Forum Replies Created
January 24, 2019 at 4:14 am in reply to: Curry night fundraiser to support Wrexham scout chosen to attend World Jamboree #162360
This seems really odd to me. Why would the scouts run a contest to choose which teenager should attend the jamboree, when it’s not within the scouts’ powers to actually send the winner to the jamboree? They’re basically saying that this teenager won a prize in a competition, but that he has to pay for the prize.
I’m assuming the young scouts who entered the competition all knew they would have to raise the funds themselves if they won, and so were not duped as such – but even so it’s a strange prize to win. Giving with one hand and taking with the other.
It’s not a cause I’d donate to, but each to their own. If other people want to donate I don’t have a problem with that. I do think it comes across as a bit mean for the scouts to do this to a teenager though – how would he feel if he couldn’t raise the funds & so couldn’t go to the jamboree? Perhaps it’s intended as a test of resourcefulness by getting the winner to raise funds through sponsorship or doing odd jobs etc – but if the winner came from a wealthy family they might be able to pay for the trip easily without fundraising. So whether the winner gets to enjoy their prize by attending the jamboree is based on personal or family circumstances, which seems unfair to me.January 22, 2019 at 2:46 am in reply to: Purrfect start for animal charity’s new £2.1m facility on old fire station site #162234
“One can love animals,” the Catechism says. “One should not direct them the affection due only to persons.”
I don’t think the ‘faithful’ amongst any religions have any qualms when it comes to picking and choosing which rules they follow & those they ignore.
I never understand why some people take issue with those who choose to donate to animal charities. It’s charity. It’s voluntary. People can donate to whichever charities they prefer, or not donate at all if they wish. There’s no requirement for it to be a charity approved by someone else (other than the Charity Commission, arguably).
I prefer to donate to animal charities. I make a regular monthly payment to one & donate items to the Cats Protection shop in town. Sometimes I donate to charities that help ‘humankind’ – including those that help people in other countries.
However, I will not donate to charities for homelessness in the UK as I feel the term ‘homeless’ is now a euphemism for substance abuse – a sanitised and more sympathetic spin on what the real problem is. I have no problem politely but flatly refusing to donate to such charities. I’ve lived next door to substance abusers before they were made homeless and even after that I tried volunteering for a few months with a ‘homelessness’ charity here in Wrexham, but I won’t do it again. I honestly consider money donated to such charities to mainly be money thrown down the drain.
Right or wrong, that is my opinion, based on my experience. But if other people want to donate their money to homelessness charities, then I don’t have a problem with that at all. So I don’t understand why it is that other people take issue with those of us who choose to donate to animal charities. It is our money and we can spend it however we like.
Also, it smells foul. You can smell it as you walk around town. I haven’t been to Chirk for many years – does that still have its peculiar odour? Maybe Wrexham will become known for its cannabis smell.
Is there anyone other than Wrexham’s councillors who actually wants Wrexham to be a city? Our councillors seem to be obsessed with making Wrexham a city. Why? Just why? Would this bring some particular benefits to Wrexham? Genuine question.
Well done to Janey for speaking her mind on this, even if it sounds bad. I have no idea who this person is – but if he’s all the things Derek & Matt say he is then I too think he deserves some recognition. But I think he and others who have really demonstrated exceptional courage and/or behaviour deserve to be rewarded by an honours system that isn’t a farce.
e.g. I’m happy to accept that Alastair Cook has done wonderful things for cricket – but is it really justification for awarding him a KNIGHTHOOD?
John Redwood was just awarded a knighthood for political and public services – i.e. his job, that he got paid for.
I liked Ken Loach’s take on the honours system: “It’s not a club you want to join when you look at the villains who’ve got it.”
Philip Green springs to my mind. And Nick Clegg.December 8, 2018 at 1:06 am in reply to: Paying an Extra £30 to Have Your Green Bin Emptied. #160240
I’m assuming (because I actually cannot be bothered to check!) that it’s £30 for the year? Personally, I’d be happy to pay £30 per annum for a green bin. It’s less per year than I spend per month for my iPhone, or for my dental plan. And I really am not rolling in cash. Less than £3 per month is a good deal as far as I’m concerned.November 10, 2018 at 10:12 pm in reply to: Universal Credit Furthers Pressure on Local Budget #158735
I’m not sure what to think of UC. I’m aware the idea (or part of it) is to bring the frequency of payments into line with what people who are working receive – e.g. makes it easier to transition from unemployed to working, which in general pays monthly. Also to make people responsible for their own budgets, in particular budgeting for their housing. Both of these in principle I agree with.
Many would be up in arms if their other (non-housing) benefits were paid differently to other people’s income, such as in food vouchers. People want the money and the freedom to budget and spend it as they wish – and they already pay their utilities out of that. So why should it be any different for rent? I think there are people who must have no idea that housing is often the single largest outgoing, because if they’ve never worked then their rent has always been paid direct to the landlord through Housing Benefit. I imagine it will make it harder still for those totally reliant on benefits to find private rented accommodation, even if they personally have every intention of paying fully and on time.
If people in, say, social housing lose their home due to rent arrears but are then given alternative housing by the council, it’s still an upheaval for them. Sadly, I think that it may be the only way for some people to realise that not prioritising rent has consequences.
What I do think is harsh is the one month wait before the first payment. It must be difficult, if you’re living on a breadline, to abruptly switch from weekly to monthly. I think it should have the option of some sort of phased introduction for each new applicant, building up to monthly payments – though for all I know such an arrangement might already exist.
In principle it seems like a sensible idea that encourages personal responsibility and makes budgeting on benefits more akin to budgeting on a salary. But something does seem to be amiss in the rollout of it – e.g. have the council been providing budgeting advice to UC recipients from the outset, because surely this situation was foreseeable (I read somewhere several years ago that landlords were not happy with UC). Also, the LibDems are partly to blame for this as they were part of the coalition.
Yes, it seemed that some people were very quick to blame it on “the foreigners”.
What do people from overseas have to do with this? Why would people from overseas using the NHS cause Wrexham – in particular – to be the “worst performing” A&E?
I really did hit a nerve with my guess about your motives for the free parking for “top management” at the council, didn’t I, Councillor X. The new Lidl location is a reasonable walking distance from there, isn’t it.
Complaint? Please use the report post tools or contact Wrexham.com .