Boom-time on benefits: The 140,000 families who claim £20,000 a year in handouts

MrsE_2

!!!!!!? wrote: »

That's because Britain entered the war because of a treaty obligation to defend Poland.

I know why Britian entered the war.

mvengemvenge

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

I don't want to spoil a good rant with a mere fact or two, but you can't just come into the UK from a non-EU country and "go straight on to benefits". Ain't possible.

Hmmm......

Does this not count as a 'benefit'???

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/asylum/support/

"If you meet the requirements to receive support, you will be given suitable housing and your case owner will arrange for you to collect money from a post office near where you live. The money will enable you to buy essential things such as food, clothing and toiletries. If you do not require accommodation but need money for essential things, or you need accommodation but not money, we will be able to give you this partial support".

I'm no expert in this field, but I thought NASS gives both money and housing/shelter to non-EU asylum seekers until such a time that they can claim 'normal' benefits?

If I'm wrong, I apologise.

leveller2911

mvengemvenge wrote: »

Personally, I think this constant reference to Poles coming over here is a red herring. They were never the problem. They worked hard and paid their way. The Government always makes reference to them, but that's to throw people off the scent of the much bigger numbers of non-EU people who come over and just go straight onto benefits. Labour never want to discuss this group, as it's not 'pc'.

I would partly agree, problem was: scenario: house rented by 6 eastern european builders= 6 wage packets---- all get jobs, all pay 1/6 th of the rent,electric,concil tax etc

---

flip side of the coin 1 english builder= 1 wage packet .Wife,2 children, pay all the rent,all the council tax, all the electric etc..............

europeans work for less= drives wages down= english builder has pay cut to same level as european

BIG PROBLEM :eek:

MrsE_2

leveller2911 wrote: »

I would partly agree, problem was: scenario: house rented by 6 eastern european builders= 6 wage packets---- all get jobs, all pay 1/6 th of the rent,electric,concil tax etc

---

flip side of the coin 1 english builder= 1 wage packet .Wife,2 children, pay all the rent,all the council tax, all the electric etc..............

europeans work for less= drives wages down= english builder has pay cut to same level as european

BIG PROBLEM :eek:

British men have gone all over the world & done that:rolleyes:

You ever watched Awf veidersien (sp?) Pet?

StevieJ

amcluesent wrote: »

"An astonishing 140,000 households are pocketing more in benefits than the average take-home wage.

The families are living on handouts worth in excess of £20,000 a year, official figures show. The enormous payouts dwarf the incomes of millions of hard-working families who are struggling to cope with the recession and the rising cost of living."

No wonder tax need to be sky-high for Clown to feed and water his block-vote.

Anyone still glad they studied, worked hard and tried to better themselves in Britain? No, thought not.


England is finished this time.

You really will have to stop reading that newspaper :eek:

leveller2911

MrsE wrote: »

British men have gone all over the world & done that:rolleyes:

You ever watched Awf veidersien (sp?) Pet?

Very true mrs E......the only difference was the British workers in Germany were paid the same as the German workers, no less and no more(apart from the smuggling of tobacco products back to dear old blighty)...;)

carolt

PasturesNew wrote: »

Making some sweeping generalisms, for which there's always one person who knew one individual for whom it wasn't quite like that ....

Before the benefits explosion, parents got some child benefit for the 2nd and 3rd kids only (until 1977). There was none of this DLA/carer business. If you had a sickly child of any sort and looked after them you'd still only get the standard child benefit money I believe. They just went to special schools where the staff could cope with a bunch of them because they were familiar with their needs. Now if there's one child in every class, each having different needs, the whole school's disrupted and nobody wins.

Back in my day, there were also none of these Tax Credit top ups.

This proliferation of benefits was promoted by the Govt to bring children out of poverty. All it did was give families more money. Those that previously spent it on fags/booze would spend more on fags/booze. Those that spent their previous money wisely would have had money for treats.

Having all this spare/extra money sloshing about enabled prices to rise for goods. Then credit cards could be obtained for this "income" - and even mortgages!

WTC has enabled a lot of employers to dump full-time jobs in favour of giving some lower paid part-time jobs to working parents, because of the top ups they get. Instead of paying one adult, say, £16-18k for a full-time job, employers have opted to employ two part-timers to cover the same hours for about £12k, knowing the Govt would top up their money if they had kids.

It's all been a rough deal for singles.

Interesting points.

Don't forget that WF tax credits were only bought in after the abolition of Married Couples Tax allowance - I know this, because we spent the first year of our married life as poor as church mice, as there was a year between abolishing the former and bringing in the latter.

So couples used to get a top-up even prior to recent benefits, just under a different name.

It's one of the reasons why single mothers are one of the groups to have benefitted most under Labour - whilst removing the stigma from them and their families was obviously fair, by treating all parents equally, single or married or cohabiting, it did come with the side effect of acting as an incentive for 'planned' single parenthood as a career choice (particularly as house prices rose and single mothers were prioritised).

arcalis

PasturesNew wrote: »

Before the benefits explosion, parents got some child benefit for the 2nd and 3rd kids only (until 1977). There was none of this DLA/carer business. If you had a sickly child of any sort and looked after them you'd still only get the standard child benefit money I believe. They just went to special schools where the staff could cope with a bunch of them because they were familiar with their needs. Now if there's one child in every class, each having different needs, the whole school's disrupted and nobody wins.

I've read some pretty sickening stuff on this forum and this is high up there with them. In your "dream world" whole sections of society were written off! Stick them in special schools, don't let them interact with society. Lets not give the disabled the same oppurtunities. You obviously have no concept of the workings of the benefits you speak of, ignorance is bliss, but even the ignorant can be attributed with empathy of which there is none in your post.

I appreciate there are faults in our system which a select few take advantage of, but in my opinion you judge a society on how it assists and enables its vulnerable citizens (children, elderly, disabled) not on how much money the government lets the privaliged and hard working keep in their pocket.

silverchair

"I've read some pretty sickening stuff on this forum and this is high up there with them. In your "dream world" whole sections of society were written off! Stick them in special schools, don't let them interact with society. Lets not give the disabled the same oppurtunities."

If I had a child with severe SEN I would like them to go to a special needs school where the class sizes are small & the staff to student ratio is better, as well as the staff being dedicated & specially trained in supporting and educating children with severe special needs. I dont see it as dumping them. Its definitely not sickening to have caring staff that are specifically trained for that special need.

I would at least like to have a choice to send them to a special needs school or mainstream. However, this government is closing more & more special needs schools. Those children are then put into mainstream schools where they are expected to cope (especially in Secondary Schools). Yes there are SEN departments & some systems in place, but not as much resources as those found in special needs schools.

Dustangle

PasturesNew wrote: »

Making some sweeping generalisms, for which there's always one person who knew one individual for whom it wasn't quite like that ....

Before the benefits explosion, parents got some child benefit for the 2nd and 3rd kids only (until 1977). There was none of this DLA/carer business. If you had a sickly child of any sort and looked after them you'd still only get the standard child benefit money I believe. They just went to special schools where the staff could cope with a bunch of them because they were familiar with their needs. Now if there's one child in every class, each having different needs, the whole school's disrupted and nobody wins.

Back in my day, there were also none of these Tax Credit top ups.

Back in your day they probably had special camps.