Let's help Duncan Smith - how would YOU improve the benefits system?

vigilaire

Compulsory sterilisation of the poor.

sss555s

marklv wrote: »

In my opinion the only way to get people off benefits is to increase the minimum wage to a level that makes work worthwhile. We need to peg the minimum wage to the Western European average, which I guess must be around £8.50 an hour or so. Anything less makes it difficult for people on family-type social benefits to give them up.

If you upped the minimum wage employers would want you to do more with less staff or prices would have to go up (inflation).

The better option is to cut benefits which will more likely have the desired effect without as much inflation or pay-offs.

dori2o

vigilaire wrote: »

Compulsory sterilisation of the poor.

That's taking things a little too far, some poor people are poor for reasons beyond their control but are generally nice people who do what they can to get by. Also not every 'poor' person is a benefits scrouger, many are simply low paid.

However what we should have in this country is a stupidity test, anyone who fails should be steralised and unable to breed. Such as those idiots who attended Raoul Moats funeral when they were neither friends or relatives, but people from various parts of the country who just thought he was 'A hero for keeping the police on their toes'.

Get rid of idiocy/stupidity, Chavs, and general scum like this by denying them the chance to breed more of the same.

Shakethedisease

However what we should have in this country is a stupidity test, anyone who fails should be steralised and unable to breed.

Oh please do give us more details of this 'stupidity test'.. am all ears.. ( wondering if I'd fail and then have to wave goodbye to my ovaries, forcibly ).. do tell !!!

LizEstelle

Let's NOT help Duncan Smith.

The LibDems may have chosen, in their strange wisdom, to support a barely-concealed, hit-the-average-man/let-the-toffs, bankers-and-tax-evaders off the hook agenda.

If you have any sense - or any self-respect - you won't.

LizEstelle

dori2o wrote: »

That's taking things a little too far, some poor people are poor for reasons beyond their control but are generally nice people who do what they can to get by. Also not every 'poor' person is a benefits scrouger, many are simply low paid.

However what we should have in this country is a stupidity test, anyone who fails should be steralised and unable to breed. Such as those idiots who attended Raoul Moats funeral when they were neither friends or relatives, but people from various parts of the country who just thought he was 'A hero for keeping the police on their toes'.

Get rid of idiocy/stupidity, Chavs, and general scum like this by denying them the chance to breed more of the same.

Yep. Let's start with those who can't spell 'scrounger' or 'sterilised'. We can do without that kind of low brow idiot, right?

chopperharris

dori2o wrote: »

That's taking things a little too far, some poor people are poor for reasons beyond their control but are generally nice people who do what they can to get by. Also not every 'poor' person is a benefits scrouger, many are simply low paid.

However what we should have in this country is a stupidity test, anyone who fails should be steralised and unable to breed. Such as those idiots who attended Raoul Moats funeral when they were neither friends or relatives, but people from various parts of the country who just thought he was 'A hero for keeping the police on their toes'.

Get rid of idiocy/stupidity, Chavs, and general scum like this by denying them the chance to breed more of the same.

Then that frees up the time for the good christian tory to round up the minorities , coloreds and the jews and force them to new areas freeing up council stock and increasing hp.

Low intelligence and poor go hand in hand , yet you champion them in the first paragraph.

In my opinion a minister for social security should have to commit to the changes they suggest.In this I mean they should live a life in those shoes for a year as experience for the job ,including social inner city housing , council waiting lists would mean a minimum of ten years before they even get started , state education for their children etc....if they had to do this , instead of just saying we are all in this together , you bet there would be changes but not in the manner a daily mail reader frenzies over.

FOURCANDLES_2

Blimey pleased I am not on benefits or an employee as many employees on here seem to have issues . However the people on here who protest so much are a worry. The funny thing is I suppose some on here coming out with some of the more unpleasant comments may well find themselves on benefits and branded idle and a waste of space in the next few years as the jobs they do are axed . FOR THE GRACE OF GOD AND ALL THAT I think people should keep the old cake hole shut.

dori2o

LizEstelle wrote: »

Yep. Let's start with those who can't spell 'scrounger' or 'sterilised'. We can do without that kind of low brow idiot, right?

I'm sorry if my dysgraphia offends you. I don't actualy think I do that bad considering and I do try and proof read everything I write.

sjaypink

dori2o wrote: »

I'm sorry if my dysgraphia offends you. I don't actualy think I do that bad considering and I do try and proof read everything I write.

lets hope the tube tie-er-uppers are as forgiving as us forumites then :A