Have you heard of Godwin's Law?

Do you think social housing might be less expensive than renting from a private landlord generally, possibly, maybe?

Maybe, but many manage it.

And how would you think that many of the poorest and those on low incomes manage to do that?

[i "You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel."[/i

Is that your solution ?

Your LA and HA can't give you a two bed house so you find a private landlord who can and then claim your full housing benefit entitlement ?

Of course, everyone's life is so simple that they can just relocate for the sake of a government officials decree, it really is that simple isn't it - millions did it by government decree all over Europe in the 1940s.

We never saw them again of course, but still, I bet the housing benefit budget looked fantastic after that.

Yup,

and I invoke it whenever the need arises, as it did with you just then, your track record of swallowing rhetoric, unfounded theories and outright lies goes before you, at best you're very gullible...

Of course they can go to the private sector, providing they can find a private landlord willing to accept tenants in receipt of housing benefit. Unfortunately such landlords are and have been reducing in number.

Should they find a landlord willing to accpt HB tenants, they will invariably be paying more in rent than to a social housing provider. More rent equals more housing benefit. As I pointed out earlier, this is the stupidity of the proposals, more money will be spent in the name of savings.

Complete and utter fu[ic[/ikwittery

At least some of the god squad (archbishopee person(s)) are understanding the immorality of this Governments welfare reform bill.

Little different from the Victorian belief that, if someone was poor, then it was their own fault and the result of them being sinful.

You can see how that would appeal to Krikstaller, can't you?

Because sometimes daddy doesn't have the energy to bang both and you can't give something to one and not the other. Just ask them priest blokes.

The polarisation between rich and poor will never be cut, ever since the days of Marx and Weber the idea of change and good communism, equal share has just been manipulated into an extreme ala Stalin. Public has given up hope over the last 6 years, remember barracades on the motorways when petrol went over a quid, now it is a £1.40 and nothing is said.

No and I suggest, neither can you unless you live in France

I reckon they must be putting something in the water. It just seems that no body gives a fek anymore.

Aren't you supposed to be the Christian, you massive hypocrite?

What on earth makes you think that Christianity is at all benevolent ?

They freely admit to having nailed their only prophet to a tree at his own fathers request and it only got worse from that point on.

He's one of these I'm afraid.

My view on religion is underpinned by the thoughts of the two wise people below.



Having said that, if a bloke called Jesus did live a couple of thousand years ago, all he appeared to say was, ' "Live and Let Live", be good to each other and treat others as you'd like to be treat yourself. Don't be cruel and selfish and try to see the bigger picture.' I think.

How that got ized into the horrific organizations perpetrating directly antithetical dogma to those fairly innocent words and who operate in the poor sod's name to boot I can't conceive.

However, any person claiming to follow the "true" word of Jesus, then coming out with the evil bile that Kirkstaller did then (yes, I can see he is a very prejudicial person anyway) is either deluded or a pharisee.

How about, from a former, now deceased, singer songwriter?

[iGod is a concept
By which we measure our pain
I'll say it again
God is a concept
By which we measure
Our pain[/i

Except Kirkstaller's point was not about poverty but about choices. Children don't just happen. People choose to have them. If they have multiple children by multiple partners but expect the taxpayer to provide for all of them then while that protects the children, it excuses the adults from taking responsibility for their own choices. That has nothing to do with Victorian belief about poverty being equal to sinfulness.

It may come as some surprise to you, but quite often some children are born that were not part of a carefully scripted life plan, there was no spreadsheet to pinpoint the optimum financial moment at which to give birth, some kids just happen.

Especially those who's religion has fobidden the use of contraceptive devices, for instance.

Strange but true.

I do not oppose contraception - that is the Roman Catholic/Orthodox view. My personal view is the non-procreative sex with your spouse is OK. Paul actually teaches that sex within marriage is to control lust, not to procreate (1 Cor 7:9).

It is true that children can come at any point. However, if you do not use contraception then you always know it is a possibility. If your religion forbids contraception, don't have sex. That, or find another way of satiating your desires.

Porn, anyone?

Well indeed. The person he was referring to chose for his previous relationship to end, for instance.

As has been pointed out, children are not always carefully planned by any stretch of the imagination.

And so when people start out by asserting, from a point of assumption, that they know that everything that happens to a person is the result of specific choices, it's very, very much in the terrain of the blaming people for being poor.

That Mary didn't choose to have a child out of marriage, did she? Bloody lucky Joseph was so understanding. Possibly why her son doesn't appear to have been reported as saying much on the matter – expect telling people to pay their taxes and advising that riches will make it difficult to get into his dad's gaff.

The catholics have had that one sorted out for hundreds of years.

Its a tad unfortunate that its now illegal to use children in such a way but there you are.