Cant pay.. OR Wont Pay!!

Defiant_3

sideshow_matt wrote:

LOL @ U

I don't work for the BBC. I was just always taught stealing is wrong. I don't believe you havn't seen or heard or even surfed the BBC since you started stealing from them.

I'm just one of millions who doesn't believe in contributing towards you guys getting your entertainment at our expense. If you don't work for the BBC why ignore the question in the first place Einstein ?

World cup games? FA Cup final? Olympics? Radio? website

Jog on good boy

Come on let me hear you tell everyone it wouldn't be here without the BBC please ?

Defiant_3

Mrs_Optimist wrote:

I was going to respond to Slenderkittens rant at me, but nodded off halfway through it....:p

I'm off to watch Eastenders:rotfl: :rotfl:

You only seen it as a rant because you didn't agree with it and your post is hardly constructive is it (Eastenders well worth £4 billion :rolleyes: )

Mrs_Optimist

Defiant I was joking! Lordy Lordy Eastenders is a pile of pants! I meant that whilst ranting at me she missed the point about Commercial TV. Everyone buys at the supermarket at some pint (whether they have a tv or not). Think of all those commercials that need paying for, the companies add the cost on the price of the goods purchased by consumers (and no I don't mean the supermarkets themselves, think of DAZ, FAIRY, CANT BELIEVE ITS NOT BUTTER - all the everyday household products that are advertised on the television ETC) You have no choice but to pay for the commercials you don't watch.

I also don't get the point about undercover reporters and whistleblower programmes (which I happen to watch) but then I don't think Slenderkitten knows quite what she is going on about either.

I don't agree with you not paying your TV Licence but if you feel happy about it I'm not going to lose sleep! I do think that is it good value (even better value if you don't pay!) Im sorry that my post is not considered constructionve because you don't happen to agree with it (or take a joke) but hey that's life.

Defiant_3

Mrs_Optimist wrote:

Defiant I was joking! Lordy Lordy Eastenders is a pile of pants! I meant that whilst ranting at me she missed the point about Commercial TV. Everyone buys at the supermarket at some pint (whether they have a tv or not). Think of all those commercials that need paying for, the companies add the cost on the price of the goods purchased by consumers (and no I don't mean the supermarkets themselves, think of DAZ, FAIRY, CANT BELIEVE ITS NOT BUTTER - all the everyday household products that are advertised on the television ETC) You have no choice but to pay for the commercials you don't watch.

I don't mind adverts and they also help to keep our shopping costs down. If you start selling more thanks to advertising you can buy more cheaper at wholesale costs. This you can pass on to the customer and then start selling even more to beat the competitiion. The only things which do cost more which isn't really about advertising are the market leaders & this is only due to everyone else wanting to keep price's under them otherwise no one would buy there products

Broken_hearted

Defiant wrote:

Do you sleep okay at night knowing that most people who end up in court are single parents or low income families ? No they shouldn't have a right to watch true FTA channels without being forced to subsidise you first isn't that right Jack

Yes being on a low income and paying my TV licence I sleep fine. I choose to have a TV and so do they.

Defiant_3

Broken_hearted wrote:

Yes being on a low income and paying my TV licence I sleep fine. I choose to have a TV and so do they.

I choose to have a TV that I paid for and I also chose to have cable TV which I pay for. I also chose not to subsidise the BBC for those who like it in fact.

slenderkitten

I agree that all my suggestions will not apply to everyone or be to their liking.
After all some people may be allergic to dogs and not everyone can travel to certain places or have all the facilities available however I do get the impression that you are trying to come up with excuses against every single suggestion to do something productive.
- You used the word EXCUSES not me, but I am talking on a REALISTIC note.

As you are meeting people you may meet someone who is useful and may be able to help you in a completely unrelated career (it's called networking).
– Yes I understand your comment but, realistically it’s just a CHANCE opportunity that through the networking in this particular fashion may actually work, and doesn’t happen for the majority.


What about cleaning, babysitting, dog walking for people? *- You have to be vetted to do some of these
Woth respect I think you are talking rubbish and coming up with no end of excuses.
– No it is true, nothing to do with excuses its to do with keeping the public safe, you have to be vetted for baby sitting as I have said before, government is clamping down on this, and the same applies to cleaning.

I remember in my last job we employed a guy in his early 30’s to be our cleaner we had to sack him because he had told people in the company that whilst employed in his previous cleaning job, one day he took to work a home made gun that he made himself and he blew a hole in the door of his employers, and YES his mother called us up and confirmed what he had done so we know it was true. For him telling us this we had no choice but to sack him so on this point, for our own SAFETY.

YES! Management should have vetted him properly because all employees were CRB checked as I worked at head office for a Retail company, but he wasn’t checked because they thought he was a HARMLESS CLEANER, but turns out that the interview he was given didn’t reveal anything that could put staff in danger, hence why I say when you hire them privately they should be CRB checked (you wouldn’t hire a fraudster to manage your accounts would you?), and if he had a criminal record for his behaviour we would have picked up on this from his CRB check (I understand his previous employers didn’t want to get police involved on the grounds of his apparent mental condition as we later found out, and on condition that he finished his job).

YES! he should have some sort of training where he knew what type of things needed to be cleaned and what did not needed to be cleaned, even though he was told several times not to clean a particular area/thing.

(Cleaning in a work place is different to cleaning in the home, because it affects everyone, in the case of any serious outbreaks, of course company wants to know where the blame lies and in this case the cleaner does need to know what he is doing).

