It's worth remembering that many of the staff at the sharp end suffer almost as much as their clients.

But where are the Kurt Gerstein figures

And from the trial of Eichmann

_________________
"...now, with a most inhuman cruelty, they who have put out the people’s eyes, reproach them of their blindness..."

Nearly 1,400 Brits rake in £30,000 a year in housing benefit
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2182477/Nearly-1-400-Brits-rake-30-000-year-housing-benefit.html


I'm pretty sure that is been known for a while that although amounts claimed are large, the number of people who actually claimed it were extremely small.


So The Mail is just regurgitating a shorter article in the Sun.


1,400 out of 5,000,000 - I make that 0.028% of all claimants, yet the Tories bang on about it as if everyone claims it and uses it as a shield against criticism of the other welfare changes.

Here's a link to the question actually asked (nealry a month ago)
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2012-07-05a.114669.h&s=speaker%3A24778#g114669.q0
Whilst the number of housing benefit claimants rose over the year, the number claiming the high amounts actually dropped by 700, and this is before the cap is being intro duced.

Another thing that grinds my gears about housing benefit is that nobody asks a landlord to justify the high rents they charge to the taxpayer, EVER.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2188075/Jobless-mother-seven-insists-family-deserve-1-25MILLION-taxpayer-funded-home-trashed.html#comments

So the home owner was given a big chunk of public money to do up her house so she could rent it out to people who were homeless. She rakes in thousands in housing benefit and then three years later she starts to moan because the house has been knocked around a bit. If she really hasn't been near the house for 3 years then she is nothing more than a slum landlord who got what she deserved.

_________________
www.newshuddlines.blogspot.com

£1.25m for that? I know London house prices are daft, but really? Also, cramming eight people into a three-bed house doesn't exactly sound like living the life of Riley to me.

_________________
Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle.

Someone finally caught up with that little 'Arbeit Macht Frei' faux pas, it seems:

_________________
"If the past really is a foreign country, I'm surprised that 'The Daily Mail' would want to live there.” - Roger Quimbly

That's "Arbeit Macht Frei", Sam.

_________________
I'm a nasty, violent lefty. You cunt.

*facepalm*

I got up about half an hour ago and I haven't had my caffeine yet. Despite having it in front of me, the spelling must've blurred. I didn't even notice.

_________________
"If the past really is a foreign country, I'm surprised that 'The Daily Mail' would want to live there.” - Roger Quimbly

As the actress said to the bishop...






It's a bit warm, I didn't bring a coat...

Finally a Mail article that reveals what is actually happening as a result of benefit reforms.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2206976/Paralysed-teenager-life-support-birth-told-attend-interview-prove-t-work-lose-benefits.html

Reading some of the comments though is rather depressing many Mail readers seem to think that episodes like this are a price worth paying if it helps to identify a few fraudsters.

_________________
www.newshuddlines.blogspot.com

Are we finally winning the battle against benefit cheats? Convictions soar 40% in two years after investigators are given access to Sky TV bills

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z29UYhSYZY

Still plenty of idiotic comments but at least the top rated speak a little more sense than your reactionary reader.

_________________
My blog: https://stevenplrose.wordpress.com/

So from that we can assume that the government believes that if you are on any kind of benefits you shouldn't be able to afford digital television? They really will be seeking out people's plasmas next.

And 8 million tax paid by Starbucks? I thought I'd seen a headline in the newspaper racks in W.H Smiths today that said they had in fact paid nothing since 2009. Not that 8 million is much of an improvement if that's true but still.

_________________
"Now get those trousers off before someone dies!"

That may backfire (the digital TV one). As detailed in Mark Thomas's Peoples Manifesto book, you're basically telling people how to spend their dole money. And if the Sun get wind of it, they'll have to run a counter-campaign for everyone's right to sit on their arse and watch Sky Sports.

_________________
Ten seconds... the pain begins.

Fifteen seconds... you can't breathe.

Twenty seconds... you give up and turn off the Jeremy Vine show.

All television is digital now (my region was the last to change on 26th September). Digital costs no more than analogue, i.e. the licence.
So the answer to your question is no.

The reason they are accessing Sky bills is to see who is spending lots of money on satellite and cable channels.

Nothing at all to do with digital, let alone plasma TVs.

_________________
That subtle admixture of the absurd and the surreally plausible...

Not exactly. That isn't fraud. What they are looking for is men paying for Sky packages when only a woman claiming to be a single mother is officially living at that address.

_________________
Sick Left-wing Zealot.