Obese family scams benefits

[satalexton]

Taken from [URL removed because of porn links]

A family which is so obese that they cannot work has convinced the government to pay them the equivalent of a substantial salary in benefits; not satisfied, they demand even more, saying “We deserve more”, and claiming that “All that healthy food is too expensive.”

The Chawner family claims £22,500 ($33,000, or $45,000 prior to the UK’s recent economic collapse) annually in benefits, having lived off state handouts without working for 11 years.

Still, even this is not enough and they demand more:

“What we get barely covers the bills and puts food on the table. It’s not our fault we can’t work. We deserve more.”

In total, the family comes in at some 525kg.

The gargantuan clan claim economic hardship forces them to eat vast quantities of unhealthy food, whilst advancing the contradictory claim that they are suffering a genetic condition:

“All that healthy food, like fruit and veg, is too expensive. We’re fat because it’s in our genes. Our whole family is overweight.”

Their diet, coming to 3,000 calories a day each, much more than the usual recommended maximums, leaves little doubt as to how they attained their exaggerated girth:

“We have cereal for breakfast, bacon butties for lunch and microwave pies with mashed potato or chips for dinner.”

Their benefits come in the form of “Jobseeker’s Allowance” (unemployment benefit), income support and “incapacity benefit”, as well as a disability allowance for Mrs Chawner’s asthma and epilepsy, a result of her weight. Additional money for conditions such as heart disease and diabetes top off the largesse.

Emma excuses herself with the claim that she is too busy training to be a hairdresser to exercise, and then pleas ignorance:

“I’m a student and don’t have time to exercise; we all want to lose weight to stop the abuse we get in the street, but we don’t know how.”

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Needless to say I'm appauled....:furious3:

[Hooahguy]

jeez. this is pretty much "news of the weird" material. in the backroom.

[Reverend Joe]

I used to work indoor construction at a hospital. Those people look like they are about the average size of the nurses who worked there, if not a little smaller.

They can work.

Oh, and this: “We have cereal for breakfast, bacon butties for lunch and microwave pies with mashed potato or chips for dinner.” is ******* disgusting. I'm amazed their hearts haven't exploded yet.

[Ibrahim]

its the world we live in..:no:

[Strategos Alexandros]

£22500 a year I have a mate whose household only earns £9000 a year (he lives with just his mum and sister).

[Vuk]

mmmmm-mmm! The sweet smell of socialism is in the air! Get your fat ***es out there and pull your own weight you socialist sleezeballs! :laugh4:

WORK PIGS! :whip: WORK!

:unitedstates::unitedstates::unitedstates:

[Ibrahim]

mmmmm-mmm! The sweet smell of socialism is in the air! Get your fat ***es out there and pull your own weight you socialist sleezeballs! :laugh4:

WORK PIGS! :whip: WORK!

:unitedstates::unitedstates::unitedstates:

well, its not exaclty socialism*, as this is not applicable to all. but the problem is indeed that they are scamming the government, who could be using this money to help truly disadvantaged people, build schools, or other good things I/any good citizen want for a country.


*social security and advanced welfare are not the same as socialism really, nor do they necessarily lead to such; the former two are a safeguard for those incapable of work or the disadvantaged (at least in theory). the latter involves equal shares in economic aspects, regardless of the situation
..:2cents:

EDIT: shouldn't this be in the back room? :inquisitive:

[LittleGrizzly]

“We have cereal for breakfast, bacon butties for lunch and microwave pies with mashed potato or chips for dinner.”

That doesn't seem too bad... though if eaten every day i guess it would be... depends on portions as well...

Vuk im not so sure... im tempted to put it down to the greed caused by a conservative free market system... ~;)

Edit: this should be in the backroom

and socialism can and does cover politics outside of communism... although the original meaning is communism...

socailism these days (to most who call themselves socailists) is free market capitalism with some of the nasty side effects lessened...

[Vuk]

lol, I thought this was in the Backroom when I responded to it. :P :embarassed:

[Rhyfelwyr]

I presume this will be moved once a mod sees it?

In which case, I don't think this is to do with socialism. The wealth should be redistribued between honest working people (or at least searching for work), not slobs like these. Having read the threatd title, they weren't half as fat as I was expecting, they could easily work.

