|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Oct 10, 2010 13:38:10 GMT
I agree whole heartedly that it ain't right but that is the situation that people are being put in. As I said before I bet the % of people claiming more than 26,000 is very small. Let's not forget that this is 26,000 after tax so you would have to earn 30 odd thousand to get the same money for working.
|
|
|
Post by Cupid Stunt on Oct 10, 2010 13:42:30 GMT
;ong term dole cant be arsed to work scroungers are not working class, they are benefits class And making cuts will make more people unemployed, putting more people on benefits. Really good idea that isn't it? Thatcher was the one who created this generation of people who sit on the dole, because people used to have jobs to go to when they left school, she closed down the mines (all so the rich could get richer making profits) and with no skills the miners had no where to go and work, their children too also had a poor education, left school at 16 and then had no where to go. It's now seen as the norm to therefore not go and get a job. Benefit cheats piss all off, but in my opinion it's better to stop poverty and to help those that need it, and let a MINORITY corrupt the system, instead of punishing everyone.
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on Oct 10, 2010 13:47:03 GMT
I agree whole heartedly that it ain't right but that is the situation that people are being put in. If you have a large family and can't get a job that pays well enough to support them then you haven't been "put in that situation", you have bought the ticket and driven yourself there. What of all the people who say they can get the same or very similar money on benefits as if they went to work? Lots of them decide to not work as they would rather have the 40-50 hours a week sat on their arses feeling sorry for themselves than paying their way and contribe their taxes towards the services that they receive. That is not acceptable.
|
|
|
Post by Yorkshirepotter on Oct 10, 2010 13:58:16 GMT
I agree whole heartedly that it ain't right but that is the situation that people are being put in. If you have a large family and can't get a job that pays well enough to support them then you haven't been "put in that situation", you have bought the ticket and driven yourself there. Thank fuck someone agrees I was starting to think i was raised by really shit parents because they taught me i have to work for a living and earn the good things in life
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Oct 10, 2010 14:00:44 GMT
I agree whole heartedly that it ain't right but that is the situation that people are being put in. If you have a large family and can't get a job that pays well enough to support them then you haven't been "put in that situation", you have bought the ticket and driven yourself there. What of all the people who say they can get the same or very similar money on benefits as if they went to work? Lots of them decide to not work as they would rather have the 40-50 hours a week sat on their arses feeling sorry for themselves than paying their way and contribe their taxes towards the services that they receive. That is not acceptable. Yes but what if you are like me? Me and the wife have 5 kids between us 4 of which live with us. She had 2 when we met and had another 2 together. Her ex pays fuck all to the kids so I bring them up as my own. When we had the kids I had a good job with the MOD until I was made redundant in 2007. I now have a shit job and would get a lot more if I didn't work thus giving my family more. I have paid into the system for over 20 years. I am considering chucking it in after xmas so my family are better off. Why should I not get it when others that have only just entered the country and not paid a penny in the pot do? I will be happy to claim until something better comes along.
|
|
|
Post by provenstokie on Oct 10, 2010 14:08:00 GMT
There is far too much of this attitude that I can earn more money living on benefits than going to work.
If that's the case then fine stay on the benefits which would help your family but you should be made to work full time for a charity unpaid.
You're still earning money from benefits but putting back in to society by working.
Also could include working to improve the city, cleaning streets, providing services such as repair etc...
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Oct 10, 2010 14:10:46 GMT
There is far too much of this attitude that I can earn more money living on benefits than going to work. If that's the case then fine stay on the benefits which would help your family but you should be made to work full time for a charity unpaid. You're still earning money from benefits but putting back in to society by working. No problem with that at all. I am constantly looking for other work but there really is jack shit out there.
