Government's Mortgage Rescue

StevieJ

ad9898 wrote: »

The reason I didn't mention the husband is because by law and morally he has an obligation to his family, however if he is a t**t and is not helping then the full force of any law should be bought upon him, even if he is helping I am still happy that my tax money is spent to help this kind of person.

Oh by the way, how do you know they has not been mewing?

vigesimal

!!!!!!? wrote: »

As welfare dependency grows and the economy (taxes) shrink we'll be hitting a point where the whole concept of the welfare system is threatened. At some stage you have to start being ruthless to ensure that we actually keep a welfare system rather than end up like much of the world (USA included) where it's very much everyone for themselves, children or no children.

We should get DNA proof of parentage when people claim welfare payments for children.

ad9898_3

StevieJ wrote: »

Oh by the way, how do you know they has not been mewing?

Good point, unless she says I guess their is no way of knowing, however I did say in my previous post higher up that these peoples finances need to be scrutinised to the nth degree, if tax payers money is to be used.

StevieJ

ad9898 wrote: »

Good point, unless she says I guess their is no way of knowing, however I did say in my previous post higher up that these peoples finances need to be scrutinised to the nth degree, if tax payers money is to be used.

So let's have this right, if she has not been mewing she is OK, but if she has been mewing it is assistance withdrawn, get a job or/and out on the street. OK fine.

ad9898_3

StevieJ wrote: »

So let's have this right, if she has not been mewing she is OK, but if she has been mewing it is assistance withdrawn, get a job or/and out on the street. OK fine.

People have to start taking responsiblilty for their actions, if you're so charitable, rent these people a room in your house and leave your car on the road so they can fit their X5 in your drive.

Dithering_Dad

If we do enter a deep recession, or heaven forbid, a depression. I wonder how many of these 'you've been an idiot with your money, you should have to live rough' type posts will slowly disappear as the posters themselves fall into financial difficulties?

I really can't abide the sort of person who makes sweeping generalisations like "People have kids in order to qualify for benefits". They're in the same boat as the BNP scumbags who make unsubstantiated statements about scrounging immigrants.

It's easy for some forum members to make these statements, from the safety of their parent's back bedrooms.

lostinrates

Dithering_Dad wrote: »

It's easy for some forum members to make these statements, from the safety of their parente's back bedrooms.

I'm the only 'regular' here that I know of that admits to living in a parent' s back bedroom (actually its a side bedroom but feels like a back bedroom) and I'm not being nasty, am I?

Dithering_Dad

lostinrates wrote: »

I'm the only 'regular' here that I know of that admits to living in a parent' s back bedroom (actually its a side bedroom but feels like a back bedroom) and I'm not being nasty, am I?

I'm pretty that although they would never admit to it, quite a few are parental home back-bedroom dwellers.

It makes it easier to say "bring back the workhouses" when you're wrapped in the security provided by your parents. After all they could lose everything in a recession, yet still have a roof over their heads.

Quite another matter when you're a sole wage earner, have dependants and your own home (rented or 'owned') and are likely to lose your job. Suddenly the workhouses or debtors prisons aren't quite so amusing.

lostinrates

Dithering_Dad wrote: »

I'm pretty that although they would never admit to it, quite a few are parental home back-bedroom dwellers.

It makes it easier to say "bring back the workhouses" when you're wrapped in the security provided by your parents. After all they could lose everything in a recession, yet still have a roof over their heads.

Quite another matter when you're a sole wage earner, have dependants and your own home (rented or 'owned') and are likely to lose your job. Suddenly the workhouses or debtors prisons aren't quite so amusing.

Well, I can't know who lives where. some people are more credible than others I'll give you that.;)

I do not think workhouses or debtors' prisions sound amusing.:mad: In the least. I do think we have an issue where responsibility is devalued however. I don't know yet what I think the best way round this is.

neas

Got to give it to zammo.. it was incredily cruel... to pounce on him like that

BUT and its a big BUT!...

I absolutely spilled my coffe all over my monitor laughing at it... it was a good joke lol... and good jokes have some truth to them.... which this does.... tax payers will fund these measures....