Plus the "healthy food is expensive" myth is... well, a myth. Fresh stuff out a butcher and grocery store is way cheaper than the branded junk food in supermarkets, and in particular the fast food chains.

These people should have their funds cut. I think having no food on the table for a while would do them good.

[Vuk]

I presume this will be moved once a mod sees it?

In which case, I don't think this is to do with socialism. The wealth should be redistribued between honest working people (or at least searching for work), not slobs like these. Having read the threatd title, they weren't half as fat as I was expecting, they could easily work.

Plus the "healthy food is expensive" myth is... well, a myth. Fresh stuff out a butcher and grocery store is way cheaper than the branded junk food in supermarkets, and in particular the fast food chains.

These people should have their funds cut. I think having no food on the table for a while would do them good.

Seeing as this has wandered into a discussion on socialism (for which I accept the blame), and that it will no doubt be moved to the Backroom very soon, allow me to comment. It is a perfect example of the short comings of socialism. In a capitalist society, your self-interest motivates you to work to support yourself, your family, and anyone else dependant on you...because if you do not, no one will. When you know someone else will, why should you do the work? That is just what these people figured. And now the people with integrity who want to truely better themselves have fat trash like this on their shoulders. In a capitalist society, trash like that would lose some wieght (would not have it in the first place) and would get a darned job. Their working would help the economy to grow, which would create more opportunitty for the jobless. The answer to helping the jobless is not giving them bread (that was Rome's answer), it is giving them a job with which they can earn their own bread and not be at the pleasure of others. Of course by giving the jobless bread (at the expense of others, which slows economic growth and the number of jobs being created) you are making them dependent on the government and powerless. Where is their freedom when they cannot even fend for themselves? They are now like helpless babies suckling from their mother. They may be happy with it now, but what if the government turns against them?
What you are doing by NOT enabling people is empowering them and cutting the power and control of the government which is good for everyone. One of the few things that McCain said about the economy during his campaign that I really liked was "Don't spread the wealth, spread the opportunitty". That is so true. You do not help people by spreading wealth, that only oppresses and enslaves people. You help them by giving them opportunitty, by giving them the power to stand on their own and better themselves.


EDIT: About what was said about Capitalist greed, a capitalist works to better himself, and it is not greedy to work hard for something. The greed is wanting something for nothing. The greed is the mindless mods in Rome screaming for bread. The greed is these fat pigs wanting to steal from honest people. That is greed, and it is not a part or product of capitalism.

[Hosakawa Tito]

Off to the Backroom...

[Reverend Joe]

Seeing as this has wandered into a discussion on socialism (for which I accept the blame), and that it will no doubt be moved to the Backroom very soon, allow me to comment. It is a perfect example of the short comings of socialism. In a capitalist society, your self-interest motivates you to work to support yourself, your family, and anyone else dependant on you...because if you do not, no one will. When you know someone else will, why should you do the work? That is just what these people figured. And now the people with integrity who want to truely better themselves have fat trash like this on their shoulders. In a capitalist society, trash like that would lose some wieght (would not have it in the first place) and would get a darned job. Their working would help the economy to grow, which would create more opportunitty for the jobless. The answer to helping the jobless is not giving them bread (that was Rome's answer), it is giving them a job with which they can earn their own bread and not be at the pleasure of others. Of course by giving the jobless bread (at the expense of others, which slows economic growth and the number of jobs being created) you are making them dependent on the government and powerless. Where is their freedom when they cannot even fend for themselves? They are now like helpless babies suckling from their mother. They may be happy with it now, but what if the government turns against them?
What you are doing by NOT enabling people is empowering them and cutting the power and control of the government which is good for everyone. One of the few things that McCain said about the economy during his campaign that I really liked was "Don't spread the wealth, spread the opportunitty". That is so true. You do not help people by spreading wealth, that only oppresses and enslaves people. You help them by giving them opportunitty, by giving them the power to stand on their own and better themselves.

Actually, Socialism is supposed to mean that everyone works to the greatest of their ability; hence the from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. I'm not saying it actually works, though I wish it did; it would be really nice if everyone was motivated to help each other out of the goodness of their heart, but that sort of thing just never happens; hence, Capitalism.

