+- Mock (https://mockforums.net)
+-- Forum: Serious Shit? (https://mockforums.net/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: Assholes In The News (https://mockforums.net/forum-10.html)
+--- Thread: FAT, LAZY BASTARDS !!! (/thread-1143.html)
Pages:
1
2
- Duchess - 03-19-2009
This is bullshit !...Make these fat fucks fend for themselves !
![[Image: familyfatties.jpg]](http://www.blogcdn.com/www.asylum.com/media/2009/03/familyfatties.jpg)
None of the Chawners, a married English couple and their two adult daughters, have worked in 11 years. Yet the British government pays them a combined 45,000 dollars an annum in various disability benefits stemming from their morbid obesity. (The Chawners weigh between 240 and 340 pounds each.) Phillip, the family patriarch and the heaviest, claims the handout "barely covers the bills and puts food on the table. It's not our fault we can't work. We deserve more."
Granted there is a growing body of evidence that suggests obesity is, in fact, genetic. But can anyone think of a scenario in which a fat person's girth renders them unable to find any work?
And, on that point, how quickly would our extra-large population bankrupt the United States if we ever brought a European-style welfare system to this side of the Atlantic?
- Liquid - 03-19-2009
stories like this in every country. really sad how some people abuse the system we all live in. and it is nothing more then blatant abuse.
- Lady Cop - 03-19-2009
they "deserve more"?? what, more chips? ::insanity::
- QueenBee - 03-19-2009
For cryin' out loud. As I have said before, I am far from petite (closer to one of the women in the pic, I guess)..but I would never ask for disability benefits because I am fat. I have worked all my adult life, and my weight has rarely if ever caused a problem. OK, I have no plans to be a swimsuit model, and I would not make it as a cop. But damn, there are more than enough jobs I am good at.
Rather reminds me of a blind guy I met once. We the taxpayers were supporting his lazy butt at home because he said he could not work..because he was blind. Gee, tell that to Stevie Wonder, or the governor of NY..and countless others.
Cripes, I hate when people abuse the Americans With Disabilities Act,
I may be fat, but that does not make me in any way disabled.
- sally - 03-19-2009
"Phillip, the family patriarch and the heaviest, claims the handout "barely covers the bills and puts food on the table. It's not our fault we can't work. We deserve more."
They can barely put food on the table? ::lmao::Yeah 400 lbs of grotesque fat is a sure sign of starvation. They should have their food stamps cut and made to see what it really feels like to be hungry for once in their lives.
- SyberBitch - 03-19-2009
Duchess Wrote:Granted there is a growing body of evidence::lmao::They certainly stated that correctly. Several growing bodies of evidence from my count.
Hell, why don't they just give the fuckers lyposuction and a lap-band surgery? It would cost less and solve the problems all in one go.
- SyberBitch - 03-19-2009
QueenBee Wrote:Rather reminds me of a blind guy I met once. We the taxpayers were supporting his lazy butt at home because he said he could not work..because he was blind. Gee, tell that to Stevie Wonder, or the governor of NY..and countless others.Thank you!! Seriously, people are SUCH bullshitters!!
For years, I've thought that people who DO receive financial support from the government, should have to either work themselves in some capacity, or the government should provide work FOR them. Think about it. How many stupid, menial jobs could be done by so-called 'disabled' people, or just plain 'poor' people who claim they cannot find jobs? It would save the government hundreds of thousands of dollars at the very least, as well as help people fend for themselves instead of using the support as a crutch. Even if they set up people for so many hours a week, doing work at home on their computers, just boring simple stuff that anyone could do. There are very few cases where people are actually TOO disabled to do any form of work.
- FAHQTOO - 03-19-2009
SyberBitch Wrote:QueenBee Wrote:Rather reminds me of a blind guy I met once. We the taxpayers were supporting his lazy butt at home because he said he could not work..because he was blind. Gee, tell that to Stevie Wonder, or the governor of NY..and countless others.Thank you!! Seriously, people are SUCH bullshitters!!
For years, I've thought that people who DO receive financial support from the government, should have to either work themselves in some capacity, or the government should provide work FOR them. Think about it. How many stupid, menial jobs could be done by so-called 'disabled' people, or just plain 'poor' people who claim they cannot find jobs? It would save the government hundreds of thousands of dollars at the very least, as well as help people fend for themselves instead of using the support as a crutch. Even if they set up people for so many hours a week, doing work at home on their computers, just boring simple stuff that anyone could do. There are very few cases where people are actually TOO disabled to do any form of work.
Agreed.
They make people that are convicted of misdemeanors around hear do community service work, as part of their sentence.
Why the hell can't they put welfare recipients to work doing community service? I say make them clean up the town 8 hrs a day, 5 days a week. Why the hell should the city pay people to do this when they can get it done with welfare recipients? They need to start earning their keep. I'm all for drug testing them too. Piss dirty and they lose their free ride.
