Universal credit = more riots.

merlin68

I just watched a shocking film as part of my OU course about poverty in Birmingham. It reduced me to tears, this family had 6 kids living in a condemmed mould infested house. Now I worked out that they were getting £514 a week in benefits.
All the kids had to eat was their school dinners, the mother couldn't afford to give them anpther hot meal a day. !!!!!!.
There was mushrooms growing on the walls, the little kiddie wanted a pair of £45 trainers for her birthday, yet she couldn't afford to give them to her. These people need a serious something.

SingleSue

I wouldn't buy my children £45 trainers either.....my reasons would be the principle of the thing, £45 indeed.

Mine is nowt to do with benefits either, I was exactly the same when I was married and we were both working, just couldn't see the point in paying out silly amounts for something you could buy and were perfectly functional for a fraction of the cost.

My most expensive pair of shoes in my entire lifetime were £20, so it is not just the children who do not have expensive items. The average cost of my footwear is around the £8 mark (sales are my forte), my current set of high heels were £4 in a sale 4 years ago, my trainers £7 over a year ago...and that is all I have!

interstellaflyer

SingleSue wrote: »

Can I just point out the following

Not all those on benefits are scum
Not all those on benefits pop out babies willy nilly
Not all those on benefits want to be on benefits, some are there by circumstances (illness, caring duties, made redundant etc)
Not all those on benefit have a lack of morals or respect for others.
Not all of those on benefits have feral children.

No you are quite right, not all are, having had a couple of periods of unemployment I know that only too well, however we all know that there is an ellement that are all of the above

merlin68

So it's perfectly acceptable to spend the kid's money on drink and fags then, these kid's didn't even have a decent pair of shoes between them, yet the parents had their fixes.

interstellaflyer

merlin68 wrote: »

So it's perfectly acceptable to spend the kid's money on drink and fags then, these kid's didn't even have a decent pair of shoes between them, yet the parents had their fixes.

Sounds like you are trying to justify the actions of these feral kids, from what I've seen they are all old enough to know right from wrong, with or without parental guidance or a decent education.

SingleSue

merlin68 wrote: »

So it's perfectly acceptable to spend the kid's money on drink and fags then, these kid's didn't even have a decent pair of shoes between them, yet the parents had their fixes.

Erm, I am not sure where I said it was.......just that spending £45 on a pair of shoes was not the brightest thing to do when you can find very decent shoes for much less (Clarkes ones too) in the sales. Youngest and middle always wear properly fitting shoes from Clarkes, just I never pay full price for them...eldest now mainly purchases his own shoes from his part time earnings as apparently mumsy here is not 'up' with fashion

For the record, I neither smoke nor drink...and I have the crap shoes, think my feet are beyond redemption after many years of being abused :rotfl:

Remember that the film you watched would be showing just one angle of a family on benefits, not all are like it, some (probably many) do put their children first whether it be their education or their welfare.

pqrdef

It's all a bit like a schoolteacher nagging the kids to be good at maths. It can't be that hard, some of the kids can do it, so why don't the rest? They must be getting the sums wrong out of sheer wickedness.

TedButler

The cuts have to happen to benefits, the longer the postpone the worse the cuts have to be. But when they do cut peoples benefits the riots and civil unrest will be like nothing we have seen.

pqrdef

llubdlog wrote: »

I am sure if it was not for the cuts in the UK these riots would not have happened.

The rhetoric does as much harm as the actual cuts. The Tories have gone to war against the Welfare State, not regretfully but with relish. Their plans were laid before the 2008 crash, and having got the opportunity, they aren't about to accept that this isn't the right time.

llubdlog wrote: »

There is no option but to cut further, the cuts so far have not made a dent in the debt problem which is still getting worse.

The sovereign debt problem isn't real. Even Greece could afford its debts until the market decided it couldn't, and panicked. The UK Treasury borrows at less than inflation, i.e. at negative cost in real terms. Far from being overwhelmed with debt, it's actually stoozing the investors.

But the market is an idiot, as we see every day now. We have to avoid becoming the subject of a panic until the market (which is still misdiagnosing the credit crunch) recovers from its blue funk.

Graham_Devon

pqrdef wrote: »

The rhetoric does as much harm as the actual cuts. The Tories have gone to war against the Welfare State, not regretfully but with relish. Their plans were laid before the 2008 crash, and having got the opportunity, they aren't about to accept that this isn't the right time.

Can you tell me exactly how they have gone to war?

And how they have fought this war so far?

I'm asking you, as I don't believe what you are saying is factual and believe it's a political agenda you are pumping.