The case we have here is not socialism in its intended form because it fails the basic philosophy on two points: one, these people are not giving according to their ability. Even if they're too rotund to do any physical labor, they can take desk jobs from more able-bodied people, allowing those people to lead a non-sedentary lifestyle and do active work. If there's no desk jobs available, fine; whip their fat asses into shape and make them do some real work. Two, they are being given a lot more than they need. These people could easily live off of the fat stored in their bodies for a couple weeks while they get into shape, and they sure as hell don't need the very generous salary they are receiving if they are able to spend every penny on junk food and still live.

Just for the record, I've also grown to dislike socialism, not because of cases like this where it doesn't pan out right (when has Free-Market Capitalism ever "panned out right?") but because, if it actually worked, it would be a much less happy society than true Free-Market Capitalism. In order to work right, Socialism would have to force people to work according to their ability, which might not be what they want to do; after all, there's a lot of lazy people out there, and forced labor is never a good thing. It would also lead to inequalities all over again because people with greater ability will "need"more than those without, so a genius like Ayn Rand's John Galt would still end up with a lot more than your average rivet driver. If they didn't, not only would their be no motivation to work as hard, but their ability might actually be hindered by their reduction to the level of everyone else, even if it's just an issue of ego. With Free-Market Capitalism, at least the less able have a chance to get lucky somehow, and quite frankly there would be a lot more room for decision-making and just putsing around before you found a job to suit you; perfect Socialism would not look kindly on the average college graduate in America, who may change jobs 5 times or so in their first 10 years out of college.

And yeah, this belonged in the backroom to begin with.

Edit: thanks, Hosa. Let's keep this as civil as it has been so far.

[Papewaio]

Self inflicted injuries that can be easily recovered from by healthy eating and exercise should not qualify as welfare and they should not be classed as disabled (in aus they can even get handicapped parking and free lifts around malls).

They are gluttons overweight to the point of severly hurting their own health and that of society (that society 'has to' foot the bill for their self inflicted sloth)

Looking at the seven deadly sins:

Lust: Not likely.
Gluttony: By the bucketful.
Greed: In the trough.
Sloth: In spades.
Wrath: Angry that they aren't being given handouts.
Envy: Of people who can tie their own shoelaces.
Pride: This is where a touch Eastern Philosophy kicks in. A lack of Pride is cause in this. Balance in all things.

They need to have pride in themselves and get off their lazy bums. They can do whatever damage they want to themselves, but don't expect respect or handouts from anyone else as they do so. DNA alone does not a human life make, sitting around being a slab of marbled meat does not make for an enviable human lifestyle.

They are doing themselves the greatest disservice. I bet the next step will be suing the government for enabling them to get fat through welfare. :wall:

[Seamus Fermanagh]

According to my daughter's endocrinologist, its the lack of exercise that is deadlier than the calories -- not that their diet is recommended either in amount or type.

[Strike For The South]

According to my daughter's endocrinologist, its the lack of exercise that is deadlier than the calories -- not that their diet is recommended either in amount or type.

Fo tru. I have 3,000 calories by 9 A.M. The fact that they say that "EXCEEDS A GOOD AMOUNT" just makes me want to cry.

And these H.M.S. McTubbs are having wayyyy more than that.

[Samurai Waki]

5 Miles a day is all it takes. Heck, even 1 mile would suffice... its not hard, I make my rounds before I even turn the Coffee pot on in the morning. Lazy, servile, scum.

[Vuk]

Actually, Socialism is supposed to mean that everyone works to the greatest of their ability; hence the from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. I'm not saying it actually works, though I wish it did; it would be really nice if everyone was motivated to help each other out of the goodness of their heart, but that sort of thing just never happens; hence, Capitalism.

The case we have here is not socialism in its intended form because it fails the basic philosophy on two points: one, these people are not giving according to their ability. Even if they're too rotund to do any physical labor, they can take desk jobs from more able-bodied people, allowing those people to lead a non-sedentary lifestyle and do active work. If there's no desk jobs available, fine; whip their fat asses into shape and make them do some real work. Two, they are being given a lot more than they need. These people could easily live off of the fat stored in their bodies for a couple weeks while they get into shape, and they sure as hell don't need the very generous salary they are receiving if they are able to spend every penny on junk food and still live.

