cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

The Philpotts found guilty

Community Veteran
Posts: 14,718
Thanks: 869
Fixes: 12
Registered: ‎01-08-2007

Re: The Philpotts found guilty

Quote from: artmo
When I referred to deaths I wasn't referring to death from natural causes.

Ok artmo if you say so!
I need a new signature... i'm bored of the old one!
Community Veteran
Posts: 6,473
Thanks: 1,311
Fixes: 1
Registered: ‎23-09-2010

Re: The Philpotts found guilty

Then you have the "other" deaths. Shouldn't they count as well in the grand scheme of things.
I'm thinking of the recent fire in a block of flats. Two firemen killed fighting a blaze in one of the high rise flats.
As this thread goes it doesn't come much more unnatural than burning to death.
Flats been redecorated and lived in. Despite the terrible tragedy no one is objecting to living there.
Community Veteran
Posts: 1,894
Thanks: 4
Registered: ‎20-10-2012

Re: The Philpotts found guilty

Thanks Sprite, I'm glad that we don't 'have an issue'!
What comes out in your text is a certain resentment towards the classes above you.
My parents lived in a council house as did my wife's parents. We were both from working class back grounds.
We decided early on in our marriage that we not going to follow our parents and stay in working class. We pulled up out boot straps and went on to further education.
Slowly we both eased ourselves up the greasy ladder and forty years later we are comfortably off by our own efforts! Neither of us having taken a penny off the state.
Our kids, 4 of them, entitled us to Family Allowance payments. In those days that was merely a diversion of income tax relief given to the husband, and an equivalent amount given to the wife, and was only paid from the 2 child onwards.
So, I'm proud to be considered middle class now. I got there by my own efforts!
Geoff,
York.
Community Veteran
Posts: 14,718
Thanks: 869
Fixes: 12
Registered: ‎01-08-2007

Re: The Philpotts found guilty

Quote from: NedLudd
What comes out in your text is a certain resentment towards the classes above you.

I don't have a resentment to those in the upper / middle classes if they are self made and treat others (no matter who they are) with respect.
What I do resent is:
1) those born with a spoon in their mouth who then parade around blaming those in the **** for being there and being in difficulty.
2) those who are self made who go around with the same attitude as #1.
3) those who are made either way and then try to cheat the system for every last penny through tax, hiding profits etc (or defending those who do) while then being ultra hard on those with little.
Those who are in the upper classes through hard work / good luck etc who still remember their roots and treat people with respect I admire. Look at the difference between Richard Branson and Lord Alan Sugar. One is a great guy who has a lot of respect for people and the other is a d*** who seems to think people are dirt and only exist to inconvenience him making money. At the end of the day, everyones poo stinks doesn't it  Wink
@billnotben: death is death imo regardless of it being natural or not. artmos point of only talking of unnatural death when he hasn't specified this previously is daft.
I need a new signature... i'm bored of the old one!
Community Veteran
Posts: 1,894
Thanks: 4
Registered: ‎20-10-2012

Re: The Philpotts found guilty

Quote from: billnotben

This seems to be a growing trend. One the country can ill afford and makes little sense as virtually every house over a certain age has some death or crime associated with it.

I think the problem lies in the end of this sentence. Does this mean "every house over a certain age has some death" what it says literally?
Or,  when read in association with "or crime associated with it" imply an un-natural death!
Easy mistaka to maka!
Geoff,
York.
itsme
Grafter
Posts: 5,924
Thanks: 2
Registered: ‎07-04-2007

Re: The Philpotts found guilty

Quote from: NedLudd
Neither of us having taken a penny off the state.

I have been working 40 years and have in the past been paid Job Seekers Allowance but there is a very high probability that you have taken more out of the system than I have. Especially having 4 children. So I welcome Harman comment
Quote
"One, that work should pay; secondly, that there should be an obligation to take work; and thirdly, that there should be support through a contributory principle for people putting into the system as well as taking out."

