• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Question Is there a bigger scumbag in the world than Mick Philpott?

They guy raked in £100,000 a year thanks to our wonderful system and fathered 17 kids. Should be a symbol of Blair's Britain and why the likes of Balls should never be allowed to control our country's finances. Phillpot should be hung yet he will probably get even more money spent on him in prison.
 
They guy raked in £100,000 a year thanks to our wonderful system and fathered 17 kids. Should be a symbol of Blair's Britain and why the likes of Balls should never be allowed to control our country's finances. Phillpot should be hung yet he will probably get even more money spent on him in prison.

The man desrves to rot in whatever hell awaits him but I cannot for the life of me see what this has to do with 'Blairs Britain' nor Edd Balls running the economy. There are fiddles at every level of society, always has been and always will be. The £100,000 granted to him by the state is just another expenditure, just like the 'creative accounting' manouvres, that cost this country millions, used by whoever can employ them. Are the remaining children to be sentenced to a life of poverty because of the mistakes of the parents. We live in a society whose measure of quality is determined by how we deal with those less fortunate. The death penalty never stopped crime, no matter how henious the death and how many innocent people would die at the end of a rope before someone decides that we need to find a better way. The death of children is incredibly emotional and the want of revenge is natural, after all, no one wants people like Phillpot amongst us but bear in mind, there never was a halcyon day when his like didnt exist, no matter who was in gorvernment.
 
Do you read the morning Labour party brief before posting?

No.
Do you get clearance from the Tory party's Central Office before posting? :winking:

For a start, it didn't come into effect at the start of the month (the tax year begins on the 6th).

Yes,my mistake.Sorry.

Secondly, the additional rate of income tax was cut. In order to pay income tax you have to have an income. Millionaires do not necessarily have an income, and if they do it may well be less than the £150,000 to pay the additional rate of tax.

There are a lot of millionaires out there when you include pension pot and savings who have incomes substantially less than £150k
.

I see that 643 bankers earning more than £1m will get combined tax cuts worth £34.6m.
We're all in it together though.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/apr/05/hundreds-bankers-save-tax-cut

I also see that Cameron has got in on the act now.Disgusting.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/05/pm-osborne-linking-philpott-welfare
 
Last edited:
All this stuff is about him being a product of the benefits system is complete and utter crap and just cheap points scoring by Politicians. Some poor people cheat the benefits system. Some rich people cheat the tax system - what's the difference? He didn't do all the stuff he's done because he was on benefits, he did them because he's a ****. As for the death penalty, I'm against him receiving a few minutes of pain by hanging then having the freedom of oblivion, compared to a lifetime of bummings & kickings in prison.
 
Him being on benefits is about as relevant as Shipman having a beard. He's an evil ****, end of
 
Drastic™;1513524 said:
All this stuff is about him being a product of the benefits system is complete and utter crap and just cheap points scoring by Politicians. Some poor people cheat the benefits system. Some rich people cheat the tax system - what's the difference? He didn't do all the stuff he's done because he was on benefits, he did them because he's a ****. As for the death penalty, I'm against him receiving a few minutes of pain by hanging then having the freedom of oblivion, compared to a lifetime of bummings & kickings in prison.
This won't happen though, he'll be like Huntley and kept in luxury versions of prison cells in solitary! I'm told that the average prisoner costs the tax payer £45k per annum to "house", the 3 of them will be costing considerably more than that!
 
Drastic™;1513527 said:
Ah, so he should be hung to save us money. Because those kids lives have a monetary value.

It's dangerous ground when you start basing sentencing on cost. I'm pretty sure the nazis were good at efficiently disposing of people they didn't like!
 
This won't happen though, he'll be like Huntley and kept in luxury versions of prison cells in solitary! I'm told that the average prisoner costs the tax payer £45k per annum to "house", the 3 of them will be costing considerably more than that!

I'm not really bothered about the costs to the taxpayer as I tend to think that the victims lives were priceless.....but, the estimated annual costs of the present (death penalty) system in California are $137 million per year, the cost of a system which imposes a maximum penalty of lifetime incarceration instead of the death penalty would be $11.5 million per year. The idea that the death penalty would be cheaper to the taxpayer is a total myth. There's some interesting info here http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty
 
All this stuff is about him being a product of the benefits system is complete and utter crap and just cheap points scoring by Politicians. Some poor people cheat the benefits system. Some rich people cheat the tax system - what's the difference? He didn't do all the stuff he's done because he was on benefits, he did them because he's a ****. As for the death penalty, I'm against him receiving a few minutes of pain by hanging then having the freedom of oblivion, compared to a lifetime of bummings & kickings in prison.

Very agreeable post,may i just add that the the bummings should all be dry.:thumbsup:
 
Drastic™;1513530 said:
I'm not really bothered about the costs to the taxpayer as I tend to think that the victims lives were priceless.....but, the estimated annual costs of the present (death penalty) system in California are $137 million per year, the cost of a system which imposes a maximum penalty of lifetime incarceration instead of the death penalty would be $11.5 million per year. The idea that the death penalty would be cheaper to the taxpayer is a total myth. There's some interesting info here http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

Really? I resent massively that the taxes my family and friends pay are used to maintain the lifestyle of a number of high profile prisoners and low life scum like these. The link you quote there is obviously American, I'd like to hope that British justice would be a lot more judicial in its administration of the death penalty were it re-introduced. Seems absolutely illogical that a system enforcing the death penalty would be more costly, or isn't it just a case of the legal professions making more money for themselves out of appeals etc? Not sure. Just know that I think scum like Philpott, like Huntley, like Brady should have been wiped from the face of the earth. They don't deserve to live.

I know the manslaughter sentence means he'll have to serve a minimum of 15 years, but that could be it, he could be out in 15. Free to live his life, free (most likely) with a new identity. With 6 of his kids barely given a chance to live.
 
I feel that those who think this crime is independent of Philpott's welfare dependency are deluding themselves. He has been allowed to live a life of licentious hedonism, with no effort required on his part, or any consequence for his immoral and self-centred acts. You really don't believe that shapes the mind of someone who is willing to burn down their house and sacrifice their kids for grander accommodations? It is often social conservatives who are accused of branding someone as 'evil' without giving regard to the circumstances that may have precipitated a heinous act, but the boot is surely on the other foot in this case. 'He's just a scumbag' is not of any great comfort in a nation where welfare dependency breeds scumbags.
 
I feel that those who think this crime is independent of Philpott's welfare dependency are deluding themselves. He has been allowed to live a life of licentious hedonism, with no effort required on his part, or any consequence for his immoral and self-centred acts. You really don't believe that shapes the mind of someone who is willing to burn down their house and sacrifice their kids for grander accommodations? It is often social conservatives who are accused of branding someone as 'evil' without giving regard to the circumstances that may have precipitated a heinous act, but the boot is surely on the other foot in this case. 'He's just a scumbag' is not of any great comfort in a nation where welfare dependency breeds scumbags.

Are we to then get rid of the working classes for breeding murderers like Brady, Huntley or West. Reactionary nonsense.
 
Are we to then get rid of the working classes for breeding murderers like Brady, Huntley or West. Reactionary nonsense.

We are not talking about the working class you halfwit. We are talking about the non-working underclass.
 
Back
Top