits I disagree. They shouldn't be classed as poor. They should be classed as stupid idiotic poor.
The addicts on benefits should explain their actions. I don't think they will somehow. Not all people going to food banks are drinkers and smokers though.
The harder you cum. The more you enjoy it.