No point working - why not just go on benefits?

ILW

ninky wrote: »

if you are so bothered you could always go and put it all on the grand national.

benefits should not go to those with means to support themselves.

But it is OK to pay benefits to those that have just pi55ed it up the wall?
Not exactly encouraging to do the right thing.

Jimmy_31

ninky wrote: »

if you are so bothered you could always go and put it all on the grand national.

benefits should not go to those with means to support themselves.

They also shouldnt go to those who have never worked a day in their lives but it happens thousands of times a day.

What can i say, it disgusts me that im paying into a system that i am not allowed to claim from. I think it would be a lot fairer if i paid a cheaper rate of tax now that i am not allowed any benefits, i dont mind benefits going to genuine sick people or people who always work but suddenly lose their jobs but why should i be happy that i am now banned from the benefits system but every layabout who live around me get free money week after week for never ever having worked a day in their lives.

B_Blank

Every man and his dog feels like they are entitled to child benefit, joker seekers, incapacity benefit, and the worst of the lot - child tax credit.

Its a joke. Their arguement is:

"well i would swap with you and earn more, its no picnic being on low income"

If they werent either so lazy or stupid then they would be fine.

Why should I pay for their stupid kids.

JOKE.

All benefits should be scrapped. End of.

B_Blank

B_Blank wrote: »

Every man and his dog feels like they are entitled to child benefit, joker seekers, incapacity benefit, and the worst of the lot - child tax credit.

Its a joke. Their arguement is:

"well i would swap with you and earn more, its no picnic being on low income"

If they werent either so lazy or stupid then they would be fine.

Why should I pay for their stupid kids.

JOKE.

All benefits should be scrapped. End of.

ALSO, these people should learn to cut their cloth accordingly. Loads of these people live in big houses, go on holidays and have cars (rather than using buses). They probably shop at tesco in the tesco finest section to.

Its a shambles, they get child tax credit to let them go to spain on holiday every year. Seriously, the welfare state is to look after the most vulnerable, not to just make society even, where even the lazy and stupid people can go on holiday every year.

ninky_2

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

They also shouldnt go to those who have never worked a day in their lives but it happens thousands of times a day.

.

don't you realise youth unemployment is a massive problem? it's really hard for many to get a job after education. they've never worked a day in their life - should we just let them starve?

sunshinetours

ninky wrote: »

don't you realise youth unemployment is a massive problem? it's really hard for many to get a job after education. they've never worked a day in their life - should we just let them starve?

Yes it is a massive problem but you know full well that wasn't who he was referring to.

We can all argue till the cows come home but at the end of the day the system is very broke (in all senses of the word) and there is no pain free or totally fair way to fix it

Population control like China had (has?) would go some way to fixing future generations in the welfare part but arguably creates skills shortages and is a rather unpleasant concept (although i accept in the overall scheme of things may be necessary round the world as i do agree its probabaly the biggest threat to the worlds' population)

ninky_2

ILW wrote: »

Bearing in mind that something like 3/4 of the world earn less than a tenth of what we do here, I cannot see much changing. It is good for some employers though.

assuming our currency stays strong relative to their native currency.

Percy1983

sunshinetours wrote: »

Yes it is a massive problem but you know full well that wasn't who he was referring to.

We can all argue till the cows come home but at the end of the day the system is very broke (in all senses of the word) and there is no pain free or totally fair way to fix it

Population control like China had (has?) would go some way to fixing future generations in the welfare part but arguably creates skills shortages and is a rather unpleasant concept (although i accept in the overall scheme of things may be necessary round the world as i do agree its probabaly the biggest threat to the worlds' population)

I don't think we should limit people having children, but I do think we should stop paying for them after the third (maybe with reduced payments for the third), in short it would kerb the professional breeders.

But I do believe as a race there is more than enough humans on the planet so we don't need more, hence my plan for 2 children, quite simply 2 people make 2 children, population stable.

p00hsticks

Percy1983 wrote: »

there is more than enough humans on the planet so we don't need more, hence my plan for 2 children, quite simply 2 people make 2 children, population stable.

Not unless you wait for your parents to die before you have your kids, it isn't ! As the gap between generations is considerably less that the average lifespan, every couple having two kids is still going to lead to an increase ....

Percy1983

p00hsticks wrote: »

Not unless you wait for your parents to die before you have your kids, it isn't ! As the gap between generations is considerably less that the average lifespan, every couple having two kids is still going to lead to an increase ....

Well that is purely overlap and the overall sum stays the same as long as the gaps between generations stay similar. As the older generations in a family die new generations are born so 2 children does keep the population stable (basic logic says so). By all means it would lead to a slow decrease in population as not everybody will have children.

As it is the professional breeders go against this as they start young to get a house sooner, so there is too many of them and short generation gaps.