Just for the record, I've also grown to dislike socialism, not because of cases like this where it doesn't pan out right (when has Free-Market Capitalism ever "panned out right?") but because, if it actually worked, it would be a much less happy society than true Free-Market Capitalism. In order to work right, Socialism would have to force people to work according to their ability, which might not be what they want to do; after all, there's a lot of lazy people out there, and forced labor is never a good thing. It would also lead to inequalities all over again because people with greater ability will "need"more than those without, so a genius like Ayn Rand's John Galt would still end up with a lot more than your average rivet driver. If they didn't, not only would their be no motivation to work as hard, but their ability might actually be hindered by their reduction to the level of everyone else, even if it's just an issue of ego. With Free-Market Capitalism, at least the less able have a chance to get lucky somehow, and quite frankly there would be a lot more room for decision-making and just putsing around before you found a job to suit you; perfect Socialism would not look kindly on the average college graduate in America, who may change jobs 5 times or so in their first 10 years out of college.

And yeah, this belonged in the backroom to begin with.

Edit: thanks, Hosa. Let's keep this as civil as it has been so far.
I agree with you that it is not socialism working how it is supposed to, but the sad thing is that it never works like it is supposed to, because it does not factor in human greed. (and even if it did, you would still have a population completely dependent on the government, so society could only advance at the government's wim) The problem is that human greed makes socialism not work at all, while capitalism takes people's natural desire to better themselves and works with it for the good of society. I came from a family that was living below the poverty level, and I worked hard and am now studying in Europe, and will be going to Grad school when I get back. Not cause someone gave me bread, but because someone gave me a job. My desire to better myself and my family hurt no one, it only stimulated the economy and HELPED people. (including myself and family) Under a socialist system I would have been waiting on my handout of bread all these years, desperately supporting whichever candidate promised me more. And of course my bread handouts would be ripped from someone else's pockets. I appreciate the goodwill people believe socialism will do, but unfortunately it just doesn't work like that. :(
What would be funny in this case (though hardly humane or recommendable) is to sentence them to prison for defrauding the government out of benefits, and force them to do heavy labour for a few years. :laugh4: (it is funny that they say being poor made them fat, yet I grew up in a very poor family and most of my siblings were Linsday Lohan skinny, not Michael Moore fat :P The thing is that while my dad was working three jobs at once, my brothers and I at the age of 14 also held our own jobs. We grew up working, not leeching like these round folks.)

[Fragony]

Why wouldn't they be able to work, the whip over that hidious mass.

[rory_20_uk]

The cure for these problems is surprisingly easy: stop almost all benefits, and reduce taxes from the savings of both benefits and admin. One gets a healthier economy and a further economic incentive to get a job - which will pay slightly better as taxes are lower.

~:smoking:

[naut]

3,000 calories? Only? I guess no exercise doesn't help.

[KukriKhan]

Their benefits come in the form of “Jobseeker’s Allowance” (unemployment benefit), income support and “incapacity benefit”, as well as a disability allowance for Mrs Chawner’s asthma and epilepsy, a result of her weight. Additional money for conditions such as heart disease and diabetes top off the largesse.

So, although we're calling it "the dole", they're actually getting separate checks monthly from at least 5 sources. Their weight and shape(s) aside, I'd say that's administrative talent. They could be sitting behind desks processing and coordinating disability, unemployment, and income support bennies for the entire population, not just themselves. "Community Benefits Coordinator". You'd think that such work would bring home more than they're taking in now.

Although I grant the point: what's their incentive?

IMO: gov't should insist, since the family (and thousands like them) are de-facto gov't employees on retainer, that they perform some public service.

[naut]

IMO: gov't should insist, since the family (and thousands like them) are de-facto gov't employees on retainer, that they perform some public service.
I hear picking up rubbish from Highways just melts the weight right off! :2thumbsup:

[Major Robert Dump]

You all are a bunch of insensitive malcontents who have no respect for peoples thyroid conditions, and even less respect for the hereditary fat gene. My grandma was half-fat, which makes me 1/8 fat and I want an apology or else I'm gonna eat the ***** out of this bag of doritos.

[Vuk]

Doritos? They do not sell them in Hungary! :bigcry: You are making me incredibly homesick! lol I would give anything for a good old Hardeez thickburger, a bottle of Mountain Dew, and a bag of Doritos!