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on Oct 10, 2010 14:11:39 GMT
If you have a large family and can't get a job that pays well enough to support them then you haven't been "put in that situation", you have bought the ticket and driven yourself there. What of all the people who say they can get the same or very similar money on benefits as if they went to work? Lots of them decide to not work as they would rather have the 40-50 hours a week sat on their arses feeling sorry for themselves than paying their way and contribe their taxes towards the services that they receive. That is not acceptable. Yes but what if you are like me? Me and the wife have 5 kids between us 4 of which live with us. She had 2 when we met and had another 2 together. Her ex pays fuck all to the kids so I bring them up as my own. When we had the kids I had a good job with the MOD until I was made redundant in 2007. I now have a shit job and would get a lot more if I didn't work thus giving my family more. I have paid into the system for over 20 years. I am considering chucking it in after xmas so my family are better off. Why should I not get it when others that have only just entered the country and not paid a penny in the pot do? [/b] I will be happy to claim until something better comes along.[/quote] Because you're better than that and have some pride? Plus instead of focusing on the arseholes on the take, keep looking at the people in the same boat as you who are still working. They are the ones you should be following and not the ones who think others owe them an easy living.
|
|
|
Post by mermaidsal on Oct 10, 2010 14:11:53 GMT
If you have a large family and can't get a job that pays well enough to support them then you haven't been "put in that situation", you have bought the ticket and driven yourself there. What of all the people who say they can get the same or very similar money on benefits as if they went to work? Lots of them decide to not work as they would rather have the 40-50 hours a week sat on their arses feeling sorry for themselves than paying their way and contribe their taxes towards the services that they receive. That is not acceptable. Yes but what if you are like me? Me and the wife have 5 kids between us 4 of which live with us. She had 2 when we met and had another 2 together. Her ex pays fuck all to the kids so I bring them up as my own. When we had the kids I had a good job with the MOD until I was made redundant in 2007. I now have a shit job and would get a lot more if I didn't work thus giving my family more. I have paid into the system for over 20 years. I am considering chucking it in after xmas so my family are better off. Why should I not get it when others that have only just entered the country and not paid a penny in the pot do? I will be happy to claim until something better comes along. Stafford, sad to say I suspect you're exactly the situation some of the hardliners are talking about, ie don't take a larger family on by choice unless you're financially secure enough. Your circumstances say exactly why that's wrong.
|
|
|
Post by provenstokie on Oct 10, 2010 14:15:36 GMT
I'm unemployed but don't claim a penny even though all the taxes I'm paid I'm entitled too.
Why don't I claim?
Because I have pride, self respect and wouldn't want my name to associate with those scum.
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Oct 10, 2010 14:17:15 GMT
I'm unemployed but don't claim a penny even though all the taxes I'm paid I'm entitled too. Why don't I claim? Because I have pride, self respect and wouldn't want my name to associate with those scum. Pride and self respect is a fantastic thing but it don't cloth and feed the kids.
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on Oct 10, 2010 14:17:27 GMT
Yes but what if you are like me? Me and the wife have 5 kids between us 4 of which live with us. She had 2 when we met and had another 2 together. Her ex pays fuck all to the kids so I bring them up as my own. When we had the kids I had a good job with the MOD until I was made redundant in 2007. I now have a shit job and would get a lot more if I didn't work thus giving my family more. I have paid into the system for over 20 years. I am considering chucking it in after xmas so my family are better off. Why should I not get it when others that have only just entered the country and not paid a penny in the pot do? I will be happy to claim until something better comes along. Stafford, sad to say I suspect you're exactly the situation some of the hardliners are talking about, ie don't take a larger family on by choice unless you're financially secure enough. Your circumstances say exactly why that's wrong. Not at all Sal. The father of the first two kids should be contributing and "the hardliners" as you put it would do something about that aswell.
|
|
|
Post by mermaidsal on Oct 10, 2010 14:20:56 GMT
Stafford, sad to say I suspect you're exactly the situation some of the hardliners are talking about, ie don't take a larger family on by choice unless you're financially secure enough. Your circumstances say exactly why that's wrong. Not at all Sal. The father of the first two kids should be contributing and "the hardliners" as you put it would do something about that aswell. Yes he totally should be. But, in reality many absent fathers aren't as good about it as you (or my ex), how we got to this place with so many kids floating about unsupported is a long and crap story but I must sound like a stuck record here, by all means penalise the parents if there's a way to do that but it's morally wrong to penalise the kids imo.
