|
|
Post by Northy on May 28, 2024 8:08:54 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on May 28, 2024 8:39:22 GMT
My opinion is that unemployed should be required to do charitable work or supporting the local community in some way. Prisoners and young offenders should be litter picking and regenerating run down neighbourhoods. Not a fan of national service as it's just a means to send the less desirables off to some bullshit conflict. National service, non-military, has some merit though. spot on. It almost feels that nowadays it’s a sin to question people who are fit and healthy (and aren’t caring for someone) who can’t be bothered to work or contribute and are happy to live off the taxpayer. Is it wrong to say actually that’s not fair. But that isn't the proposed policy - it's compulsory unpaid labour for everyone aged 18 regardless of whether they are active or not. That isn't National Service or paying your way, its being press ganged. |
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on May 28, 2024 9:19:30 GMT
My opinion is that unemployed should be required to do charitable work or supporting the local community in some way. Prisoners and young offenders should be litter picking and regenerating run down neighbourhoods. Not a fan of national service as it's just a means to send the less desirables off to some bullshit conflict. National service, non-military, has some merit though. spot on. It almost feels that nowadays it’s a sin to question people who are fit and healthy (and aren’t caring for someone) who can’t be bothered to work or contribute and are happy to live off the taxpayer. Is it wrong to say actually that’s not fair. I don't know if you've tried 'living off the taxpayer' as a fit and healthy person lately but one of my lads was out of work for a couple of months last year and it was pretty much impossible, whatever money he did eventually get he had to pay most of it back. |
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on May 28, 2024 9:52:09 GMT
spot on. It almost feels that nowadays it’s a sin to question people who are fit and healthy (and aren’t caring for someone) who can’t be bothered to work or contribute and are happy to live off the taxpayer. Is it wrong to say actually that’s not fair. I don't know if you've tried 'living off the taxpayer' as a fit and healthy person lately but one of my lads was out of work for a couple of months last year and it was pretty much impossible, whatever money he did eventually get he had to pay most of it back. I guess that perhaps he was doing it right and honest I’ve witness numerous people over the years who openly abuse the system for years. |
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on May 28, 2024 10:30:05 GMT
I don't know if you've tried 'living off the taxpayer' as a fit and healthy person lately but one of my lads was out of work for a couple of months last year and it was pretty much impossible, whatever money he did eventually get he had to pay most of it back. I guess that perhaps he was doing it right and honest I’ve witness numerous people over the years who openly abuse the system for years. They may have found a way to game the system or they may have disabilities you're unaware of, I'm just telling you how difficult it seemingly is to achieve for the average person. |
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on May 28, 2024 10:45:27 GMT
I don't know if you've tried 'living off the taxpayer' as a fit and healthy person lately but one of my lads was out of work for a couple of months last year and it was pretty much impossible, whatever money he did eventually get he had to pay most of it back. I guess that perhaps he was doing it right and honest I’ve witness numerous people over the years who openly abuse the system for years. What have they been doing, be good to hear the details? |
|
|
|
Post by Foster on May 28, 2024 10:59:01 GMT
I guess that perhaps he was doing it right and honest I’ve witness numerous people over the years who openly abuse the system for years. What have they been doing, be good to hear the details? If he had the details then they wouldn't be openly abusing the system... obviously. Do you think people don't abuse the social system? |
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on May 28, 2024 11:01:48 GMT
What have they been doing, be good to hear the details? If he had the details then they wouldn't be openly abusing the system... obviously. Do you think people don't abuse the social system? He's witnessed it, he said as much. I was merely interested to know how they're doing it as my experience is it's a lot more difficult than people let on........ |
|
|
|
Post by Clem Fandango on May 28, 2024 13:30:26 GMT
I really doubt we've got the budget to fund this scheme. Our armed forces are struggling as it is to adequate kit and house those doing it as a proper job so god knows how they are going to fund an extra 30k.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on May 28, 2024 15:06:28 GMT
I guess that perhaps he was doing it right and honest I’ve witness numerous people over the years who openly abuse the system for years. What have they been doing, be good to hear the details? They are a family of 6. Mum and 5 kids. The majority are school age. Mum hasn’t worked in 20 years. Dads been in and out of their lives in that time. Mum lives in local housing. Receives over 2000 pounds in benefits a month. Was happy to brag about how much she gets. That’s all I’m willing to say but I’m not lying. Believe me she’s not unique. |
