J B

[J B @JBrzph]

@Telegraph It's fine, I'm sure we can get around it - for example instead of using guy Fawkes on the bonfire we can instead pick a politician who's failed the country for a significant period of time.

[J B @JBrzph]

@boni_castellane @Telegraph Exactly my thoughts - should have done this while in power. I'm not gonna vote for them regardless of what they come out with as it's all just lies to win votes. They fundamentally don't give a damn about regular people - just the rich.

[J B @JBrzph]

@Telegraph I feel sorry for those trapped in flats as they struggle to sell so they have been genuinely locked in for years and it's why I would say to anyone buying - never get a flat as most won't buy them.

[J B @JBrzph]

@michelle_tan101 @Digimon_up_en I want her for this reason as she looks awesome - probably won't use her but she looks cool AF

[J B @JBrzph]

@LurkyRacccoon @Digimon_up_en This is a fair comment, it's overpriced for an AFK game and I don't like that banners don't seem to return e.g. units are unavailable once their banners are gone at this time rather than there being a daily banner with a chance of getting any of them to progress.

[J B @JBrzph]

@LeonardoLpzOso @Digimon_up_en You're also against a stun user, once you're stunned you're pretty vulnerable while the critical tree is just bad imo. I'd choose stun or skill crit at higher levels as regen doesn't matter if you die instantly and another crest gives you instanr hp recovery anyway

[J B @JBrzph]

@LeonardoLpzOso @Digimon_up_en It's not necessarily them cheating - power levels mean nothing, I regularly destroy people above my power levels as crests make the biggest difference. Rare Crit Damage crest is + 404% crit damage so you'll just get one shot when you're hit.

[J B @JBrzph]

@Matt56404055206 @Sonny496 @Heccles94 Able to do so, it's draining funds from taxpayers and other disabled people who can't work - in addition to from all the disabled people who work but don't claim benefits. It's not kind to allow people to milk a system they don't need as it disadvantages people who do /2

[J B @JBrzph]

@Matt56404055206 @Sonny496 @Heccles94 There's two different conversations though, most people who are disabled can work. That's just a fact. So it's about establishing more thoroughly who actually can work Vs who genuinely can't - as by allowing people to sit on their ass and not work when they're fully /1

[J B @JBrzph]

@Bleache1rs @Heccles94 Yes it is this, people need to stop making excuses from having valid conversations which is what Burnham is doing. Just because you're disabled doesn't mean you're disabled to the point you can't work - those are two very different things.

[J B @JBrzph]

@chris_baker60 @Heccles94 Cold sweats at one point before going to work tied to a health condition that inflamed at one stage, so I was dragging myself into work while struggling while Brenda at home who has minor depression is supposedly so bad she can't work - it's immoral /3

[J B @JBrzph]

@chris_baker60 @Heccles94 It's exactly this Chris, like I'm 33 and I've got severe asthma and had mental health issues for 20 years. I've always worked and never claimed benefits bar from 1 month where my condition got so bad I went to NHS crisis. It's not that these people are not disabled, it's that /1

[J B @JBrzph]

@chris_baker60 @Heccles94 Just because you have a disability doesn't mean it's severe, nor does it mean you can't work. I'd wager I've probably had significantly more struggles than a lot of those claiming they're unable to work - such as having to experience vomiting every single morning along with /2

[J B @JBrzph]

@Heccles94 Correct, hence why it's targeted at the portion of people claiming they are disabled when they are nowhere near the point that their condition prevents them from working. The people who are actually disabled to this extent will be fine, those exaggerating will be pushed into work

[J B @JBrzph]

@dontdelay E.g. after tax with a student loan =£2093, outside of London their essential bills range between £1350 and £1750 - add on if they need a car to get to said job that's more costs in terms of fuel and the car itself leaving nothing remaining.

[J B @JBrzph]

@dontdelay We shouldn't target individuals but it's a fair point to make that these individuals paid nowhere near as much tax as people do now all things considered due to economic imbalances that grew the last 40 years. For example someone on just over minimum wage now e.g. 30k a year /1

[J B @JBrzph]

@dontdelay Are paying 70-80% of their income for essential bills alone - they have zero ability to save, so why should they face the burden to pay for many pensioners who aren't struggling and don't require additional income. It's extremely damaging to the country long term /2

[J B @JBrzph]

@Solonfb @MeggMacc This is 100% a massive part of it I agree.

[J B @JBrzph]

@piran_peyman @MeggMacc A male perspective also would be: when misogyny occurs the country condemns it socially and legally, when misandry occurs excuses are made, it's downplayed, and ignored. People don't like double standards, it's "why should I care about your issues when you don't care about mine"

[J B @JBrzph]

@MeggMacc You will never see a substantial decrease in misogyny for example while misandry exists and vice versa as they radicalise normal people on the opposing side. Hate based on sex or ethnicity is hate regardless, there is no "this one's worse" as by doing that you just enable it /2

[J B @JBrzph]

@MeggMacc I don't, but I do hate misandrists like I hate misogynists. A lot of men hate women though as when misogyny occurs everyone in the administration and socially condemn it, as they should - while when misandry happens it's allowed and deemed "not as bad" while hate is a cycle. /1