Another one of those benefits threads

Shakethedisease

No more entitled than you it seems.

Re : spouting 'those that breed as a lifestyle'..

In short judging them. I don't, and I haven't. I wasn't the one coming out with that on a public forum.

You're strong on words but with little idea of what you're talking about.

I have plenty of idea what I'm talking about. Unlike you it seems.

No-one pretends to know the personal circumstances of everyone having a child. I take it you're having some sort of a joke.

No and don't try to pretend that you are actually silly enough to have taken me 'literally' with the above. I credited you with far more sense. I've read many of your posts/opinons.. some of which I agree with, some not. On this one, I definately didn't.

As for the workhouse - what are you on about? You sound one bitter person.

You want people on benefits to work for free in community projects in order that they are financially supported by *coughs* you. It's in essence the same. Again, I credited you with the abilities to see the similarities between Victorian workhouses and the premise of 100's of thousands of the present day unemployed people working for no more than food and a roof in return.

Seems I really did over-estimate you. I won't make that mistake again.

And what exactly do you think that I personally have to be bitter about ? What on earth gave you that idea ? I am genuinely puzzled by that comment. Please justify it.

I see this thread has degenerated in to the usual 'cliquey banter' ignoring the original question/rant once things have been challenged a bit.
Carolt didn't even aknowledge that the price of childcare may be huge factor in single parents not being financially able to work. It was simply ignored in favour of an assertation that 'millions of immigrants' just 'magic up' employment when they arrive here so why can't the UK jobless do so ?

If that really was the case, most of them certainly WOULD be magicing it up too if they could. I assure you.

I'll leave you to your nice little cosy banter thread now.

chucky

carolt wrote: »

Wasn't my idea - was just repeating ruggedtoast's ideas.

Bet chucky's too much of a wuss to attack another man, though.

yet another thread spoiled by the usual suspect

silvercar

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Carolt didn't even aknowledge that the price of childcare may be huge factor in single parents not being financially able to work. It was simply ignored....

Unless on a high income, 80% of child care costs are reimbursed as part of CTC.

lostinrates

silvercar wrote: »

Unless on a high income, 80% of child care costs are reimbursed as part of CTC.

Child care vouchers are also a part of some high income packages.

treliac

Shakethedisease, I am not bothered what spin you try to put on my thoughts, nor what assumptions you may make about my experience, understanding or knowledge of social issues.

I couldn't care less whether you want to contribute to this thread or not. And I'm not going to answer your twisted statements about what I have or have not said..... it's pointless!

carolt

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Carolt didn't even aknowledge that the price of childcare may be huge factor in single parents not being financially able to work. It was simply ignored in favour of an assertation that 'millions of immigrants' just 'magic up' employment when they arrive here so why can't the UK jobless do so ?

If that really was the case, most of them certainly WOULD be magicing it up too if they could. I assure you.

I'll leave you to your nice little cosy banter thread now.

Why should I? As silvercar correctly points out, they would get most of the costs back through CTC.

Moerover, single parents are not the only ones who have to deal with the price of childcare, parents in couples do too, I can assure you!

And many immigrants who work have kids too.

So I can't really make any sense out of your comments.

Not clear if you're trolling, with a massive chip on your shoulder or just incredibly lacking in basic knowledge of the benefits system.

I sugggest you check your facts before posting next time.

carolt

chucky wrote: »

yet another thread spoiled by the usual suspect

Well stop posting then, chucky - you don't have to spoil it, do you?

carolt

And here is the latet update:

Coalition government sets out radical welfare reforms



http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/may/26/coalition-welfare-reforms-duncan-smith

What a night! First I agree with Asheron, then Ian Duncan Smith...

treliac

carolt wrote: »

And here is the latet update:

Coalition government sets out radical welfare reforms

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/may/26/coalition-welfare-reforms-duncan-smith

A word of wisdom here:-

Duncan Smith........ also discloses that he is looking at widening the definition of child poverty to include other measures besides the previous government's definition of poverty, which he says was a measure of inequality. "You get this constant juddering adjustment with poverty figures going up when, for instance, upper incomes rise."

As it stands now, 'child poverty' can never be eradicated.

carolt

And here is the bbc on the same:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8707652.stm

I await this with considerable interest.