Anyway He didn’t understand what product to use and how much of a product should be applied to the surface that he was cleaning, as he was cleaning all sorts of strange things.

After this we decided to hire a professional company who did their own CRB checks and staff training.

And yes I was CRB checked I am only a Clerical worker with no access to even petty cash or accounts, or anything that is important.

You do not need qulification to clean someones house, although it's quite natural that they would want to interview you.
– You say this but wouldn’t you want to check that they even know what to do in an emergency if they spilt something on their own arm and that they do not have any problems with the products that you may have provided for them. There are all sorts of things that they may not know about.

I wouldn't let a stranger into my house with all my valuables without giving them an interview.

Have you even done any of these things yourself
I have cleaned, walked dogs and babysat in the past (all without qualifications).
– Some places may like to CRB check you and make sure you’re not the kind who likes to steal dogs or abuse dogs, if you havent noticed things are changing, government is making it a nanny state remember.

What about getting involved in local committees?
- not quite sure in what capacity you are thinking of, these are sometimes subject to interview

What is so offputting about having an interview?
- I was talking in general tone about interviews, being that if you want to volunteer your time you are interviewed in a similar way to that of a job; so if you the kind of person who is scared of interviews with paying jobs and thought volunteering with a charity wil be any easier, this may not be so.

If you go to CVS site you will see that most of the opportunities are fixed there for years and never taken off, so hence lots of people are applying through CVS and most are not getting a reply; much like if you were going for an actual job, this is why I said what I did.

Through companies like CVS you have to sit and wait to see if your selected I remember one of the companies I applied to had over 200 people interested, they have to say no to someone don’t they, what I am trying to point out to you that volunteer work is different to how you would volunteer years ago, today there are campaigns to volunteer your time but years ago there weren’t perhaps as many people interested in doing it.

If someone way cleaning my house I would want to talk to them before letting them lose on my TV, computer and jewelry,
- I would have thought you would want more than a “talk” with them, being that if you used a professional company they would have to be CRB checked and according to a cleaner they have to do courses on cleaning, (I suppose partly because of the chemicals involved, and in what quantity is is used and measured).

A simple talk isn’t going to tell you whether they have been convicted of THEFT is it. If you apply for a job in hospitals you have to state whether you have any convictions spent or otherwise, which is the standard in many companies now and is a growing trend, and when you go for interviews with the hospital they want you to bring copies of birth certificates passports and a whole host of other identify papers to identify where you live too, of course serious risk to having your bag snatched and all yoru worldly goods nicked in one go with this kind of paperwork.

If someone is entrusting you with their children then of course they wish to know something about you. No responsible parent will leave their children with a complete stranger who could be an axe-murderer.
The act of having an interview is GOOD practice for the future
- (again more than interview is required, they are CRB checked remember Ian Huntley and the likes – no-one is going to admit to you that they have a problem with children are they, and of course you would want to check out their previous references.

If you did most of your jobs (whatever profession it may) be through temporary employment agencies there could be a problem with references, particularly if you worked on several jobs one after another perhaps with different agencies).

And YES! i have tried to offer my services to a number of organisations through CVS which is the same as the year as the volunteer government campaign, but unfortunately most of them hadn't bothered or didn't want to interview/informal chat, nor did they even reply to messages left either through CVS or direct to the companies themselves. so please do not think that it is easy to find somewhere to offer your services being that there are going to be 200 applying.

Well done, glad to here it.
I am sorry that they didn't bother to reply.
You could try approching some organisations locally in person.
– actually I did if you read my comment again I did actually say I called them up and I even went to one company, (I have RE-INSERTED the rest of comment that you had omitted).

i'm just trying to point out that finding the right voluntary opportunity is not straight forward and that like me you will have to fight, as if you are applying for a paid job.

***Oops one more note, i did some voluntary work for an oxfam shop some years ago, they took about 4 helpers from the local OPEN PRISON, unforunately all of these were murderers, so if you have reservations about working with these types of people; you need to enquire about this before you make your decision whether you want to do it or not.***

:xmastree::rudolf::xmassmile:snow_laug:santa2::snow_grin:xmassign::bdaycake:

going2die_rich

TV is a luxury, anyone who can't afford it and on benefits should sell it so they don't have a TV license to pay for and simply wait till they can afford that luxury.

Not like you will die from not having a tv. Not saying it isn't harsh, especially on children, but I don't think Tv license should ever become staggered depending upon what you earn. It isn't fair for higher earners or any earners to not only subsidise people through benefits but also subsidise them so that they can watch Eastenders or whatever they watch.

slenderkitten

here you go again telling porkies you do not need a tv licence to own a tv it is only for LIVE broadcasts as there are many features on a tv that are not related to LIVE broadcasts.

just putting the story straight

Defiant_3

going2die_rich wrote:

TV is a luxury, anyone who can't afford it and on benefits should sell it so they don't have a TV license to pay for and simply wait till they can afford that luxury.

Thats a typical TV Licence response, subsidise our television or don't watch anything. Well going2die_rich again I pay for my own TV and only my own & they can't touch me

going2die_rich wrote:

Not like you will die from not having a tv. Not saying it isn't harsh, especially on children, but I don't think Tv license should ever become staggered depending upon what you earn. It isn't fair for higher earners or any earners to not only subsidise people through benefits but also subsidise them so that they can watch Eastenders or whatever they watch.

I get the feeling its your parents who pay your TV Licence anyway so why do you object to people having a choice ?