Benefits shake-up: warning for non-working claimants

frank_begbie

cit_k wrote: »

would not put it past them, the have been spraying (and probably still are) large sections of the country with nasty bacteria. They have even released chemicals into workplaces and the london underground - to test bacterialogical/chemical warfare etc - all without the publics prior knowledge or consent.

Here's me thinking it was just a strong smell of bullsh!t.

cit_k

frank_begbie wrote: »

Here's me thinking it was just a strong smell of bullsh!t.

The authorities certainly release lot of that too.

Unfortunately they tend not to admit to it, unlike the chemical spraying/tests on the public, which has been fully documented and admitted by the MOD....

Oldernotwiser

cit_k wrote: »

would not put it past them, the have been spraying (and probably still are) large sections of the country with nasty bacteria. They have even released chemicals into workplaces and the london underground - to test bacterialogical/chemical warfare etc - all without the publics prior knowledge or consent.

Have you ever met David Icke?
:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

cit_k

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Have you ever met David Icke?
:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

No, cant say I have had the pleasure. It may actually be quite entertaining to meet him, I could do with a laugh.

However, I can prove my case on this one...

Have a read of this...

and also this..

and this...

and just in case you are thinking that site made it up, and also the BBC made it all up, and the Gaurdian made it all up, I picked one of the cases at random, did a quick google search and here is the direct proof of that random case - direct from the MOD itself.

Its all provable - as the MOD themselves have de-classified the old trials now. They refuse to deny they are still doing trials - which means they probably still are.

diable

Phew, first week at work over and I can see this thread has gone down hill ;o))))))

zaksmum

Maybe I've missed something with regard to benefits being stopped for up to 3 years for "those who refuse to apply for a job or accept a job"...but how could that work?

If you have, for example, a claimant who just couldn't care less, as opposed to someone who can't find a job, and the one who doesn't care has five young kids...how can they stop HIS benefits? Are his little kids going to starve? Yes, I know it'd be his own fault if they did because he won't look for work. But it's not the kids' fault. And if he gets his benefits stopped for even a week, let alone three years, he will have no money at all and so won't have any means of buying food.

It would be nice to think that would shake him out of his idleness...but what if it didn't?

No civilised country could allow children to starve so how would this be managed?

Apologies if I HAVE missed something!

Sixer

zaksmum wrote: »

Maybe I've missed something with regard to benefits being stopped for up to 3 years for "those who refuse to apply for a job or accept a job"...but how could that work?

If you have, for example, a claimant who just couldn't care less, as opposed to someone who can't find a job, and the one who doesn't care has five young kids...how can they stop HIS benefits? Are his little kids going to starve? Yes, I know it'd be his own fault if they did because he won't look for work. But it's not the kids' fault. And if he gets his benefits stopped for even a week, let alone three years, he will have no money at all and so won't have any means of buying food.

It would be nice to think that would shake him out of his idleness...but what if it didn't?

No civilised country could allow children to starve so how would this be managed?

Apologies if I HAVE missed something!

I think hardship payments of about 70% of benefits levels kick in. But don't quote me!

janninew

Parents would still get CB and CTC I think?? At the end of the day if you can't meet the basic needs of your children through being bone idle, then maybe social services will step in, as somebody who knows what will happen if they don't accept a job etc and knows it will affect their children badly clearly isn't fit to have children. I'm sure there won't be many cases as extreme as that though (I hope!)

cit_k

They are toying with the idea of replacing hardship payments with loans...

And also reducing the number of people who would be eligible for either a loan or hardship payment if sanctioned...

lynzpower

cit_k wrote: »

They are toying with the idea of replacing hardship payments with loans...

And also reducing the number of people who would be eligible for either a loan or hardship payment if sanctioned...

Yes, did you hear which company is ALLEGEDLY lined up for this nice little contract?