Why does social work filth chase people abroad to bring them home?

Christopher Booker over at the Telegraph wonders why the social work industry do not leave people alone when they have fled abroad to escape their clutches. I think I have the answer...

If you were a lump of social work shit then you would know that all the aspiration in the world wasn't going to alter the fact that you are as thick as two short planks, which is why only a former poly would take you with your crap A-levels. Having got your "degree" social work is about all your can realistically aspire to do, since nobody else will give a third-rater such as you even an interview.

Such a creature may have enough sense awareness to know that human society survived for several millennia before the social work industry was even thought of, and will survive for many more after its members have been reduced to doing something more in keeping with their intellectual abilities, such as flipping burgers. Obviously, what our representative lump of social work shit wants to do is to put off that day of reckoning for as long as possible that that his place in the first class section of the local government gravy train is assured for his lifetime.

This why pregnant women who flee abroad have to be pursued. If the word gets out that these women are more than capable of fending for themselves and their babies in foreign lands then why were they not left alone to do the same in Britain? If they were capable what then is the point of having a large social work industry that leeches off the public purse? Would it not be far better just to close it down and leave people alone to lead their lives?

The social work industry doesn't want us to ask those questions, so it tries to ensure that we are cowed by demonstrations of the industry's power. That is why when a pregnant woman flees abroad she is persecuted unmercifully: so that everyone else will see her anguish and be terrified into submission by it.

Alas for them, it doesn't work, and more and more people are asking why we are subsidising these creatures in their lifelong cushy number at our expense?

When Edwina Currie took on Jack Monroe

Former Tory MP Edwina Currie's main claim to fame was that she used to put a shine on John Major's knob when he was Prime Minister. Jack Monroe is a food writer who went through a period of incredible financial hardship and began to blog about her recipes that allowed her to feed herself and her son on about a tenner a week. A little over a week ago they came to blows on television, with Mother Currie accusing little Miss Monroe of being a middle class type on the make. La Monroe's howls of anguish were an entertainment in themselves, and all in all I scored that bout as a technical knockout for Edwina Currie.

It is not that Jack was never poor because she obviously was for a few months. Nor is it that she did not have to sell just about everything that she owned to get by and still found herself with only a few pounds left over to feed her young son when some of her benefits were not paid properly. No, the point is that Jack Monroe was a nice middle class gel from a nice family who found herself on her uppers for a short period of time. Had she taken that as her starting point then the right would not be able to attack her, but she doesn't. What she does is try to present herself as being more proletarian than thou, and that will not work for the granddaughter of a hotel owner, who is also the daughter of a senior fire brigade officer and a nurse. Certainly not when faced with a political bruiser like Edwina Currie...

Jack Monroe has become the voice of poverty porn for the Guardian reading middle class, none of whom would have given her a second glance had she not been a young, attractive, girl who writes the recipes that they want to make in their kitchens. Poor people have been producing dishes like stovies, since time immemorial, but the gobby harridans who churn out such delicacies do not fit into the Guardian's view of what a poor person should be. Jack Monroe does which is why she was able to work her ticket  out of poverty and back into the warm embrace of the middle class that spawned her.

I am sure that she will continue to work her ticket, probably all the way into the House of Commons. It's amazing what a few weeks of hardship can do for a person, especially if they have the cultural knowledge that allows them to market that poverty in a way that is acceptable to the consumers of poverty porn over at the Guardian and the BBC.

Which is pretty much the point that Edwina Currie was making, if you think about it.