[Seamus Fermanagh]

So, although we're calling it "the dole", they're actually getting separate checks monthly from at least 5 sources. Their weight and shape(s) aside, I'd say that's administrative talent. They could be sitting behind desks processing and coordinating disability, unemployment, and income support bennies for the entire population, not just themselves. "Community Benefits Coordinator". You'd think that such work would bring home more than they're taking in now.

Although I grant the point: what's their incentive?

IMO: gov't should insist, since the family (and thousands like them) are de-facto gov't employees on retainer, that they perform some public service.

Military procurement jobs. These people are obviously skilled at playing red tape to advantage. It's time we had folks on the army purchase side who could game the system and save the taxpayer a buck or three.

[Major Robert Dump]

In the longer version of the article it states one of the girls gets a job seekers allowance. A job seekers allowance? Is you kidding on me?

[Banquo's Ghost]

In the longer version of the article it states one of the girls gets a job seekers allowance. A job seekers allowance? Is you kidding on me?

Job Seeker's Allowance is the UK government's dole cheque.

It is worth about £60 (approx $85) per week and is paid to the unemployed when they claim. To qualify for this payment, someone has to demonstrate to the civil service (Jobcentreplus) a certain number of job applications and "sign on" every two weeks. They have to be available for work. After 12 months receipt, they are required to attend a job focussed training course or have the benefit removed.

[HoreTore]

Another reason to give more money to football clubs IMO.

[Furunculus]

Taken from [URL removed because of porn links]

A family which is so obese that they cannot work has convinced the government to pay them the equivalent of a substantial salary in benefits; not satisfied, they demand even more, saying “We deserve more”, and claiming that “All that healthy food is too expensive.”

The Chawner family claims £22,500 ($33,000, or $45,000 prior to the UK’s recent economic collapse) annually in benefits, having lived off state handouts without working for 11 years.

Still, even this is not enough and they demand more:

“What we get barely covers the bills and puts food on the table. It’s not our fault we can’t work. We deserve more.”

In total, the family comes in at some 525kg.

The gargantuan clan claim economic hardship forces them to eat vast quantities of unhealthy food, whilst advancing the contradictory claim that they are suffering a genetic condition:

“All that healthy food, like fruit and veg, is too expensive. We’re fat because it’s in our genes. Our whole family is overweight.”

Their diet, coming to 3,000 calories a day each, much more than the usual recommended maximums, leaves little doubt as to how they attained their exaggerated girth:

“We have cereal for breakfast, bacon butties for lunch and microwave pies with mashed potato or chips for dinner.”

Their benefits come in the form of “Jobseeker’s Allowance” (unemployment benefit), income support and “incapacity benefit”, as well as a disability allowance for Mrs Chawner’s asthma and epilepsy, a result of her weight. Additional money for conditions such as heart disease and diabetes top off the largesse.

Emma excuses herself with the claim that she is too busy training to be a hairdresser to exercise, and then pleas ignorance:

“I’m a student and don’t have time to exercise; we all want to lose weight to stop the abuse we get in the street, but we don’t know how.”

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Needless to say I'm appauled....:furious3:

looking on the bright side, it looks like i won't have to pay for them for too much longer, and thank god for that!

[Ja'chyra]

Some context I believe is required.

£22500 between a household of 4 is not a lot of money, my household of 2 pulls in £65k but we are relatively well off.

My issue isn't the amount of money they receive it's the fact that they do nothing for it except eat and watch TV. I was unemployed for a year after being made redundant and it nearly drove me mad. As has been said after 1 year you have to do some training courses or basic donkey work like building paths, planting trees etc, I think you should have to do this after a month after all there's always stuff needing done even if it's only gardening for OAP's.

[Meneldil]

A few misconceptions here:

1 - Socialism isn't communism. Communism is a trend of socialism, theorized by Marx (and other thinkers before and after him), but socialism as a whole includes dozens of ideologies and theories, many of which are completely differents from communism.

2 - Socialism (or in that case, communism, as many people seem to think that they are the same thing) never implied that some guys could live without working thanks to gvt help. Everyone is supposed to work in a communist country. Thus blaming socialism or communism when discussing this example isn't really spot-on.

