• The post you are reporting:
   
  Very difficult to know which way to jump on this. There was a presentable immigrant woman on the lunchtime news with 2 kids who bemoaned the almost certain loss of her fairly comfortable life in a very nice part of London. She doesnt work, and probably has never worked, but feels the state should be providing her with this good life and was quite upset at the prospect of having it all disrupted. She has 2 kids and no husband.
  
  The cap would not allow her to carry on living there. But is this bad? couldnt she move to somewhere less salubrious. When we all came to London without an ass in our trousers, we had to work our way up from lowly bedsits in Clapham. The lowly bedsits came with the low level of income. When you made more money you went higher up the ladder, twas slow but sure. But that was how the system worked.
  
  Some people think you should start at the higher end, even if you have no ass in your trousers. The thing is..you have to earn a better pair of trousers. But therein of course lies the dilemna.
  
  The government are faced with trying to incentivise a whole mass of people who dont work, dont want to work either, because they are better off than the sods hitting the traffic every morning..( of course there are others who want to work but cant get jobs..but thats another story)
  
  While none of us want any kids to suffer, there has to be a line drawn in the sand at some point. The welfare bill is astronomical and growing ever more so.

Report Post

Your Name

Reason