Skip to main content


Showing posts from April, 2013

More Problems With The Welfare Card Idea

I was thinking, on my way up to the Post Office, about the welfare cash card idea that flared up, like a pustulent sore, recently. I’m sure it will return.
Is the idea to put all the claimant’s money onto the card? How else would it work? How would the money get onto the card if it’s paid, as it is currently, into the person’s bank? Wouldn’t the bank have something to say about this; after all don’t they make money from their own transactions.
If I want to pay for something from my local shop, or any small retailer (i.e. not a supermarket), there is always a minimum spend requirement for debit cards. This is about £7. I’m told this is to cover bank charges. Wouldn’t this apply for payments made using a welfare card? That money has to come off the card/from the claimant to the business, no doubt at a cost. This means that claimants will be forced to spend more than they’d like just to get what they need, even if the money is frontloaded onto the card.
If the payments are to be put dir…

Fear and Scrounging

I’ve mentioned this before, but I’ve never actually watched it before (and with good reason), but having my breakfast I just accidentally caught five minutes of BBC’s Saints and Scroungers. My god, I just had to put finger to key and mash!
In about half an hour I have to catch a bus to town to do my shopping; how do I know there won’t be some DWP private dick hiding in a car watching me. How do I know he won’t be filing a report saying “well, he can walk and carry shopping, clearly he can work!” That’s the point: who else is the target audience but the daytime unemployed. The people the media criticise for consuming daytime media. Be afraid.
In the space of the five minutes I exposed myself to, I have gone from calm to shit scared. This is what this awful propagandist populist (you can tell, it’s hosted by Matt Allwright) rubbish has done to me. This is what black and white Third Man style stock ‘reconstruction’ footage of investigators with long lenses or sat in cars with clipboards…


The Tories say: “it’s tough times; you must accept what’s available. The world doesn’t owe you a living.”
That last part always offends me. Of course the world owes you a living – you were born into and onto this earth, how can you not be entitled to a stake and a share? Who are they to tell us otherwise? Why do we let these born to rule – people who have been owed everything and continually feel the most entitled among us – elites treat us this way?
If one must accept what’s available then surely that is a failure of government? The Tories protest that the state is a burden and must be reduced (i.e. sold off), but they are the state: that’s what government is. They by and large come from the state: that’s what the aristocracy is. The ruling elite who have all the advantages in life handed to them on a plate. So therefore their argument must be seen as either an admission of failure bordering on ineptitude perhaps even negligence, or an abrogation of responsibility. If the state cann…


In years to come will we be asked if we can remember the details of our lives the day we heard the news. I was at a bus stop listening to Radio 2 (unless I wasn't, details are sketchy). It's hard to remember anything or think clearly in the midst of this nauseating propaganda pea souper; the outpouring of Tory sycophancy and mistruth has been staggering - and it's still going on, partly because of the disturbances caused by 'leftists' dancing on Thatcher's (for it is she that I speak of) grave.
I am currently typing this (if, thanks to this broken keyboard, it can be called such) at Bristol library. On the way here I heard a couple of students, kids, on the seat behind me; one of them was saying that she wanted to get into 'sales'. That is the legacy of the 'iron lady'. Even when I was at school (which was during her heyday) I remember people saying similar things; one lad saying he wanted to get into accountancy. Even then I sneered - ok we n…


If you didn't see the Daily Mail's headline in the wake of the Philpott verdict then you'd have to be blind or perhaps very lucky. 
Vile product of the welfare state, is how they lead yesterday's episode of the daily hate crime that is the Mail. Splashed above a family picture of the now-guilty Mick Philpott. I have never in my life read a headline as vulgar, as crass and as deeply offencive as that. 
It's been no secret for a long time that decent journalism has been in terminal decline in Britain, but this takes the absolute fucking biscuit - to use the death of children to push an odious agenda like this is not just a new low, it's the absolute nadir of journalism. Yet there will be plenty of people that believe this garbage. Plenty of programmed, emotionally charged insecure people that the Mail has convinced are the target of every weak minded lesser lazier person on the face of god's green earth. Whether it's foreigners, people practising one of …

More BBC Bias

Yesterday I blogged about James Bartholomew and his bullshit performance on 5live's morning phone in. I didn't mention that he was opposed in that discussion by Polly Toynbee, who many see as a voice of the left - a 'guardianista'. This is because she was useless, conceding way too much and providing bugger all authoritative opposition to the flurry of unchecked right wing histrionics.
However at that point I had not listened to the entire discussion. Later, at about the 50 minute mark (after the umpteenth travel and weather update) the final three callers were brought on, together. Eileen called in from the Benefit Justice campaign, Jason called in as the voice of entrepreneurs from, of all places, the south of France, and Francine, a small business owning bigot, came on and spoke first. 
What she said was some of the most disgusting bigotry I have ever heard. Using the term 'benefit breeders' this ignorant bigot proceeded into a lunatic tirade against feral …

I Hate James Bartholomew

Know the Tory mindset: according to these creatures welfare breeds dependency. Meanwhile they do not want to set a minimum wage, they do not want to create legislation to protect the un - and under - employed from the predations of the system they benefit from. That word is chosen deliberately, because they like benefits for themselves - the ability to sack whom they like, when they like and how they like. In this UKIP are the same. This is the febrile heart of the right wing.
Yesterday on 5 Live's laughable morning phone in - bigots drink for free - another right wing excuse for a human, James Bartholomew, revealed another aspect of their nasty prejudice and staggering ignorance. Not surprisingly this vile creature was once a banker. He writes (if one can call it that) for the Telegraph and though I don't know the content of his ballot paper, I dare say I can guess. He props up every tory myth about the unemployed and welfare with dull witted aplomb.
He believes people have …