Is it time to demollish the welfare state in the UK

by Gill 136 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  PaulJ

  I still cant get the earlier idea of 'death squads' out of my head. To quietly pick off the oikey little chavs (rat-children) one by one......

  Beautiful.
• 

  Crumpet

  ~wonders why Crumpet carries packing tape in her handbag~

  
  to seal up the squealing mouths of bairns of course!

  (Actually its a sex toy - works much better than silk scarves and is less heavy than handcuffs)
• 

  greendawn

  I think the average birth rate ratio in the EU as a whole is 1.7 which means it takes 10 women to produce 17 children, not enough to replenish the population should 2.2 for that to happen. Moslem women have a ratio of 6 ie 10 women produce 60 children.
• 

  talesin

  Interesting how the men just drop their seed, and the women are the ones 'producing' ,,, LOL!!!

  Too funny, we are still considered mere sperm receptacles and incubators ,,,,

  Haven't seen any comments about making the sperm donors responsible for flagrantly spreading their seed to the masses of SRs out there

  ... or for keeping the nasty brats quiet

  tal
• 

  funkyderek

  I have a solution to the problem of the welfare state, which happily also provides a solution to the energy crisis and the growing problem of obesity.

  It requires an initial outlay for several thousand exercise bikes, some magnets and a lot of copper wire but after that, should be cost-saving and perhaps even generate revenue.

  If people can't find a real job, then in order to get benefits they would have to spend a portion of their week - nothing too intensive, maybe four or five hours a day - on an exercise bike, generating electricity. The advantages of this would be obvious. Most likely, the majority of moochers would give up and get a job. Those who did not would cost the state no more than they do now, but would at least offset some of these costs by producing clean, renewable energy. Perhaps people could even earn more money by doing overtime. This would of course, improve their health and general well-being. Exercising is always going to be healthier than sitting at home watching Kilroy and drinking Carlsberg Special Brew.

  Many people, of course, will be unwilling to do this, even after their benefits are stopped. Fortunately, there are other ways of generating energy from a human body, and while they may not be as environmentally friendly or renewable, they are more cost-effective and permanent.
• 

  PaulJ

  FunkyD

  It requires an initial outlay for several thousand exercise bikes, some magnets and a lot of copper wire

  I was bought just after reading this.... Great Idea.
• 

  talesin

  by producing clean, renewable energy

  Tree-hugger!

  I suppose you're going to tell me that we will run out of fossil fuels some time soon.

  Bleedin' liberals.

  t
• 

  funkyderek

  I suppose you're going to tell me that we will run out of fossil fuels some time soon.

  No, not at all. But the primary purpose of this exercise was to fix the unemployment problem. Sending them down mines might be another solution that would satisfy you, but I'd prefer that the mines were manned by delinquent children.
• 

  talesin

  fd

  I hear you, but I was thinking more of production work ... you know, it would generate more cash for the economy.

  Why waste valuable free labour on saving the environment?

  t

  *actually does hug trees*
• 

  badboy

  Perhaps only disabled people like myself should receive benefits, I am one person who actually hates receiving benefits.