Posted by electricfog on Fri 1 May 09, 9:22 PM to electricfog's blog.
Tags: Walsall (WS)
...if so, I apologise. It's just my thoughts on stuff I heard and saw this morning.
Went to see the Australian Pink Floyd last night (spectacular as always) and stayed in a small hotel which is run by a large chain.
No complaints at all about the accommodation - heck, it was even a 'smoking' room!
Breakfast was another matter.
Lovely breakfast room, food fine.
NOT fine was Ms Chavette and three of her (seven, she said, but I am not sure she was counting the one 'on board', if you see what I mean)
Mummy (slim, apart from the bump) was fetchingly dressed in skintight jeans and t-shirt, and pink, fluffy slippers. Kiddies (not terribly badly behaved, considering) were in school clothes.
Her very loud conversation with a bloke on the other side of the room was about the fact that 'the council' had only offered her a three bedroomed house, so she'd refused it, because she wanted something 'nice'.
She got up to go to the hot drinks table and took LOADS of sugar packets from the drawer there. She then went back to her table and told the oldest kid to empty the container of sugar packets, then put them all in his pockets.
My taxes are going to keep this uncontrolled breeder in a hotel (so no housework for her) where her kids are being taken to school by someone else (hence fluffy slippers) and she's not only nicking stuff but also teaching her kids that stealing is fine.
STEALING IS NOT FUCKING FINE.
Mr Brown, I want my taxes back, please.
I do NOT want to pay money to keep people like that in stolen sugar.
Nor do I want to have to pay hotel fees for myself when I am already paying for Ms Chavette to stay there indefinitely.
| 1 May 09, 9:25 PM Jezzebelle UK, 10 yrs  |
WOW... A smoking room? Our last holiday in Portugal didn't have one of those!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jezzebelle/ | |||||
| 1 May 09, 9:33 PM electricfog UK, 7 yrs |
| |||||
| 1 May 09, 10:05 PM yoda_dog UK(HP), 6 yrs  |
Erm...just a few points... Skin tight jeans and a t-shirt: what should she have been wearing? 7 kids and a mum in a 3-bed house? Depending on the age and the gender of the kids, that's probably impossible. Well behaved considering? Considering what? Uncontrolled breeder? I take it you know her background then. Let's put it another way...who's to say she's not a Catholic who's just got away from her violent husband? Stealing? You're right it is wrong. Upsetting? No, I just find your narrow mindedness disappointing, but that's my fault, I have a little too much faith in human nature I suppose. "Bottom line: it's couples who are truly right for each other wade through the same crap as everybody else, but the big difference is they don't let it take them down. One of those two people will stand up and fight for that relationship every time." | |||||
| 1 May 09, 10:12 PM little_belle UK(E), 4 yrs  |
What yoda-dog said. But, in addition...it's sugar for god's sake! Everyone steals sugar - it's like taking the soap and shampoo from a hotel. It's not the end of the world and if she hadn't been a 'chav' I don't think it would have bothered you. ETA - Not having a go at you, cos we all make judgements and there's no point denying it, but its good to have them challenged, right? My sorry name has made it to graffiti, Edited 1 May 09, 10:14 PM by little_belle | |||||
| 1 May 09, 10:41 PM ian_wilts UK, 5 yrs |
One or two extra sugars, not the entire container. It's a good idea not to have a stupidly-loud conversation about how a three-bedroomed house isn't good enough for you too. It doesn't exactly endear you to those who pay their way. I'm not against the benefits system per se. I was unemployed for a while back in the Nineties recession, but I looked for work and took training courses while on the dole. The small handful of people who milk the system are very annoying to those who use it legitimately. | |||||
| 1 May 09, 10:52 PM little_belle UK(E), 4 yrs |
If I had a family of 8, soon to be 9, a three bedroomed house wouldn't be good enough for me either!