[Furunculus]

you are correct that it is incorrect to conflate communism and socialism.

what many people note is that socialist policy tends to drift towards the perils of moral hazard where overly lax social security schemes encourage bad behavior in the 'bad', which admittedly is not necessarily worse than the alternative which penalizes the good and the bad in the event of misfortune.

which is why people strive for that happy medium, where support exists for those who need it, without propping up those who don't, a notoriously precarious balance to maintain.

[Subotan]

What's the source?

[HoreTore]

what many people note is that socialist policy tends to drift towards the perils of moral hazard where overly lax social security schemes encourage bad behavior in the 'bad', which admittedly is not necessarily worse than the alternative which penalizes the good and the bad in the event of misfortune

Uhm..... What? Social security is a socialist thing?

Is this another case of "if you're not the incarnation of Reagan, you're a socialist"?

[Furunculus]

it is a generally agreed trend that right-wing countries tend to have a less forgiving safety net than left wing countries, there are obvious parallels between europe and america for example.

no, that i why i talked of balance and happy mediums.

[Vuk]

A few misconceptions here:

1 - Socialism isn't communism. Communism is a trend of socialism, theorized by Marx (and other thinkers before and after him), but socialism as a whole includes dozens of ideologies and theories, many of which are completely differents from communism.

2 - Socialism (or in that case, communism, as many people seem to think that they are the same thing) never implied that some guys could live without working thanks to gvt help. Everyone is supposed to work in a communist country. Thus blaming socialism or communism when discussing this example isn't really spot-on.

Communism is simply fully-fledged socialism.

And it IS right to clame socialism for this, because it is an example of how socialism DOESN'T work. Sure, it sounds like Utopia, but things like this (and much much worse) are what really happens. Socialism does not work, and this is a perfect example.

[caravel]

“All that healthy food, like fruit and veg, is too expensive. We’re fat because it’s in our genes. Our whole family is overweight.”
What utter rubbish. Decent fruit and vegetables costs less than their pies, chips and cereal. Most cereals are insanely expensive in the UK and are loaded with sugar. Pies and chips are just fat and salt, but cost proportionally more than fresh produce.

It's quite typical of these people to make such pathetic excuses for their vile lifestyles and for not getting a job. It's always someone else's fault that they're fat, or someone else's fault that they're unemployed.

:no:

[InsaneApache]

I have a cousin (now living in Freemantle) who's been obese for years. He used to drone on about how he couldn't help it because it was his hormones or summat. Not the fact he ate 3 sandwhiches to every one that we ate. One day he was giving it the ususal cobblers when my uncle, also his uncle, piped up...

"There were no fat people in Belsen".

NB: Said uncle was one of the first British troops into Belsen.

[Meneldil]

Communism is simply fully-fledged socialism.

Wrong. Communism is a specific trend of socialism that seeks to eliminate all class relations and injustice in a given society by creating a new mode of production.
Most socialist theories did not attempt to challenge capitalism yet went as far as communism. Proudhon's revolutionary socialism was based on a capitalist society and so were Blanqui's ideas.



And it IS right to clame socialism for this, because it is an example of how socialism DOESN'T work. Sure, it sounds like Utopia, but things like this (and much much worse) are what really happens. Socialism does not work, and this is a perfect example.
Wait, what? Are you actually blaming socialism, a broad political and philosophical idea theorized in hundreds of different ways by hundred of different thinkers, because of the shortcomings of the British (crappy) Welfare State system?
Now, that is impressive. I think we should get rid of capitalism altogether, because frankly, Enron is an example of how capitalism DOESN'T work.

Now, if only you could pull your head off your right-wing neo-liberal propaganda for only a few minutes, you would notice that many states in western Europe decided to implement socialist policies, and that life in these states is just as enjoyable (if not vastly more) as it is in the US.
Norway, Sweden, Finland, Germany, Danemark, Belgium, Spain, France are not failled states. Sure, some people abuse social programs, and that is quite sad. But would you say while keeping a straight face that nobody abuses capitalism?

[rasoforos]

Communism is simply fully-fledged socialism.

And it IS right to clame socialism for this, because it is an example of how socialism DOESN'T work. Sure, it sounds like Utopia, but things like this (and much much worse) are what really happens. Socialism does not work, and this is a perfect example.