Community Veteran
Posts: 14,718
Thanks: 869
Fixes: 12
Registered: ‎01-08-2007

Re: The Philpotts found guilty

@Ned: He did say 'virtually'.
IMO that means most houses but not all.
Not sure who itsme is quoting in the second quote but I agree - everyone should be made to work including millionaries and bankers. They should also do hard graft and physical work like many of us at the bottom of the ladder are told we must do. That especially applies to MPs who seem to think they're above everything.
I need a new signature... i'm bored of the old one!
Community Veteran
Posts: 1,894
Thanks: 4
Registered: ‎20-10-2012

Re: The Philpotts found guilty

@ itsme
I don't follow the logic there matey!
How on earth can I have taken more out of the state than you when I have never taken a penny and you have.
I left secondary school at 15 and went straight into work. I enrolled (and paid for) night classes to further my education. That enabled me to get better employment and, of course, to pay more in taxes.
I retired aged 53 and never took anything from the state until my Old Age Pension at 65 (for which I had paid) for.
I have no problem with those unable to work through illness or disability. Those people need help and should get it.
However, we all have people in our localities who are born spongers. Those should have their benefits cut!
Harman's comment is surely aimed at those who have no intention of coming off benefits
Geoff,
York.
Community Veteran
Posts: 14,718
Thanks: 869
Fixes: 12
Registered: ‎01-08-2007

Re: The Philpotts found guilty

@Ned I think itsme was referring to the money you had for Family Allowance payments as you mentioned earlier.
I need a new signature... i'm bored of the old one!
Community Veteran
Posts: 6,473
Thanks: 1,311
Fixes: 1
Registered: ‎23-09-2010

Re: The Philpotts found guilty

Running off at a tangent there's a bit of a class divide. No not on these forums.
I mean if the old working class pile has a bit of a dodgy past it's something that's usually kept quiet about.
Now if the uber class family pile has a history of grisly murders or hideous suicides it seems to inevitably result in a haunting which, in those cases, is regarded as a plus point.
Community Veteran
Posts: 1,894
Thanks: 4
Registered: ‎20-10-2012

Re: The Philpotts found guilty

@ Sprite
Yes, maybe. But in the seventies Family Allowance was a diversion of money from the husband to the wife. So, if Family Allowance was claimed, my tax code was changed to reflect that. My wife would get 8 shillings (40p) for the second child - nowt for the first- and I would pay 8 shillings more in tax. That's how it worked then!
Geoff,
York.
Community Veteran
Posts: 6,473
Thanks: 1,311
Fixes: 1
Registered: ‎23-09-2010

Re: The Philpotts found guilty

Quote from: NedLudd
Easy mistaka to maka!

Now I'm wondering what were the big feathers in his hat? Was it cockerels?
Community Veteran
Posts: 1,894
Thanks: 4
Registered: ‎20-10-2012

Re: The Philpotts found guilty

Ahhhhh, Capitano Bertorelli!  Wink
Geoff,
York.
Community Veteran
Posts: 19,272
Thanks: 430
Registered: ‎12-08-2007

Re: The Philpotts found guilty

Quote from: NedLudd
My parents lived in a council house as did my wife's parents. We were both from working class back grounds.
We decided early on in our marriage that we not going to follow our parents and stay in working class. We pulled up out boot straps and went on to further education.
Slowly we both eased ourselves up the greasy ladder and forty years later we are comfortably off by our own efforts! Neither of us having taken a penny off the state.
Our kids, 4 of them, entitled us to Family Allowance payments. In those days that was merely a diversion of income tax relief given to the husband, and an equivalent amount given to the wife, and was only paid from the 2 child onwards.
So, I'm proud to be considered middle class now. I got there by my own efforts!

Well said NedLudd.  Like you I grew up on a council estate and went to a secondary modern school.  Also like you I decided to try and better myself and with hard work managed to make a good living.  I decided to retire at 58 and have enjoyed life ever since. Hard work does pay off Sad Cool
itsme
Grafter
Posts: 5,924
Thanks: 2
Registered: ‎07-04-2007

Re: The Philpotts found guilty

Quote from: NedLudd
@ Sprite
Yes, maybe. But in the seventies Family Allowance was a diversion of money from the husband to the wife. So, if Family Allowance was claimed, my tax code was changed to reflect that. My wife would get 8 shillings (40p) for the second child - nowt for the first- and I would pay 8 shillings more in tax. That's how it worked then!

Believe that the tax allowance you received for having children was removed if your wife claimed child allowance. The net outcome was still the same you still had extra money going into a household compared to a no children household.