MSE News: George Osborne to make £10bn welfare cuts

robpw2

topaziem wrote: »

Gobsmacked as the other poster has said, is putting it mildly!!

So someone that has worked and contributed for at least 30 years would get the current basic state pension of £107.45 a week.
Then if they have also paid over more of their money into a private pension scheme as well over the same 30 years and they get another £35.25 a week they would receive a total of £142.70 a week in pensions.


Yet some dozzy cretin that decided that going to work didn't feature in his bubble and claimed JSA for those 30 years he would still get the same amount - £142.70 from pension credit?

If I have read it right then what is the point in working? If at the end of the day you are no better off than someone who hasn't paid a penny into the system.

Totally out of order and it should be stopped right now.

I'll go back to what I said earlier - you can only get something out if you have contributed hard cash in.

i always wonder if pensions are so loe etc how all these oap's afford to spend £1000s pounds a year playing bingo

jamespir

robpw2 wrote: »

i always wonder if pensions are so loe etc how all these oap's afford to spend £1000s pounds a year playing bingo

a tad stereotypical isnt it

jamespir

topaziem wrote: »

Keep their knickers on and legs crossed instead!!

to be fair it takes 2 people to make a baby

they dont suddely pop out kids

Somerset

topaziem wrote: »

If I have read it right then what is the point in working? If at the end of the day you are no better off than someone who hasn't paid a penny into the system.

That's the point. That's why (some) welfare cut's have more support than a lot of poster's imagine.

jamespir

topaziem wrote: »

Of course it does, so we then have two irresponsible adults then and not just the irresponsible single mum!

Silly question - why doesn't the guy then become responsible when baby arrives and pays for it instead of mum claiming benefits?

Oh yes forgot he is claiming JSA isn't he.

Thinking about it a bit more - all of this irresponsible breeding is the fault of politicians - they let people become bored and hey presto - another one is on the way! Idle hands............

judge judge judge


you presume a lot dont you

do you have kids???

System

topaziem wrote: »

No one knows yet. But given that your daughter is in work/apprenticeship and given your forces connection, I would doubt very much that she will be one of those that are targetted.

It cannot be as simple as 'everyone who is 25 and under'. There will be exceptions. Personally I feel that the target will be set at those lazy cretins that are not in work or training and are under 25. Being a 'forces' child will also be taken into account.

The purpose of this is to shake the tree of all who are under 25 and are expecting people like me to pay their rent for them whilst they sit around doing no work or training. There are a lot of them!! As for no jobs - well your daughter does prove that there are jobs and training/apprenticeships available. The trouble is no one wants to do them for little or no more than JSA + HB +CTB. Take HB & CTB out of the equation and I am sure that most will find the 'jobs/training/apprenticeships' that don't exist!

As if the government care. It would take too much to actually do it on an individual basis, i expect they will apply a blanket policy much like they did with under 35's and the shared room rate.

robpw2

topaziem wrote: »

Turn it round the other way. How much do you spend on holidays, running a car, hobbies, entertaining, mobile phones, alcohol, smoke, Sky and a myriad of other wasteful things?

.

god i have just realised how boring i must sound
1. i don't drink
2. i dont smoke
3. i don't go on holiday much (last one was 2009)
4.i don't drive
5. i don't entertain others unless its taking my partner to free films as the cinema

robpw2

jamespir wrote: »

judge judge judge


you presume a lot dont you

do you have kids???

people need to get into the mindset that when you have a stable job , a suitable house and savings in the bank that is the time to have children.

Children should not be used as a way to get benefits and there are many young people who still believe it is

jamespir

topaziem wrote: »

And so they should have.

I'm not too happy myself after finding that out.

It's about time this country looked to the ones that are paying into the system every week and gave them the extras.

It should simply be, pay nought in - get nought out!!!

where have you been the last 30 years
?

oh and they shoudl change it but anyone can find themselves unemployed even yourself


but those who have never worked there is a few reasons why not

and its not always they are lazy or dont feel they will get more on the dole than working

i know someone who is in late 40's who has never had a paid job becuase he applied when he was younger and because he had not qualifications they wouldnt take him on so he got disenhearted and gave in however he found some volunteer work in a charity shop and he works there (has done for 15 years) but hes got to an age now where not many companys will take him on


where as if we gave people help to find and get jobs instead of judging them perhaps the situation might be better

jamespir

topaziem wrote: »

Well it's true isn't it?

If people spent more time working (voluntary, apprenticeships whatever) they wouldn't have the time to breed at the rate they are.

I do wonder if more children are born to jobless and !!!!less people than born to hard working families who have to consider if they can really afford anymore children.
Breeding carries a responsibility for the entire lifetime of that child. That responsibility covers finance, emotional support, education, etc etc.

I cannot get it into my head as to why would some people who have no job, no money and sometimes no home want to bring a child into their life. There isn't much that they can offer the child.[/

voluntry work does not pay and they would still be unemployed and consider answer my question do you have kids ???


and a child needs love not execss amounts of money i think id rather an unemployed person raise a child even though they may not have a lot of money than a working person who neglects or abuses it