Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Wed Mar 19, 2025 4:23 pm He mentions them in the article. Part of his 70s nostalgia thing, but stressing that he does not want a return to them.

His focus is the people, not so much the cars. Nice cars for genuine disableds, kick up the arse for the ones with "mennul elf" as he puts it.

As I once said from personal experience, the most dangerous phrase in the English language is, "Just pull yourself together. "

Even Little Dick himself seems to admit that the Motability scheme is helping to keep a lot of car dealerships going which seems a good a reason of any to keep the scheme going. In the past I've bought a couple of cars that have previously been used by the people on the Motability scheme and both cards proved to be real bargains. They were both two years old yet only had about 10,000 miles on the clock which would suggest that they had only been used for essential journeys.

The key thing with the scheme is that the cars are leased, the people who drive them never actually own them. The money from the benefit agency just covers the leasing fee.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... on_desktop

Older people are working longer and it's all the fault of da kidz with their mennul elves. Standard "kids, eh?" and "back in my day..." filler.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... -Play.html

Dickie's all concerned about respecting people and that. Look, he can do it when he wants!

Given the current obsession with race, you might have expected the NHS to be outraged over Patient X’s disgusting N-word slur against a loyal employee of African heritage. But no.

This kind of Far-Left lunacy used to be confined to the more insane inner London boroughs.

"Inner London boroughs" is commonly code for "the blacks are acting up again".

The Far-Left have seized control of the institutions, including the law. Courts frequently put the ‘rights’ of criminals, terrorists and illegal immigrants above those of decent, law-abiding British citizens.

From two-tier justice, pro-Hamas marches and the ludicrous Motability scheme, to the billions spent billeting migrants in Lenny Henry hotels, nine million benefit claimants (many with bogus Mental Elf ishoos), police withdrawing from and taking the knee to BLM protesters, you name it, the country is going to hell in a handcart.

Given the far left has apparently been at this for the last 45 years, during which 31 were under Tory regimes of various shades of right wing-ness, how come none of them did anything to stop this?

Because it's a load of old bollocks, and taking cases like this (without looking it up, here's my guess - these people censured for "simply expressing their beliefs" were on the receiving end of some abuse or criticism, and their response was along the lines of "bloody trannies, fucking pervs, should hang the lot of them!") without filling in those gaps is....well, it's his raison de fucking etre.

Cunt.

Again, I'll say this: WTF is "ludicrous" about Motability?

According to him, because it gives disabled people too nice cars. Not that they should be given clunkers with "Motability" stencilled on the side, but nothing too shiny either. And only disabilities he approves of. A nice missing limb or something, but not a hand. That's a bit hate preacher.

So like so many, wilfully ignorant that the cars aren't free but it's deducted from your benefits (we looked into it about twenty years ago). No doubt he'd hate the big "Motability" signs in the windows of my local BMW and Audi dealers: I used to know someone who was the Motability salesperson at a Mercedes dealer.

As said before, he's no doubt quietly longing for the return of the Invacar because that's all they deserve. Know your place, crip.

"Like my Motability car? Here, you can have it on the condition you also take my qualifying circumstances with it too."

davidjay wrote: ↑Wed Mar 19, 2025 8:29 pm
As I once said from personal experience, the most dangerous phrase in the English language is, "Just pull yourself together. "

Or 'Smile, it might never happen'.

Boiler wrote: ↑Tue Mar 25, 2025 11:10 am So like so many, wilfully ignorant that the cars aren't free but it's deducted from your benefits (we looked into it about twenty years ago).

This was from the old DLA, which was a less restrictive version of the current PIP, right?

I'm struggling to understand how the current PIP is calculated. Presumably there's an element that's basically "you need a car, this is what we'll contribute towards leasing a car", right? I assume that's not particularly generous, even if some fairly expensive cars are part of the scheme, so would be pretty silly to spend all of it on the best available car?

It was indeed DLA, Tubbs.

I suspect the choice of car would be more along the lines of what best meets the needs of the claimant, not merely the badge it carries. For example, a small SUV/Crossover vehicle with higher entry/exit would best benefit someone with restricted mobility rather than a two-seater coupé low to the ground.

Although not disabled, my brother and sister-in-law have just bought a Toyota Yaris Cross as s-i-l finds entry/exit easier as her hips are now starting to play up.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... ights.html

Labour this and that, closed down the factories, made us reliant on the Yanks, destroyed manufacturing in the UK, what about the war, we built tanks then, something something drill for oil.

Wank.

A former hardline Thatcherite free marketeer is now an economic protectionist?

Littlejohn and other right wing journalists have spent years moaning about people taking the knee yet they all now seem to be taking to knee to Trump, backing his policies even when they are completely batshit and likely to cause economic damage to this country.

satnav wrote: ↑Thu Apr 03, 2025 8:40 pm Littlejohn and other right wing journalists have spent years moaning about people taking the knee yet they all now seem to be taking to knee to Trump, backing his policies even when they are completely batshit and likely to cause economic damage to this country.

They don't care. He's owning the libs.

And he has his “residential status” to maintain.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... armer.html

And he's claiming Brexit saved us from higher tariffs and everything will be great because...look, it might take a while but....any minute now...

Cunt.

We got the default 10% simply because we are just about the only economy in the world that doesn't have a trade surplus with the US. It was tangentially about Brexit, but only because that's just one of the reasons why we're an economic basket case.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... fting.html

Crime out of control, bring back bobbies on the beat, security tags on groceries now, hardworking good immigrants*, 70s sitcom reference, 'trendy' new TV show reference**, stand your ground, self defence, arrest the real criminals why don't you, 'hate crime' is just 'hurty words', bring back hanging.

Tellingly though, he makes a bit of a slip. See if you can spot it:

If Plaistow Patricia wants to buy a tin of Cow & Gate baby formula, she’ll find it locked away in a Perspex safe on the shelves, along with everything from bars of Fruit & Nut to lamb chops.

(In the US, they’re even putting face wipes under lock and key, as my wife discovered in a drug store on a recent holiday in Boston, Massachusetts. Soon everything in shops here will be behind bars, too – except, of course, the thieves themselves.)

Given that he starts off talking about security measures in British shops, the implication is that 'here' for him is the US.

Anyway, at least he doesn't blame the shop staff for not wanting to get beaten up. But otherwise, it's his usual proper coppering stuff - whack 'em around the head and bang up a few to deter the others. Cunt.

*We're in 2025, and it's still 'immigrant families' running corner shops. How many generations need to be born on British soil before...oh, never mind. We know what Mailites think.

**The Wire. Only 23 years old. To put that into perspective, if he wrote in 2002 about the new exciting sketch show Not the Nine O'Clock News, how out of touch would he seem?

Boiler wrote: ↑Wed Mar 26, 2025 4:04 pm It was indeed DLA, Tubbs.

I suspect the choice of car would be more along the lines of what best meets the needs of the claimant, not merely the badge it carries. For example, a small SUV/Crossover vehicle with higher entry/exit would best benefit someone with restricted mobility rather than a two-seater coupé low to the ground.

Although not disabled, my brother and sister-in-law have just bought a Toyota Yaris Cross as s-i-l finds entry/exit easier as her hips are now starting to play up.

A larger car would be useful if the disabled person used a wheelchair for example. Would enable them, their chair and someone else to travel together.

In some cases converted vehicles like the old Renault Kangoo were adapted with a wheelchair lift and a raised roof for just that purpose: the wife of a family friend had an adapted Ford Escort for that job. I think they were sold under the name of Chairman?

Strangely enough, the much-criticised Invacar was designed to accommodate a wheelchair alongside the driver.