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on May 28, 2024 15:32:59 GMT
What have they been doing, be good to hear the details? They are a family of 6. Mum and 5 kids. The majority are school age. Mum hasn’t worked in 20 years. Dads been in and out of their lives in that time. Mum lives in local housing. Receives over 2000 pounds in benefits a month. Was happy to brag about how much she gets. That’s all I’m willing to say but I’m not lying. Believe me she’s not unique. Well the maximum amount of benefits a parent(s) with kids can receive is £2,110 a month in the Greater London area, and around £1,800 outside of London so I don't think you're lying at all. You said abusing the system though, in what way is she doing that if she's taking what she's legally entitled to? Is it not a bit like someone rich avoiding tax, we might not like or agree with it but they're not breaking the law? |
|
|
|
Post by Gawa on May 28, 2024 20:50:44 GMT
Reminds me of a young foster
|
|
|
|
Post by Gawa on May 28, 2024 20:58:18 GMT
If he had the details then they wouldn't be openly abusing the system... obviously. Do you think people don't abuse the social system? He's witnessed it, he said as much. I was merely interested to know how they're doing it as my experience is it's a lot more difficult than people let on........ Depends what you consider playing the system. Lots of people were I live who have connections tend to get the best council houses, alot don't need then. Some people work cash in hand while claiming different benefits. I have a friend who had a dla car due to his mum (nothing wrong with her). This particular friend is always going to court trying to make claims against employers and stuff too. He sort of boasts about playing the system. Tbh those playing it in most cases aren't exactly living a high life but some do take advantage. It is a minority though and not alot compared to the tax dodging at the other end of the scale. |
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on May 28, 2024 21:19:14 GMT
They are a family of 6. Mum and 5 kids. The majority are school age. Mum hasn’t worked in 20 years. Dads been in and out of their lives in that time. Mum lives in local housing. Receives over 2000 pounds in benefits a month. Was happy to brag about how much she gets. That’s all I’m willing to say but I’m not lying. Believe me she’s not unique. Well the maximum amount of benefits a parent(s) with kids can receive is £2,110 a month in the Greater London area, and around £1,800 outside of London so I don't think you're lying at all. You said abusing the system though, in what way is she doing that if she's taking what she's legally entitled to? Is it not a bit like someone rich avoiding tax, we might not like or agree with it but they're not breaking the law? She is fit and healthy but chooses not to work. Maybe I’m being harsh but I’ve always thought that if you have any self esteem / morals rather than being supported by the tax payer out of guilt you’d get a job. instead she openly brags and laughs at the likes of you and I about how much she gets and how she receives more than some of us poor sods / mugs that work 40 hours a week for less money. Her children are all of school age so there’s no dependents at home during the day. You’re quite right she isn’t breaking the law but that doesn’t make it right. Sometimes it’s more about morals than being dealt with criminally and getting away with it. In relation to the rich of course that’s not right either but it shouldn’t always be used as an argument to deflect from those at the other end of the spectrum. If they’re hard working at least they’re contributing something whether as a business owner like the Coates’s they’re creating jobs locally or in other cases making money for businesses. Swings and roundabouts I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by thisisouryear on May 28, 2024 21:20:59 GMT
They are a family of 6. Mum and 5 kids. The majority are school age. Mum hasn’t worked in 20 years. Dads been in and out of their lives in that time. Mum lives in local housing. Receives over 2000 pounds in benefits a month. Was happy to brag about how much she gets. That’s all I’m willing to say but I’m not lying. Believe me she’s not unique. Well the maximum amount of benefits a parent(s) with kids can receive is £2,110 a month in the Greater London area, and around £1,800 outside of London so I don't think you're lying at all. You said abusing the system though, in what way is she doing that if she's taking what she's legally entitled to? Is it not a bit like someone rich avoiding tax, we might not like or agree with it but they're not breaking the law? For me I would rather the person getting benefits than having the rich avoiding tax. At least the money from the person on benefits goes back into the economy to help keep local businesses going. The rich just hoard money which doesn't get spent therefore kills the economy and businesses |
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on May 28, 2024 21:34:34 GMT
Well the maximum amount of benefits a parent(s) with kids can receive is £2,110 a month in the Greater London area, and around £1,800 outside of London so I don't think you're lying at all. You said abusing the system though, in what way is she doing that if she's taking what she's legally entitled to? Is it not a bit like someone rich avoiding tax, we might not like or agree with it but they're not breaking the law? For me I would rather the person getting benefits than having the rich avoiding tax. At least the money from the person on benefits goes back into the economy to help keep local businesses going. The rich just hoard money which doesn't get spent therefore kills the economy and businesses Absolutely........... |
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on May 28, 2024 21:47:04 GMT
Well the maximum amount of benefits a parent(s) with kids can receive is £2,110 a month in the Greater London area, and around £1,800 outside of London so I don't think you're lying at all. You said abusing the system though, in what way is she doing that if she's taking what she's legally entitled to? Is it not a bit like someone rich avoiding tax, we might not like or agree with it but they're not breaking the law? For me I would rather the person getting benefits than having the rich avoiding tax. At least the money from the person on benefits goes back into the economy to help keep local businesses going. The rich just hoard money which doesn't get spent therefore kills the economy and businesses And there are fair few on here that simply don't get this. Well said. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on May 28, 2024 21:52:04 GMT
Well the maximum amount of benefits a parent(s) with kids can receive is £2,110 a month in the Greater London area, and around £1,800 outside of London so I don't think you're lying at all. You said abusing the system though, in what way is she doing that if she's taking what she's legally entitled to? Is it not a bit like someone rich avoiding tax, we might not like or agree with it but they're not breaking the law? For me I would rather the person getting benefits than having the rich avoiding tax. At least the money from the person on benefits goes back into the economy to help keep local businesses going. The rich just hoard money which doesn't get spent therefore kills the economy and businesses I was just about to make the same point, it really isn't swings and roundabouts at all, far from it, there is simply no equivalence whatsoever. But the Daily Mail (or whoever) encourage people to focus on it, to distract them from the far, far bigger problem of tax avoidance by the rich. |
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on May 28, 2024 21:56:07 GMT
For me I would rather the person getting benefits than having the rich avoiding tax. At least the money from the person on benefits goes back into the economy to help keep local businesses going. The rich just hoard money which doesn't get spent therefore kills the economy and businesses Absolutely........... I guess it depends on the circs but who contributes more the person claiming benefits who doesn’t work or pay into the pot and just takes or the person who works hard and is successful and pays tax just not enough ? Of course every persons story is different and there’s extremes to both sides of the argument but I’ve always been of the view that if you’re fit and healthy and not caring for a sick loved one at the very least you should try and find work. I can’t get the argument that it’s ok to condone people who want to take an easy ride and live off the taxpayer and exploit the system. If everyone had that same mentality nothing would ever get done. You’re talking like they’re almost doing us all a favour and helping the economy.  |
|
|
|
Post by thisisouryear on May 28, 2024 22:17:56 GMT
I guess it depends on the circs but who contributes more the person claiming benefits who doesn’t work or pay into the pot and just takes or the person who works hard and is successful and pays tax just not enough ? Of course every persons story is different and there’s extremes to both sides of the argument but I’ve always been of the view that if you’re fit and healthy and not caring for a sick loved one at the very least you should try and find work. I can’t get the argument that it’s ok to condone people who want to take an easy ride and live off the taxpayer and exploit the system. If everyone had that same mentality nothing would ever get done. You’re talking like they’re almost doing us all a favour and helping the economy. I don't think anyone is condoning it but it's just something we have to accept. You will never stop it because there will always be a few that play the system but the fact is they do help the economy and local businesses tick over and they will at least be in a more stable environment. The harder you make life for people who don't want to work the more likely they are to turn to crime or addiction which also has huge costs at the taxpayers expense and this can then impact local communities, they can even drag other people down with them from all walks of life. If you go after them by trying to force them into work you just make things worse for yourself. |
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on May 28, 2024 22:22:29 GMT
