Guest 728- Registered: 24 Oct 2011
- Posts: 31
Gary:
The reason i start with benefits is this.
There are people that lose their job and quite rightly the state should be the safety net to look after them. If you've worked why shouldn't the state look after you until you get a job.
But should the state be there for somebody who has not worked in 5 years or who has never worked at all?
Should the state prop up those that have 2, 3 or 4 children (while unemployed for the whole time)?
You should never be better off by not working and this needs to be put right.
Your pride should make you want to work.
What was the welfare system set up for? The genuine or those who have never worked?
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
your correct steve
its how best you dont hit the needy by trying to achieve your aims
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Steve, the house of Windsor receive EU subsidies (benefits) for land estates in Britain, to the sound of hundreds of thousands £ a year!
So too do some aristocratic landowners.
We pay these contributions to the EU, who in turn give them to these high class... beneficiaries.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Steve Harris.
You are 100% right in your sentiments. Sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind. Some people are quite happy to let spongers live their useless lives on the taxes we pay. I would suggest slightly different solutions but better your ideas than the current morality-free, work-free spongers charter.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
barryw;
many will share the same viewpoint(maybe not in the same terms)
no one wants to see a benefit dependent society, but with this we need to look at reasons.
There should be a safety net for those that struggle, but shouldnt be an easy option.
but like has been said, with the push to have 4 million unemployed the benefits system will get worse.
im sure there are a lot of people out there on benifits who would prefer not to be, but with 400 people chasing 1 job, its something we need to face up to,
No govt will bring forward radical plans to change things, and will tinker with the system
as well as those on benefits though the issue should be addresses on those quite in a legal way getting millions, not having to worry where the next meal is to come from
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
Steve.
I am not disagreeing with you on benefits, I have stated many times that this system needs sorting and some of your ideas make sense.
Although you do not mention numbers, I don't think that it is as rife as you believe it is and simply saying that we take some benefits away from certain groups of people, will not help in any way with the current situation that we are in, with un-employment etc, such as it is.
In fact it will probably make it worse.
If you want to keep playing the "Morality Card" then why don't you start at the top where you CAN make a difference, into putting this country back on its feet.
Greed is the first one to attack.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
oh dear garyc you will get barryw biting lol
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
yep barry likes a good waffle.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
the cobbled together people are taking a chance on hitting the under 25's housing benefit.
aimed at their core voters but more talk of the return of the nasty party has surfaced.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
The cobbled together govt won't be together on this one
the lib dems wont want to go along with nasty dave.
it will all ends in tears
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Perhaps Dave is pointing out that society has responsibilities, that dependency on benefits for young healthy people cannot be a solution to their and society's problems.
The logical outcome would be that local government take up their responsibilities and start doing something, or saying something, or campaigning, for the unemployed!
Until now, local government in many districts has been silent, in many ways complacent, uninterested in speaking out for the unemployed or trying to find ways to create productive employment.
I know this as a fact to be the case of Dover.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
alexander
answeed in another thread
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Steve, I agree that benefits are badly apportioned; I do have a problem with young people living at home, being given housing benefit and working tax credits, but older people, who have worked all their lives and paid taxes, find they are laid off and can then only get a minimum-wage job, find they can't get WTC or Housing Benefit, so are deep in the brown sticky stuff.
Why should we pay for people to have loads of kids ? Surely people should only have children if they can afford them; why do they expect other people to pay for their children ?
Is it fair that people should be given benefit money, but not work or do anything, not put anything back ?
Some families do need help and support and they should be given it, I've always said that, it's the unfairness I don't like.
Roger
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
one good salution to the problem,make work pay,ie,up the hourly pay rate to £11.50p an hour thus cutting the need to have work based benifits redused to zero.housing/child benifit should be given to the most needy.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
I said that a while ago Brian, only £10 per hour, not £11.50. Barry said it wouldn't work because....... I can't remember now.
Roger
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
and it could be afforded how????(i hear barryw ask lol)
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
not remembering comes with age roger,just taking the medication it seems to help.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 26.Spot on.
Benefit fraud is common knowledge and nobody in Government regards benefit fraud as a `Significant` cost.
It is a rhetorical twist Osborne uses by placing his welfare reforms in the `territory` of stopping cheats,but the cuts
he/Government introduce have nothing to do with fraud,they appliy to `all` welfare claimants.
The cheats of benefit fraud need to be stopped but they are only 1 % of the benefit costs.
The rhetoric used by Government tacitly turns everyone who claims welfare into a `cheat`
It is socially very divisive.
It stigmatizes.
It is subtly slanderous and is immoral.
Unfortunately it taints all benefit claimants and it is regularly used by `some` to continue the misconception.
# 29....Agree...the cobbled together government is like an ``Iceberg``...the top part is the so called``compassionate``face
and the bit below the surface is the nasty stuff.
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
All political parties understand that if you tern up the heat on society to much, you run the risk of tipping that society into, communism, nationalism, or in the uk radical Islam .
You have 3 things at play in the UK at the moment, a vast reservoir of cheep labour
A lack of good paying jobs and millions unemployed.
So as we restructure the economy of the UK and Europe, things are going to get very bad indeed, lots of you could fined yourselves out of work if we tip over in to depression. (Very possible)
If you expect people to work for £6.19 ph they need affordable accommodation around £40 p/w gas and electricity at affordable prices, transport affordable prices
The basics for life, if not see paragraph 1
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
very astute mr b as the problem is europe wide and the ever present danger while unemployment and general disaffection is high that extremism in one form or another will be given ammunition.
i don't see the young of spain, portugal, greece and possibly italy sitting idly by with no money or prospects comforting themselves with the thought that austerity is the best medicine.