Benefit cuts to hit more than 330,000 children

Bogof_Babe

I can remember one particular vocal single mother who complained strongly when she was only supplied with a single bed instead of the double she wanted for her own bedroom.

Begs the question of how "single" she actually was. Hmmm...

Glitterbaby

But the cuts wont make reckless people less reckless, meaning that the people most likely to suffer are children.

zagfles

Weary_soul wrote: »

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk- starving-soldier-3923771

Was he one of the soldiers who beat up Iraqi prisoners of war?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3716151.stm

Seriously, what next? How about a picture of an American kid crying over the death of his pet worm and pretending he's starving because of benefit cuts

http://www.theguardian.com/media/photography-blog/2014/apr/17/mirror-weeping-child-picture-lie-lazy-journalism

Nobody can be stupid enough to believe this sort of propaganda surely? It's pathetic, worse even than the Daily Mail.

Post it on DT, you'll get the them all frothing over it.

zagfles

bloolagoon wrote: »

In addition don't they get some of the pensions or other benefits if widowed? I know my MIL was widowed early and got something from my FIL contributions.

Yes, my wife would get a lot more in pension if I died than she'd get in child support if I walked out!

Weary_soul

And he had enough money in his bank account to buy enough for several meals.

£3.44 actually.

Nobody can be stupid enough to believe this sort of propaganda surely? It's pathetic, worse even than the Daily Mail.

Cameron must be so proud of you hon....

Prothet_of_Doom

The fact that my student kids can survive on so little and actually have money left over from their loans and grants, is partly because they were brought up in a household where money was tight, but we made it stretch. And where we openly discussed financial descisions in front of them and with them, and the choices we would have to make.
The benefit cap might mean that some people have hard choices too.

tea-bag

Prothet_of_Doom wrote: »

The benefit cap might mean that some people have hard choices too.

Like paying for sky sports or the iPhone, or not having a night out this week.

Lioness_Twinkletoes

Weary_soul wrote: »

Imo a civilized society wouldn't need such a thing.

In a civilised society people wouldn't have children they can't afford. In a civilised society, people wouldn't deliberately lower their hours at work to get more benefits. In a civilised society people would tramp the streets looking for work - any work - to put food on the table. In a civilised society, people would prioritise food and shelter over fags, booze, Sky TV and other luxuries. In a civilised society, people would realise that they and they alone are responsible for themselves and their families - not the Government and the taxpayer. In a civilised society we would support those that are truly desperate and destitute through no fault of their own - and the help would be practical with a view to getting them back on their feet. It would not just be throwing money at them.

Back in the day, both my parents worked - I was only weeks old when my Mum went back to work. They worked bloody hard to provide an excellent upbringing for us children and with no help from the Government.

We cannot continue to keep giving because people will just keep taking the handouts and won't take responsibility.

Weary_soul

We cannot continue to keep giving because people will just keep taking the handouts and won't take responsibility.

How do you know that? Are you in intimate contact with everyone in the UK? Thats just your view, not everybody's.

The only people I see getting 'hand outs' and who aren't won't taking any responsibility are todays politicians.

Lioness_Twinkletoes

Weary_soul wrote: »

How do you know that? Are you in intimate contact with everyone in the UK? Thats just your view, not everybody's.

The only people I see getting 'hand outs' and who aren't won't taking any responsibility are today's politicians.

Not everybody, of course not, just as not every politician is getting handouts etc. I assume you are being facetious as, of course, you are no more in intimate contact with all politicians that I am all benefit claimants. That said, there are enough examples of benefit claimants that support my point. Benefits should be safety net - not a lifestyle choice.