We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Boom-time on benefits: The 140,000 families who claim £20,000 a year in handouts
Comments
-
If you are pointing out my posts then you need to read them fully and digest them.milliemonster wrote: »I don't think it is fair that all mothers should have to work full time whether they like it or not, what kind of dictatorship would that be?
I am stating that if you are in a legal partnership where someone will support you and both your children so one of you doesn't work have to work fine.
If you are not then providing the state gives decent childcare you should be expected to work full-time unless your child has a disability. Surprisingly to some people even disabled adults want to work and most full-time if they can.
The day I really knew something was wrong with the benefits system in this country was when one of my nephews' aged 7 was happily stating the financial affairs of some families in his local area, which I know quite well.I'm not cynical I'm realistic
(If a link I give opens pop ups I won't know I don't use windows)0 -
I'm reading this thread getting more and more annoyed.
Do you think we should help those less fortunate than ourselves? Even if some chancers slip through the net? Can you imagine being disabled or disadvantaged in some way? So what if it's their 'fault'? So what if some nieve young girl gets pregnant and the father does a runner? !!!!!! happens sometimes and society is supposed to be there to pick up the pieces.
I hope someone will help me if and when I need it.
If people keep taking the p!ss and abusing the system then the likelihood that it will be able to help you should you need it, is much reduced. There are finite resources available and every pound sponged by a chancer is a pound less to help the really needy.
I'm in favour of a welfare state that helps the genuinely deserving who find themselves in problems through no fault of their own. I'm not in favour of one that enables people to make a lifestyle choice not to work.
It's clear that we simply can't afford to keep up current levels of welfare into the future and something will have to give. Either we kick out the leeches or we degrade the system for those who really need it ... or the system simply collapses.--
Every pound less borrowed (to buy a house) is more than two pounds less to repay and more than three pounds less to earn, over the course of a typical mortgage.0 -
>about paying a few pence extra of tax<
If only it was just a few pence!
Apart from the £600,000,000,000 social security budget, there's £11,000,000,000 going to criminal justice and £100,000,000,000 for the NHS.
A good proportion of that is splurged on the drunk, drugged-up underclasses and their feral brats running riot in their sink-estates.0 -
OK guys. I wake up tomorrow with a critical and disabling illness. I have no insurance. What should happen? Is it just my hard luck, or will you support me for a while and then begrudge my Mobility car? Will you believe that I did once work and pay tax, or will you accuse me of being a scrounger? What if I am permanently disabled by this illness? Suppose it's a mental illness, so you can't actually see anything wrong with me - like a leg missing? Am I a scrounger then? Am I scum? Suppose I am female, pregnant, black and ill educated? Suppose I never got the chance to work, because of family problems, lack of education or opportunities? Is it my fault then?
Who do you select to be deserving or not? It's almost impossible to be fair. Do you let the deserving fall along with the undeserving - because you are so bitter and twisted about paying a few pence extra of tax that you cannot bear the thought of someone ripping you off?
That's how I read it.
How about just getting on with your own life - working, paying tax, being healthy, having a secure and happy home - and just be grateful that YOU don't have to rely on someone else's 'generosity'.
I agree but the problem is (and was recognised by the 1601 Poor Law Act) that some bloke (honestly) says, "I have a horrible but unprovable disease which means I can't work".
We all say, "You poor old thing. We'll chip in a bob each and see you right."
Then a ne're do well says, "I have the same unprovable disease. So does my missus and all of our 10 kids." And so do all his mates.
The poor bloke in the first case is looked as as being a bludger. The fraudsters who should be in prison are looked at as mere bludgers.
The reality is that you can't fix this. You can make it easier to recognise fraud by making the areas smaller for bureaucracy so perhaps the Civil Servant sees the blind man refereeing or whatever.0 -
amcluesent wrote: »>about paying a few pence extra of tax<
If only it was just a few pence!
