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

The_White_Horse

marklv wrote: »

You are a joker - as you have proven repeatedly and consistently on this forum.

If you don't give welfare to those who need it you will get much more crime - especially theft. And then the costs of putting people through the courts and imprisoning them will be hugely higher than anything paid out as benefits.

not if you summarily execute them.

plus, why should it cost anything to jail scum? throw them in the existing cells and be done with it. you could get at least 30-40 standing in those cells if you remove the bed, tv, toilet etc.

Pete111

See Bendix?

A touch liberal but very interesting

Malcolm.

Exocet wrote: »

I can't see the Liberal wing of the coalition going for mass sterilisation but if Nick can sell it to them the right way, maybe another four years in government. Great thread Carol, we don't normally find a solution this quickly.

I would avoid drinking the mains water supply*, lots of estrogen, at least get a good water filter.

*unless come the weekend, your name is 'Lola'.

tincans

Pennywise wrote: »

Statistically speaking, yes, but if you look at the levels where it really matters, i.e. moving from a part time to full time job, or taking a payrise/promotion taking your household income up from £15k to £18k, then it is a massive disincentive that can leave you worse off in terms of higher tax and NIC, lower working tax credits and loss of other linked benefits such as council tax, free prescriptions etc. It's a lot more common that you'd think - I see it a lot. It's far from nonsense it's actually holding people back.

The initial claim was that it was a disincentive to go back to work.
Nothing could be further from the truth.

Graham_Devon

tincans wrote: »

The initial claim was that it was a disincentive to go back to work.
Nothing could be further from the truth.

It is a huge disinsentive to go back to work.

If you were part time, and your employers asked you to go full time, and they will pay you an extra £10 on top of your part time wage to do so, how incentivised would you feel?

bendix

Pete111 wrote: »

See Bendix?

A touch liberal but very interesting

He has potential, but he's showing definite ninky-esque tendencies.

Perhaps we can make him put him in some head of public sector type role, and see how he gets on first.

marklv

Pete111 wrote: »

It would be an honour Sir.

At the rate the govt is creaking there will be a general election in the next 12 months. Suspect we are going to need to quickly recruit a few others from the board to form a shadow (shadow) cabinet.

How about that White Horse chappie as home secretary? he's a little left leaning but is full of interesting ideas nevertheless.

The Tories want to gerrymander the electoral system to suit themselves - they need to be stopped. I'm hoping the AV referendum will not be approved, then the Lib-Dems will have no reason to support the Tories any longer and the entire coalition will fall apart.

Pete111

bendix wrote: »

He has potential, but he's showing definite ninky-esque tendencies.

Perhaps we can make him put him in some head of public sector type role, and see how he gets on first.

Good plan. What could possibly go wrong?

bendix

marklv wrote: »

The Tories want to gerrymander the electoral system to suit themselves - they need to be stopped. I'm hoping the AV referendum will not be approved, then the Lib-Dems will have no reason to support the Tories any longer and the entire coalition will fall apart.

As I said, totally humourless.

Pete111

marklv wrote: »

The Tories want to gerrymander the electoral system to suit themselves - they need to be stopped. I'm hoping the AV referendum will not be approved, then the Lib-Dems will have no reason to support the Tories any longer and the entire coalition will fall apart.

I know it's terrible. Soon they will be trying to skew the system so that winning a tiny overall % majority results in over 100 more seats in parliament.


Oh no. Wait....