I certainly understand where the OP is coming from. There are, and always will be, flaws in the benefit system. But nothing wrong in playing devil's advocate. And I still maintain the sugar issue is just silly My sorry name has made it to graffiti, | |||||
| 1 May 09, 11:13 PM Eomer_Of_Rohan 5 yrs |
If the sugar was put out gratis for hotel patrons it wasn't exactly stealing and they never have enough sugar in the rooms. "Honesty is the most offensive thing in the world." | |||||
| 2 May 09, 12:24 AM yoda_dog UK(HP), 6 yrs |
The impossible bit comes from mixing girls and boys who are above a certain age in the same bedrooms (social services will get involved if they are aware). That and, realistically, if there isn't enough floor space in the rooms for the amount of beds and their clothes, what are they meant to do? I could go into the maths of it, but I'm sure you're not stupid. There are very few that really see more kids as meal tickets, though the papers would make you think otherwise. Yeah, they are out there, but it's not the norm. Why can't she take them to school? I don't know, there could be many reasons. Maybe she's got low blood pressure with the pregnancy and the doctors have said she's not to. Maybe she can't drive and the child goes to a special needs school. Maybe the council have found that it's cheaper to pay for a taxi than it is to pay for child care if she has children below school age.
Which part of "Stealing? you're right it's wrong" is saying it's ok to steal sugar?
So, where do you draw the line? When does 'assisting to get on their feet' become 'freeloading'?
"Bottom line: it's couples who are truly right for each other wade through the same crap as everybody else, but the big difference is they don't let it take them down. One of those two people will stand up and fight for that relationship every time." | |||||
| 2 May 09, 1:50 AM J_o_sh UK, 4 yrs |
Get real, there are thousands of people freeloading, I know a few myself, couples on benefit, no intentions of getting jobs but still producing kids. That is freeloading, if you aren't in employment or don't have a partner that can support you then you shouldn't be reproducing. Those that have kids whilst on benefits should not get an increase in payments. Why should I pay for them if they can't or won't get off their lazy arses ? Just to add I wouldn't lose a moments sleep if kids went short if they reduced benefit for mass producing lazy parents. I should be financially responsible for my kids and mine only. Yes support those who have kids and have lost jobs but not those planning families with no intentions or prospects of working. | |||||
| 2 May 09, 8:14 AM Max_Bedroom 5 yrs |
I saw a recent thread about a playboy millionaire who had been accused or raping and threatening a woman. Someone immediately said "I bet he is guilty" and was jumped on by everyone. Then someone said "I bet she is lying" and still got jumped on by everyone. The point being, that nobody really knew who was guilty of what, and that expressing opinions one way or the other was unfair and counter productive. Is this not the case here? Nobody really knows much about this woman, except what someone who clearly disapproved of her described. Yes, there are people taking the piss out of the system. Yes, this sucks. But, you generally can't tell if they are simply by looking at them. Have you ever paid cash for something, negating the need to pay VAT? I have, and it is illegal, and denies the government tax income. Is that alright with you? Or do you want to criticise me? Or maybe you have done it. If so, you have probably made your peace with it, thinking, well, everybody does it. I am not trying to get all preachy - far from it. It just seems to me that we all have principals that we are prepared to compromise, and laws we are prepared to break - especially if we have little to no chance of getting caught. We all play the system, when it suits us. The sugar thing - what if you wanted to make a cup of tea in your room, and had run out of sugar? Is that ok? What if you really liked tea, so took ten packets to see you through. Is that ok? When does it cease to become ok? When someone draws an arbitrary line in the sand? Oh, and whilst I am probably annoying a load of people - The is "chav" thing. I seem to remember some celebrity chef getting into tabloid trouble last year for referring to someone as a "pikey" - he was called rascist. Is the word "chav" not used to characterise white, working class, poorly educated people with dubious sartorial taste? It seem to me that it is a lazy way for "non chavs" to look down their noses at people that they feel superior to. But as these people are predominantly white, well, that's ok. Now if they weren't... Do I sneer at people that annoy me when I am out and about? Of course I do. Do I mutter to myself about their boorish, loud behaviour? Yep. Do I lazily characterise people, simply because I am in a bad mood and it suits me to do so? Absolutely. But do I actually think that I am undoubtedly superior to them in every way, formed on the first impression of them? God, I wish life was that simple.
|