I guess it depends on the circs but who contributes more the person claiming benefits who doesn’t work or pay into the pot and just takes or the person who works hard and is successful and pays tax just not enough ? Of course every persons story is different and there’s extremes to both sides of the argument but I’ve always been of the view that if you’re fit and healthy and not caring for a sick loved one at the very least you should try and find work. I can’t get the argument that it’s ok to condone people who want to take an easy ride and live off the taxpayer and exploit the system. If everyone had that same mentality nothing would ever get done. You’re talking like they’re almost doing us all a favour and helping the economy. I don't think anyone is condoning it but it's just something we have to accept. You will never stop it because there will always be a few that play the system but the fact is they do help the economy and local businesses tick over and they will at least be in a more stable environment. The harder you make life for people who don't want to work the more likely they are to turn to crime or addiction which also has huge costs at the taxpayers expense and this can then impact local communities, they can even drag other people down with them from all walks of life. If you go after them by trying to force them into work you just make things worse for yourself. Fair play I don’t necessarily agree but it’s a fair and good response. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2024 23:10:12 GMT
Well the maximum amount of benefits a parent(s) with kids can receive is £2,110 a month in the Greater London area, and around £1,800 outside of London so I don't think you're lying at all. You said abusing the system though, in what way is she doing that if she's taking what she's legally entitled to? Is it not a bit like someone rich avoiding tax, we might not like or agree with it but they're not breaking the law? For me I would rather the person getting benefits than having the rich avoiding tax. At least the money from the person on benefits goes back into the economy to help keep local businesses going. The rich just hoard money which doesn't get spent therefore kills the economy and businesses The rich put money in investments that literally drive the economy. That includes people like this: www.british-business-bank.co.uk/business-guidance/guidance-articles/finance/angel-investment. The rich do it so they can make more money, and continue that perpetual cycle. However, they gamble each time they do it and the money they put in is probably quite invaluable to those small businesses that this apparent woman on benefits is propping up with her enthusiastic spending habits. |
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on May 29, 2024 5:08:12 GMT
For me I would rather the person getting benefits than having the rich avoiding tax. At least the money from the person on benefits goes back into the economy to help keep local businesses going. The rich just hoard money which doesn't get spent therefore kills the economy and businesses I was just about to make the same point, it really isn't swings and roundabouts at all, far from it, there is simply no equivalence whatsoever. But the Daily Mail (or whoever) encourage people to focus on it, to distract them from the far, far bigger problem of tax avoidance by the rich. Surely not the same Daily Mail whose owner has non dom tax status? What possible reason could they have for gaslighting their readers? 🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by thisisouryear on May 31, 2024 9:35:39 GMT
For me I would rather the person getting benefits than having the rich avoiding tax. At least the money from the person on benefits goes back into the economy to help keep local businesses going. The rich just hoard money which doesn't get spent therefore kills the economy and businesses The rich put money in investments that literally drive the economy. That includes people like this: www.british-business-bank.co.uk/business-guidance/guidance-articles/finance/angel-investment. The rich do it so they can make more money, and continue that perpetual cycle. However, they gamble each time they do it and the money they put in is probably quite invaluable to those small businesses that this apparent woman on benefits is propping up with her enthusiastic spending habits. So we should be thanking the rich for avoiding paying tax, taking money out of the country by the billion and putting it in tax havens which could be spent on infrastructure just because they invest in repeating the cycle whilst they get richer and the average person gets poorer and poorer and become the target for more tax hikes as we are hit with the bill to improve everything. We aren't feeling the benefit of their investments, this country is on its knees. The people are being hit harder and harder and our Infrastructure is wrecked. We are broken Britain, there is no balance. Our poor need a lift and the rich need to take a hit. The benefits of the poor having more money in their pockets will take a lot of pressure off our services. Reduced crime, less homelessness, reduced mental health problems, better health and there's got to be more I can't think of off the top of my head. We can't keep running the poor into the ground, more money in their pockets will increase their options. They can either stay as they are or they can become more ambitious and invest more in themselves but having more money can open more doors for them. Having nothing leaves you lost, low of confidence and fight and low ambitions |
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Jun 12, 2024 18:57:47 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Jun 12, 2024 19:25:33 GMT
What could possibly go wrong 🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Jun 12, 2024 19:26:52 GMT
What could possibly go wrong 🤔 Do you think they’ll get laughed at for wearing skirts? |
|
|
|
Post by maninasuitcase on Jun 12, 2024 19:38:45 GMT
This would be todays generation.
Get of my obstacle!!!!
|
|