I have said it to you before. Please read a book on economic theory.

Your lack of theoretical knowledge has given you an idea of socialism and communism so distorted that one does not even know where to begin explaining the error of your ways. To make matters worse you blame something or other on command economy almost constantly.

In this edition, you seem to be confusing a welfare system (an integral part of free-market states as well) with socialism (an economic theory).

I really an not trying to be insulting or patronizing but please read a good book on economic theories or socialism at least. It wont infect you with commie cooties.

[Vuk]

Ras, you really are a very arrogant person. I know fully well that there is a difference between socialism and communism, and I know what it is. What my argument was is that the philosophy behind them is from the same root, and socialism will eventually lead into communism. And the welfare system in Britain (and the systems all throughout Europe for that matter) are very socialist welfare systems that enable scum like this. For your information, I have 1 and half years left until I get my degree as an economic historian. I know the difference between economic theories and systems, I am simply saying that history has shown that socialism and communism came from the same school of thought, and that one leads into the other. May I suggest that you stop lecturing me and go read some history.

[rasoforos]

I know fully well that there is a difference between socialism and communism, and I know what it is.


Communism is simply fully-fledged socialism.

Yeah ok right... :wall:











As for socialism leading into communism you will probably notice that historically revolutions installed communist regimes which later allowed greater freedoms and transformed into socialist regimes. McCarthy's scaremongering about mixed economies leading to communism is hardly historical fact.





And the welfare system in Britain (and the systems all throughout Europe for that matter) are very socialist welfare systems that enable scum like this



Ok first things first Britain is not a country...

Now that we got to accept that it is a matter of faulty welfare systems and not a matter of which model of economy a country is using, we can take the extra step and acknowledge that faulty welfare systems can exist in either communist, mixed or capitalist states. Acknowledging that it becomes obvious that socialism is not somehow behind all this. The UK is not a socialist economy by the way and Yurop is not full of commies. The US welfare system had historically had similar shortcomings and it not anywhere near a socialist economy.


I will chose to ignore you calling me arrogant. All the best for your degree.

[Vuk]

Yeah ok right... :wall:


As I said, I was referring to it as being a fuller incarnation of the same root philosophy.









As for socialism leading into communism you will probably notice that historically revolutions installed communist regimes which later allowed greater freedoms and transformed into socialist regimes. McCarthy's scaremongering about mixed economies leading to communism is hardly historical fact.

No, but Communism stemmed from Socialism, and then was able to replicate itself like a virus as full-fledged Communism. The problem is that Communism just does not work, so these system had to resort to the less developed form of the philosophy, which is socialism.



Ok first things first Britain is not a country...

Thank you for telling me that.


Now that we got to accept that it is a matter of faulty welfare systems and not a matter of which model of economy a country is using, we can take the extra step and acknowledge that faulty welfare systems can exist in either communist, mixed or capitalist states. Acknowledging that it becomes obvious that socialism is not somehow behind all this. The UK is not a socialist economy by the way and Yurop is not full of commies. The US welfare system had historically had similar shortcomings and it not anywhere near a socialist economy.

An economy is simply the sum of its systems. I never said that the UK was a socialist country, because not all of its systems fit the socialist economic model. Their welfare system though, does. In fact, it is key to the socialist model of economy. I will not argue about the US welfare system. FDR used an economic disaster to push his socialist welfare policies through, and it has only gotten worse since.
China BTW is a perfect example of how a country can have systems from other economic models. China is NOT a Capitalist country by any stretch of the imagination, but it has borrowed certain Capitalist policies in order to survive. Likewise the UK is not socialist, but it has a socialist welfare system.


EDIT: and BTW, just so you know, as I have learned studying here in Europe, Europeans and Americans seem to have different ideas about what socialism, capitalism, and communism mean. In fact, they some times use completely different definitions and comparative methods.

[Furunculus]

Ok first things first Britain is not a country...



is that a useful or constructive addition to the conversation?

yes technically, The Kingdom of Great Britain was superceded by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and later still ammended to Northern Ireland........... but really that is pedantry.

we all know what is meant when people say GB, Great Britain, the UK, United Kingdom, Blighty, Her Majesties most l33t and aWeSoMe Nation, and many others, so why make a point of it?