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Oct 10, 2010 14:22:57 GMT
Stafford, sad to say I suspect you're exactly the situation some of the hardliners are talking about, ie don't take a larger family on by choice unless you're financially secure enough. Your circumstances say exactly why that's wrong. Not at all Sal. The father of the first two kids should be contributing and "the hardliners" as you put it would do something about that aswell. Do you live in cuckoo land? Do you honestly think we haven't tried to get money from their father? He is the best scammer known to man. The CSA can't touch him for some reason.
|
|
|
Post by provenstokie on Oct 10, 2010 14:29:20 GMT
To be honest it's too easy for people to get knocked up and have a child. There is very little deterrent these days.
How many single mothers and fathers are there? Or those who have multiple kids with different partners?
There is no consequences to churning them out left right and centre.
In the long run this produces a generation of children who are less than desirable who will grow up not knowing who their parents are or where their home is as they are passed from parent to parent. They also believe society owes them a living just like their parents did and just like their children will too...
Nobody works at relationships and walk away when it gets tough and their is little thought for those who become effected.
Obviously can't tar everyone with the same brush but what was once a minority is growing with each year.
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on Oct 10, 2010 14:34:06 GMT
Not at all Sal. The father of the first two kids should be contributing and "the hardliners" as you put it would do something about that aswell. Do you live in cuckoo land? Do you honestly think we haven't tried to get money from their father? He is the best scammer known to man. The CSA can't touch him for some reason. Calm down fella. I wasn't suggesting you should be doing something about it yourself. It's up to the government to sort him out as it's up to them to sort out immigrants who don't contribute and benefit sufficient families. Alternatively i suppose we can all just take the view of "Fuck it, he gets away with it so i'm going to aswell". Then all 60 million of us can live on benefits. That would be a great place to live in.
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Oct 10, 2010 14:54:34 GMT
Me and my partner are currently putting the whole children thing on hold until we are more stable financially. They will be my children after all, why should the rest of the workers be supporting my family? - doesn't make any sense at all to me.
I know several families who basically just pop them out despite the fact neither parent is working. The whole thing is a total joke - they might actually consider the financial implications of having a child if nothing was coming in to support them. Or change the system to vouchers so that the child benefit is exactly that, to benefit the child and not subsidise this months subscription of Sky TV.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Oct 10, 2010 15:06:53 GMT
Not at all Sal. The father of the first two kids should be contributing and "the hardliners" as you put it would do something about that aswell. Do you live in cuckoo land? Do you honestly think we haven't tried to get money from their father? He is the best scammer known to man. The CSA can't touch him for some reason. he is one lucky bastard then stafford, no offence pal i been paying for 15 years, and the cunts at the CSA wring me dry only 18 mths to go
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Oct 10, 2010 15:08:40 GMT
oh and before anyone wants to have a go, giving the absent father routine the bitch i pay to only wanted to be a single mum in a council flat like her big sister and i was the mug that came along,
i was an 18 year old boy that has been paying for it ever since
rhodesy, keep your dick in your pants or wear a bag
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Oct 10, 2010 15:15:28 GMT
Do you live in cuckoo land? Do you honestly think we haven't tried to get money from their father? He is the best scammer known to man. The CSA can't touch him for some reason. he is one lucky bastard then stafford, no offence pal i been paying for 15 years, and the cunts at the CSA wring me dry only 18 mths to go My eldest who lives with her mum turned 14 last Friday. I pay for her every month and more besides for school trips etc. I don't mind supporting my wifes 2 kids as they are like my own and get treated as such. The CSA is wank.
