[user104658]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I also think going into debt for a wedding is not the wisest move working or not!

That much is true but then, I've known working couples to go £30,000+ in debt for a wedding which as A) insane and B) irresponsible (both personally and socially). People just go overboard with weddings in general, IMO. Plus the catering at these expensive weddings, sometimes running to £50 a head or more, is utterly insane! It's never even good! Dry chicken and cold veg... and not enough of it... mmm! Put out massive platters of pizza and snack-sized sausage rolls (bag of 50 for £1 from Morrisons...) and everyone will be happier and fuller, and the happy couple will be better off .

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

No Kirk, I;ve just heard you use the phrase "straw man" so many times that I already know exactly what follows, and it bores the **** out of me.

What other way is there to describe your posts T.S.?

Description of Straw Man:

"A logic fallacy involving the purposeful misrepresentation of an argument in order to strike it down."

"The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position."

A) The SUBJECT of the programs in question is EXCLUSIVELY Benefit CHEATS.

B) You MISREPRESENT that subject as attacking BENEFIT CLAIMANTS.

C) This then gives you a perfect platform to repeatedly post your rants and show us all how clever you are.

The problem is that you also repeatedly denigrate those of us who hold a different viewpoint to you - a viewpoint, I might add.which is legitimate, based on the program's TRUE subject and not your MISREPRESENTED view.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by bobnot

It is designed to make working class people feel better about their lives even though they are a lot worse off than they have been for a long long time.
Giving them a section of society to look down on makes them feel relatively superior even though it isnt a true reflection of the world.
The sad thing is that so many are willing to put the blinkers on and lap it up like good little citizens.

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Your maths are a bit out Smudge 30.00 for 4 weeks works out at 7.50 which would equate to about 10 per cent weekly benefit, I agree with your other points though I feel they would have been aware of the slant of the programme they just weren't bothered, I also think going into debt for a wedding is not the wisest move working or not!

Nope, nothng wrong with my maths, I said it worked out at £3.75 each. ( unless they paid £30 each)
We are both right.
The way the lady had everything in such tight control. I wouldn't be surprised if it had been budgeted for a good while.
I was well impressed with the £30 each for their hen/stag nights as well.
I am not into wearing a ruddy meringue and walking down the aisle so our wedding cost next to nothing, but I can see that a lot of people like to do it in style so as to speak, some people need a second mortgage just to pay for the day

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by rubymoo

I watched the first 5 minutes then thought..."why the hell are you watching 2 strangers getting married, who are on benefits????? Is this really what tv has come to????"

So i switched off, grabbed a glass of red wine and did a few suduko puzzles in silence

Me too but i played some Xbox rather than the Soduko

[user104658]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

What other way is there to describe your posts T.S.?

Description of Straw Man:

"A logic fallacy involving the purposeful misrepresentation of an argument in order to strike it down."

"The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position."

A) The SUBJECT of the programs in question is EXCLUSIVELY Benefit CHEATS.

B) You MISREPRESENT that subject as attacking BENEFIT CLAIMANTS.

C) This then gives you a perfect platform to repeatedly post your rants and show us all how clever you are.

The problem is that you also repeatedly denigrate those of us who hold a different viewpoint to you - a viewpoint, I might add.which is legitimate, based on the program's TRUE subject and not your MISREPRESENTED view.

You don't understand how a cheap show made by a cheap channel about "Benefits cheats" is a covert attack on all benefits claimants, and furthers a mindset of distaste towards benefits recipients in general. That's fine. I genuinely don't care that you don't "get it" .

All I will say is that you failing to understand something does not make it a "deliberate misrepresentation", or, in fact, any sort of misrepresentation at all.

You're also being a hypocrite again kirk. Yes, on occasion, I despair when people hold opinions that I think are wrong and believe to be damaging and I don't shy away from saying so. However, I really have to point out that even if I am guilty of this... there is no one else more guilty of belittling people, by questioning their intelligence, their sincerity, or often both, for not sharing an opinion as... Errrr... You, Kirk. Your very self.