£3,000 spent on Christmas & 'guess what - you're paying for it'

[Ajthedragon]

My family work and I get £100 spent on me at Christmas from each parent, and other stuff.

When I was that age I was getting cheap presents, my PS2 was a one-off!

Get the ***** off benefits.

[Swastika]

Considering "armed forces" is either the army, the navy or the RAF then after your training, you're going to end up in a war fighting for oil.

So to have respect for the country, that automatically means you should risk your life for it? I respect a lot of people, doesn't mean I would risk my life for them either.

The last thing I would want is some idiotic chav be allowed access to a gun.

I understand what the armed forces are, i don't need you to tell me what the armed forces consists of thanks.
No your not automatically going to end up in Afghanistan, there are plenty of other places where you COULD end up, i didn't say front-line solider either which by the sounds of things you and everybody else are referring to.
No it doesn't mean you should risk for you life for the country, last time i checked doing something useful such as engineering, weapons technician etc didn't involve risking your life. There are plenty of things in the forces that you could do instead of front-line solider.
These "idiotic chavs" you talk about usually turn into good soliders once they understand respect, law and order, i'd rather have an "idiotic chav" who is a good solider than you behind a gun any day of the week.

And @Milestone.
By being in the army your leeching of the country? Have you just came off a banana boat? Are you seriously that dumb?
Any solider risking his life for this country has my ultimate respect and you have just called every single solider that represents this country a leech? What an educated, mislead young man you really are...

[Jam]

They got the old 360, its all fine.

[AgnesIO]

I understand what the armed forces are, i don't need you to tell me what the armed forces consists of thanks.
No your not automatically going to end up in Afghanistan, there are plenty of other places where you COULD end up, i didn't say front-line solider either which by the sounds of things you and everybody else are referring to.
No it doesn't mean you should risk for you life for the country, last time i checked doing something useful such as engineering, weapons technician etc didn't involve risking your life. There are plenty of things in the forces that you could do instead of front-line solider.
These "idiotic chavs" you talk about usually turn into good soliders once they understand respect, law and order, i'd rather have an "idiotic chav" who is a good solider than you behind a gun any day of the week.

And @Milestone.
By being in the army your leeching of the country? Have you just came off a banana boat? Are you seriously that dumb?
Any solider risking his life for this country has my ultimate respect and you have just called every single solider that represents this country a leech? What an educated, mislead young man you really are...

What the hell are you on about?

I never said you leech of the country if you are a soldier? I have the utmost respect for every soldier risking their lives for such a poor salary, and don't you dare question that.

[alexxxxx]

The problem with creating jobs is that government cannot create jobs, state sector jobs are a drain on the wealth creating sector and the bigger the state sector the small the private sector becomes because it is the private sector which generates the wealth for the state sector to gobble up. The only way you will create jobs and a real economy is by cutting the public sector right back (because we cant afford it this big, its an economic fact of life) which would then allow you to lower taxes and thus more private sector jobs come into being.

The period under the last government was high unemployment throughout its term, even though it created hundreds of thousands/millions of public sector jobs which of course in turn ended in the closing of the private sector as it could not afford the tax burden levied on it. I mean you only have to look at real unemployment figures to see that when Thatcher cut the state sector (hence the large peak in unemployment) the recovery was by the private sector which prospered thanks to her tax cuts and the ending of masses and masses of red tape and regulation which stifles growth;

Thatcher 1979 to 1990
Major/Blair and Brown 1990 onwards

Then again, we can't cut regulation now because we have political parties in office which are dedicated to big government and government interference (the Lib/Lab/Con) along with regulation which comes from the European Union which we have no control over and no powers to prevent until we leave the ridiculous thing.

What a mess.

Seeing as people in further education and university are counted as being economically inactive and this number has no doubt grown over the last 20 years plus the growth in population, i would not at all be surprised by this. can you post your source?

[Swastika]

Sorry Milestone, it was somebody else - this idiot.

You'd also leech more money by being in the army and not going to war, don't get your logic.

[Nemo]

She must have been saving for absolutely ages, not buying essentials/really low budgeting them, etc. etc.

Either way, shes an idiot and is a bad example of those on benefits

[Ajthedragon]

£300-400 EACH? They're on benefits and spoilt? Don't see the sense in that to be honest. That girl has a bloody macbook pro, if you can afford that then benefits should be cut.

Benefits should cover basics and SOME luxuries, not macbooks and Xboxs.

Edit: Why do they need two Xboxs?

No, benefits should not cover luxuries. It's getting something for nothing.

[Chippiewill]

They got the old 360, its all fine.

I think they already had it, they probably got it out for an even better photo.