Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

news & politics:discussion


zahidf

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Barry Fish said:

So is that a rule you apply to all the contracts you take ? 

Personally yes.

But I'm not in charge of what contracts we take.

I have in the past turned down work which went against my beliefs/morals and it's cost me 1000's

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Skip997 said:

Spot on.

This is something too many people don't understand or in Barry's case refuse to understand.

Once more for those at the back/hard of hearing/right wing twats:

PEOPLE ON BENEFITS (rightly or "wrongly") ARE NOT TO BLAME

Sadly that’s one way the right feel like they can win by telling us it’s people less fortunate that are the issue when in reality it’s them. They try to deflect away from themselves hoping that the public won’t notice how corrupt and nasty they are. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I've been both a freeloader and a tax avoider...so f**kyou.

The irony being the Tories are the biggest freeloaders of all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Skip997 said:

Are you sure?

I thought it was only those on benefits, regardless of need.

Yep. That’s why the Tories peddle that crap so people don’t pay attention to them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Skip997 said:

Spot on.

This is something too many people don't understand or in Barry's case refuse to understand.

Once more for those at the back/hard of hearing/right wing twats:

PEOPLE ON BENEFITS (rightly or "wrongly") ARE NOT TO BLAME

similarly, and contrary to your claim - those that create wealth are not to blame - freeloaders are to blame for the destruction of wealth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Neil said:

similarly, and contrary to your claim - those that create wealth are not to blame - freeloaders are to blame for the destruction of wealth.

So if this were true, which it clearly isn't, then there'd be no wealthy people in the world.

Correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

So if this were true, which it clearly isn't, then there'd be no wealthy people in the world.

Correct.

you're only right if you can't get your hands on others wealth to destroy it. as your posts show you go out of your way to take what you can.

Edited by Neil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Skip997 said:

Plenty of this going on.

Or at least greed preventing people getting what they are due.

yes, you stopping a cafe owner being paid for their goods & work. you are what you do!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Neil said:

yes, you stopping a cafe owner being paid for their goods & work. you are what you do!

Give it a rest you absolute nutter

You act as if I stole someone's lively hood. As it happens said cafe owner has happily and comfortably retired, even after the massive loss of about 10p due to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

Give it a rest you absolute nutter

You act as if I stole someone's lively hood. As it happens said cafe owner has happily and comfortably retired, even after the massive loss of about 10p due to me.

A billionaire business owner gives people their livelihood and you act like he stole from you. I can form opinions from what you post same as you do for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Neil said:

A billionaire business owner gives people their livelihood and you act like he stole from you. I can form opinions from what you post same as you do for me.

I've absolutely no idea what you're going on about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lot of posts here today! 

Barry, I feel like there's an implication from you that the 96% of valid claims aren't all entirely valid, is that right? Or are you just really pissed off about the 4%? My original point around punishing the real claimants was based on the premises that it would be impossible (or at least not cost effective) to clamp down on benefit fraud without also impacting real benefit claimants. 

If that's true, then I'd happily take the hit on 4% fraudulently claiming to ensure the remaining 96% get what they need.

 

Also on the subject of tax avoidance, tax avoidance isn't equal. Rich people avoid more tax by nature of them being rich (see: SIPP government top up payments). The system is incredibly messed up. Everyone has the same ISA and SIPP yearly contribution allowances, but how many people on a Basic Rate of tax will ever be able to utilise those? And then to add insult to injury, a Higher or Additional rate tax payer needs to pay less into a SIPP to hit that allowance. How is that fair?

 

And finally, the weird attempt to draw a comparison between Glastonbury volunteers working for their tickets to benefit claimants is one of the thinnest arguments I've seen around here for a while 😂

Entertaining read though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, cellar said:

And finally, the weird attempt to draw a comparison between Glastonbury volunteers working for their tickets to benefit claimants is one of the thinnest arguments I've seen around here for a while 😂

Entertaining read though.

That's not really what it was about though.

It's a pathetic attempt to discredit me, with no substance behind it, and to fair Neil has been far more "guilty" than Barry.

For some reason Neil took an instant dislike to me as soon as I started posting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Latest Activity

    • I'd be absolutely amazed if they went without a female headliner.
    • Basement Jaxx 120  Billy Bragg 90 Chase & Status 150 MAX (+10) CMAT 150 MAX  Confidence Man 130 David Byrne 150 MAX Everything Everything 130  Faithless 75 Fatboy Slim 100 Four Tet 130  Garbage 125 GOAT 70  Greentea Peng 125  Joy Crookes 110  Kneecap 125 Lorde 150 MAX The Maccabees 120  Nile Rodgers & Chic 150 MAX The Prodigy 150 MAX Pulp 150 MAX RAYE 80 Richard Ashcroft 110  Scissor Sisters 110  Self Esteem 140  The Streets 100  Super Furry Animals 100 Underworld 150 MAX Wilco 20  Wolf Alice 150 MAX
    • Basement Jaxx 120  Billy Bragg 90 Chase & Status 140 CMAT 150 MAX  Confidence Man 130 (+10) David Byrne 150 MAX Everything Everything 130  Faithless 75 Fatboy Slim 100 Four Tet 130  Garbage 125 GOAT 70  Greentea Peng 125  Joy Crookes 110  Kneecap 125 Lorde 150 MAX The Maccabees 120  Nile Rodgers & Chic 150 MAX The Prodigy 150 MAX Pulp 150 MAX RAYE 80 Richard Ashcroft 110  Scissor Sisters 110  Self Esteem 140  The Streets 100  Super Furry Animals 100 Underworld 150 MAX Wilco 20  Wolf Alice 150 MAX
    • Kinda sounds like we’re heading towards Fender, Fontaines & Harry however I can’t see them not getting a female headliner so think it’ll be Fender or Fontaines and another. They’ll obviously try for Madonna but they’ve also tried before, really depends on whether she’s bothered about it. 
    • and we are all set up for 222 and 122😉😊
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...