- The Antagonist - 03-19-2009
SyberBitch Wrote:Are you SURE you're a liberal?QueenBee Wrote:Rather reminds me of a blind guy I met once. We the taxpayers were supporting his lazy butt at home because he said he could not work..because he was blind. Gee, tell that to Stevie Wonder, or the governor of NY..and countless others.Thank you!! Seriously, people are SUCH bullshitters!!
For years, I've thought that people who DO receive financial support from the government, should have to either work themselves in some capacity, or the government should provide work FOR them. Think about it. How many stupid, menial jobs could be done by so-called 'disabled' people, or just plain 'poor' people who claim they cannot find jobs? It would save the government hundreds of thousands of dollars at the very least, as well as help people fend for themselves instead of using the support as a crutch. Even if they set up people for so many hours a week, doing work at home on their computers, just boring simple stuff that anyone could do. There are very few cases where people are actually TOO disabled to do any form of work.
- FAHQTOO - 03-19-2009
Quote:They make people that are convicted of misdemeanors around hear do community service work, as part of their sentence.
Here..........not hear. Got to appease the spelling Nazis.
- SyberBitch - 03-19-2009
The Antagonist Wrote:I'm a smart liberal ::bigg::SyberBitch Wrote:Are you SURE you're a liberal?QueenBee Wrote:Rather reminds me of a blind guy I met once. We the taxpayers were supporting his lazy butt at home because he said he could not work..because he was blind. Gee, tell that to Stevie Wonder, or the governor of NY..and countless others.Thank you!! Seriously, people are SUCH bullshitters!!
For years, I've thought that people who DO receive financial support from the government, should have to either work themselves in some capacity, or the government should provide work FOR them. Think about it. How many stupid, menial jobs could be done by so-called 'disabled' people, or just plain 'poor' people who claim they cannot find jobs? It would save the government hundreds of thousands of dollars at the very least, as well as help people fend for themselves instead of using the support as a crutch. Even if they set up people for so many hours a week, doing work at home on their computers, just boring simple stuff that anyone could do. There are very few cases where people are actually TOO disabled to do any form of work.
- SyberBitch - 03-19-2009
FAHQTOO Wrote:Why the hell can't they put welfare recipients to work doing community service? I say make them clean up the town 8 hrs a day, 5 days a week. Why the hell should the city pay people to do this when they can get it done with welfare recipients? They need to start earning their keep. I'm all for drug testing them too. Piss dirty and they lose their free ride.Well, to be fair, they shouldn't necessarily have to work 'full time' (it's not like they're getting paid full-time wages), unless they WANTED the opportunity to work that much and get paid more for doing so... but I do think there should be a minimum number of hours they have to work doing community service or menial government jobs (or heck, even higher-level work if they were qualified for it).
I simply don't see the logic in hiring people to do all of this crap for the state when there are people getting paid for doing NOTHING.
Drug testing - people getting state aid SHOULD be drug tested randomly and if tested positive, should be given rehab (addicts can't necessarily break their addictions on their own). If they refuse the rehab or just go back to their drug problems again.. they should be kicked off. I have a real problem with people who have self-perpetuating 'disabilities'.
- LuMPyPussy - 03-19-2009
If I lost my vision, I'm not sure what sort of a job I could find or perform.
- SyberBitch - 03-19-2009
LuMPyPussy Wrote:If I lost my vision, I'm not sure what sort of a job I could find or perform.Referee?
- D - 03-19-2009
SyberBitch Wrote:Yeah, they don't see anything anyways... especially the ones that were used in Tuesday's Red Wings game. Fuckers, take away our goal then ignore a buncha penalties to the other team. ::batguy::LuMPyPussy Wrote:If I lost my vision, I'm not sure what sort of a job I could find or perform.Referee?
- The Antagonist - 03-20-2009
D Wrote:I saw that game. What goal was taken away? You won the damn game. and the ref's looked the other way a couple times against the Flyers.SyberBitch Wrote:Yeah, they don't see anything anyways... especially the ones that were used in Tuesday's Red Wings game. Fuckers, take away our goal then ignore a buncha penalties to the other team. ::batguy::LuMPyPussy Wrote:If I lost my vision, I'm not sure what sort of a job I could find or perform.Referee?
- Jurassic - 03-20-2009
If the lazy bastards don't want to work put the fuckers down, I would even pay for the lethal injection myself .
- D - 03-20-2009
The Antagonist Wrote:I saw that game. What goal was taken away? You won the damn game. and the ref's looked the other way a couple times against the Flyers.The goal we scored right off the bat and they took away claiming "goalie interference" against Holmstrom... just because his skates were edging into the crease. But the goalie never saw it, never even tried to make a save, and didn't even try to play like there was interference. Was just a bad call from a blind ref. But, that's neither here nor there. It is my own sarcastic rude opinion. ::bigg::
- The Antagonist - 03-20-2009
I must have missed that.
Besides that stupid new rule allowing anyone in the crease should have nixed that call.
You are right though - ref's are lax and play favorites.
- D - 03-20-2009
The Antagonist Wrote:I must have missed that.You forgot blind, which was the whole point of my tirade.
Besides that stupid new rule allowing anyone in the crease should have nixed that call.
You are right though - ref's are lax and play favorites.