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on Oct 10, 2010 15:16:20 GMT
oh and before anyone wants to have a go, giving the absent father routine the bitch i pay to only wanted to be a single mum in a council flat like her big sister and i was the mug that came along, i was an 18 year old boy that has been paying for it ever since rhodesy, keep your dick in your pants or wear a bag Wearing a bag is the only way he'll get his dick out of his pants - the bag goes on his head of course. But more importantly than all the above Rhodesy - Shut the fuck up
|
|
|
Post by provenstokie on Oct 10, 2010 15:42:39 GMT
oh and before anyone wants to have a go, giving the absent father routine the bitch i pay to only wanted to be a single mum in a council flat like her big sister and i was the mug that came along, i was an 18 year old boy that has been paying for it ever since rhodesy, keep your dick in your pants or wear a bag I don't think we have to worry about Rhodesy getting his chopper wet. I mean who wants a Ron Weasley lookalike?
|
|
|
Post by Yorkshirepotter on Oct 10, 2010 17:44:30 GMT
oh and before anyone wants to have a go, giving the absent father routine the bitch i pay to only wanted to be a single mum in a council flat like her big sister and i was the mug that came along, i was an 18 year old boy that has been paying for it ever since rhodesy, keep your dick in your pants or wear a bag I don't think we have to worry about Rhodesy getting his chopper wet. I mean who wants a Ron Weasley lookalike? How the hell did our serious social discussion turn into another Rhodsey bashing thread ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? Sal, Stafford doesnt even come close to the cases we are talking about. Support should be there for people who have paid into the system when they need it. Those who have never worked and fund their way of life through freebies are doing little more than taking money away from our kids. If we stopped all these wasted benefit payments, we might even end up paying less tax in the future.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Oct 10, 2010 19:21:03 GMT
c'mon huddy, define rife, i still want my apology I have no idea mate, you used the word not me
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Oct 10, 2010 19:29:39 GMT
c'mon huddy, define rife, i still want my apology I have no idea mate, you used the word not me rife is more than 1 case, i can give you two, beardy can give you pne, sal one as well etc etc etc rife is millions a year in benefit fraud wrong again fella
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Oct 10, 2010 19:32:42 GMT
I have no idea mate, you used the word not me rife is more than 1 case, i can give you two, beardy can give you pne, sal one as well wrong again fella Oh well that's me put right then
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Oct 10, 2010 21:23:39 GMT
benefit fraud is rife, and scrounging WITH NO INTENTION OF EVER WORKING is fraud in my eyes beardy tell him what market drayton wetherspoons is like first thing in morning I'm sorry I really don't believe that to be true, if you can find me statistical proof that Britain is rife with Benefit Fraud, then I will apologise to you. For now, it seems to me that you believe the lies that the Tory government and the right wing press tell you. another broken socialist promise
|
|
|
Post by mermaidsal on Oct 10, 2010 21:33:52 GMT
So... a) does anyone NOT accept that approx 10% of benefit claims are likely to be dodgy in some way (mostly quite small ways)? and b) does anyone seriously believe it applies to all or the majority of benefits claimants??
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Oct 10, 2010 21:38:57 GMT
i believe landlords inflate rent because they know thehousing benefit will pay it (maybe mumf does with his two little shitty buy to let terraced houses)
i believe there are a shit load of people on incapacity where there is nothing wrong with them
i know of a few single mothers who have not told the authorities they are co-habiting as they would lose shit loads of housing benefit, council tax discount, child care benefits, income support etc. i bet there are loads of these
tip of the iceberg sal
rife, i tell you
|
|
|
Post by mermaidsal on Oct 10, 2010 21:45:06 GMT
i believe landlords inflate rent because they know thehousing benefit will pay it (maybe mumf does with his two little shitty buy to let terraced houses) i believe there are a shit load of people on incapacity where there is nothing wrong with them i know of a few single mothers who have not told the authorities they are co-habiting as they would lose shit loads of housing benefit, council tax discount, child care benefits, income support etc. i bet there are loads of these tip of the iceberg sal rife, i tell you I'm certain those are areas of fiddling, but cohabiting and incapacity benefits are quite heavily policed, I know the dodgy claims get the publicity but I still find it hard to believe the figure's much over one in 10. (I also know plenty like me who don't claim the full range of disability benefits when they could, mobility and adaptation grants are all I've ever claimed but I'm lucky, my economy doesn't depend on it - on the other hand having paid in plenty of tax and NI I don't feel guilty taking mobility components.) If we bring landlords and tenants colluding over Housing Benefit then I do agree with you but that's not really an individual scam, it's institutionalised and wants sorting (but I suspect would crash the buy to let market if it was knocked on the head in one go... mumf?? )
|
|