Apart from the £600,000,000,000 social security budget, there's £11,000,000,000 going to criminal justice and £100,000,000,000 for the NHS.
A good proportion of that is splurged on the drunk, drugged-up underclasses and their feral brats running riot in their sink-estates.
The problem is we don't know if this is true. The media particularly newspapers job is to sell more papers or get more people to watch so sensationalist stories help.
From the stories I hear from my own family's kids quite a lot of benefit claimants whose offspring they mix or mixed with lived in good or OK areas.I'm not cynical I'm realistic
(If a link I give opens pop ups I won't know I don't use windows)0 -
At least they know how to have fun!!amcluesent wrote: »A good proportion of that is splurged on the drunk, drugged-up underclasses and their feral brats running riot in their sink-estates.
A proportion will also go to supporting deserving people of course. I put it to you lot that there are some ironies here - talking about people working when actually unemployment is rising. But I will agree something should be done. My suggestion is that we put MORE money into these sink estates - to repair the infrastructure, improve education, to creates jobs and opportunity. After all, in all honesty, I could easily afford a few pounds extra per week, as I suspect most of those attacking the feral underclass could. I've just given the banks 250 billion after all.0 -
At least they know how to have fun!!
A proportion will also go to supporting deserving people of course. I put it to you lot that there are some ironies here - talking about people working when actually unemployment is rising. But I will agree something should be done. My suggestion is that we put MORE money into these sink estates - to repair the infrastructure, improve education, to creates jobs and opportunity. After all, in all honesty, I could easily afford a few pounds extra per week, as I suspect most of those attacking the feral underclass could. I've just given the banks 250 billion after all.
I agree, but give it as breakfast & afterschool clubs & nurseries for working parents, NHS services, education, youth clubs, dentists, etc......0 -
At least they know how to have fun!!
A proportion will also go to supporting deserving people of course. I put it to you lot that there are some ironies here - talking about people working when actually unemployment is rising. But I will agree something should be done. My suggestion is that we put MORE money into these sink estates - to repair the infrastructure, improve education, to creates jobs and opportunity. After all, in all honesty, I could easily afford a few pounds extra per week, as I suspect most of those attacking the feral underclass could. I've just given the banks 250 billion after all.
The only problem if we do this it will be done the government quango way rather than the ways that would actually help by using someone in those communities who is already doing similar work. I don't know the solution to this.I'm not cynical I'm realistic
(If a link I give opens pop ups I won't know I don't use windows)0 -
At least they know how to have fun!!
A proportion will also go to supporting deserving people of course. I put it to you lot that there are some ironies here - talking about people working when actually unemployment is rising. But I will agree something should be done. My suggestion is that we put MORE money into these sink estates - to repair the infrastructure, improve education, to creates jobs and opportunity. After all, in all honesty, I could easily afford a few pounds extra per week, as I suspect most of those attacking the feral underclass could. I've just given the banks 250 billion after all.
You can throw all the money into sink estates that you like - but it won't fix anything.
The problems in those places aren't resulting from poverty - it's social breakdown. Putting endless amounts of money in is just enabling people to abdicate all responsibility for themselves, making the overall situation worse as well as placing a burden on the system.--
Every pound less borrowed (to buy a house) is more than two pounds less to repay and more than three pounds less to earn, over the course of a typical mortgage.0 -
You can throw all the money into sink estates that you like - but it won't fix anything.
The problems in those places aren't resulting from poverty - it's social breakdown. Putting endless amounts of money in is just enabling people to abdicate all responsibility for themselves, making the overall situation worse as well as placing a burden on the system.
It's not social breakdown though. That's a massive red herring.
Read about what places like Wapping and Whitechappel were like in the 2nd half of the C19th and you'll see that phrases like social breakdown are rubbish (IMO of course).
Read London: A Biography to see what parts of the West End (eg St Giles I think) were like in the C17-18th.
You've never had it so good!0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards