Chronic the Drug Wasp 6 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 I am fortunate enough to have spent only 6 weeks on the dole in my life and in that time, I could afford next to nothing with what I received in benefits. Even the cheapest food from the cheapest shops was a struggle let alone anything else. "50" plasma telly; Nintendo DS; Air Max trainers; holidays to Spain" etc etc. Fuck off man, if full on 'dole scroungers' with these luxuries are actually in existence (a minority at best) then they've acquired them some other way, i.e. by drug dealing, robbing, or some other form of criminal activity. Maybe even gifts from relatives, but benefits do not afford them these things directly. I know a couple of lasses with bairns who work under 16 hours and pretend they're single in order to receive tax credits. In reality they aren't single, but live with a fella earning a full wage and as a result are living very comfortably with all the top ups, but full on dole claimants living the life of riley? Absolute bollocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) I think what people on here seem to hate more than anything is easily available credit rather than excessive benefits. Ignore the housing benefit, cos they don't any of it....and if they do, it's a fraudulent matter rather than a legislative one. The Maximum Jobseekers allowance is £67.50 a week.... You get £20 a week for a kid and £13 a week for any kid after that one so a 3 child jobseeker gets £5902 a year. £490 a month £113 a week. £28 per person per week. £4 a day each. To feed and clothe the 4 of you. The more kids you have, the tighter those margins get. If they are daft enough to be spending on big screen TV's, these people aren't going to Fenwicks and putting down £1000 on a top of the range 3d TV. They're going to Brighthouse and getting crippled on 1000% interest for a shitty 2005 model plasma Of course you NEVER see the front page headline pumelling powerful financial institutions for their harmful lending practices....which do cripple the country. It's the weakest, poorest members of society with least sway on the powerful elites that are the problem. Utter garbage.....even if their kids do have a PS3. Edited January 24, 2012 by Happy Face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26738 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 so a 3 child jobseeker gets £5902 a year. £490 a month £113 a week. £28 per person per week. £4 a day each. To feed and clothe the 4 of you. Well if that is all they're getting then no one will be too badly affected by the £26k cap then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 so a 3 child jobseeker gets £5902 a year. £490 a month £113 a week. £28 per person per week. £4 a day each. To feed and clothe the 4 of you. Well if that is all they're getting then no one will be too badly affected by the £26k cap then. They will. Because a very small number of people get that much. Housing benefit and Carer’s Allowance and Industrial Injuries Disablement will also be included in the cap. Ensuring that only the most vulnerable people taking care of disabled people, or themselves disabled or living in the most costly cities are affected. Hurrah for the cap. Hitting cripples who got this country in a mess hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 NJS is right, high profile extraordinary examples picked out at as evidence of the norm and people fall for it every time. Aye. Similar to saying the bloated public sector is responsible for the financial crisis. I.e. a big, fat fucking lie. That said, £26k untaxed is a canny bit of money so don't really have a problem with the idea in principle. As with everything though, the devil is in the detail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 3989 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 so a 3 child jobseeker gets £5902 a year. £490 a month £113 a week. £28 per person per week. £4 a day each. To feed and clothe the 4 of you. Well if that is all they're getting then no one will be too badly affected by the £26k cap then. 500 pw sounds alright but if they pay 400 pw rent (feasible in London) it becomes a struggle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26738 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 so a 3 child jobseeker gets £5902 a year. £490 a month £113 a week. £28 per person per week. £4 a day each. To feed and clothe the 4 of you. Well if that is all they're getting then no one will be too badly affected by the £26k cap then. They will. Because a very small number of people get that much. Housing benefit and Carer’s Allowance and Industrial Injuries Disablement will also be included in the cap. Ensuring that only the most vulnerable people taking care of disabled people, or themselves disabled or living in the most costly cities are affected. Hurrah for the cap. Hitting cripples who got this country in a mess hard. Households with DLA recipients are exempt from the cap so the cripples are still okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26738 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 so a 3 child jobseeker gets £5902 a year. £490 a month £113 a week. £28 per person per week. £4 a day each. To feed and clothe the 4 of you. Well if that is all they're getting then no one will be too badly affected by the £26k cap then. 500 pw sounds alright but if they pay 400 pw rent (feasible in London) it becomes a struggle. Indeed. However, it isn't meant to be easy. This idea that people are entitled to live where they want is ridiculous. I own a house in an area I can afford. If I couldn't afford the mortgage repayments then I would have to move to a less well off area, that's the harsh reality and should be the rule for all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 6441 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Households with DLA recipients are exempt from the cap so the cripples are still okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Households with DLA recipients are exempt from the cap so the cripples are still okay. No they aren't. They rely on carers...who are going to be affected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Indeed. However, it isn't meant to be easy. This idea that people are entitled to live where they want is ridiculous. I own a house in an area I can afford. If I couldn't afford the mortgage repayments then I would have to move to a less well off area, that's the harsh reality and should be the rule for all. Aye, if the rents too dear: move. Just like everyone else would have to. Only it's easier to find somewhere else to live if you don't have to spend 40-odd hours a week working / commuting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26738 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Households with DLA recipients are exempt from the cap so the cripples are still okay. No they aren't. They rely on carers...who are going to be affected. In the vast majority of cases, the carer will be a family member who lives with the disabled person. They will not be affected by this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 If implemented in its current form, the government's benefit cap will save £290m next year. That's on a £110 billion welfare budget. a 0.29% saving, on what is our third most costly government bill. Sure to save the country from it's financial woes. Pure politics playing on peoples emotional views rather than logic and facts. £290m is also just 4% of the £6bn (currently viewed as a conservative estimate) tax bill we let vodafone off with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Households with DLA recipients are exempt from the cap so the cripples are still okay. No they aren't. They rely on carers...who are going to be affected. In the vast majority of cases, the carer will be a family member who lives with the disabled person. They will not be affected by this. Exactly. The people affected are the ones where that is not the case. So people without family, who already rely on the kindness of a strangers to care for them, or with family that live separately....who now can't afford to care for them and have to get jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26738 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 So they just do nothing about it? Of course a large part of it is to do with appealing to the public stereotype of dole scroungers in their free houses but it doesn't mean that it isn't the right thing to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26738 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Exactly. The people affected are the ones where that is not the case. So people without family, who already rely on the kindness of a strangers to care for them, or with family that live separately....who now can't afford to care for them and have to get jobs. Being a carer is not a career choice. As you say, part of it has to do with kindness. It is also one of the most easily abused benefits available. Again, the allowance is not being removed, it is part of the overall cap. And it is worth about £2,500 a year, less than 10% of the cap. It's not like being a carer is an alternative to a job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Paul Wynn is a carer. That's all I'm saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Exactly. The people affected are the ones where that is not the case. So people without family, who already rely on the kindness of a strangers to care for them, or with family that live separately....who now can't afford to care for them and have to get jobs. Being a carer is not a career choice. As you say, part of it has to do with kindness. It is also one of the most easily abused benefits available. Again, the allowance is not being removed, it is part of the overall cap. And it is worth about £2,500 a year, less than 10% of the cap. It's not like being a carer is an alternative to a job. The trick there is to treat benefit abuse as the crime it is, if it can be proved. However small carers allowance is, when added to the housing, council tax, child benefit and that, if it takes them over the top, then it's a kick in the teeth to say they ain't getting it and they should get a proper job. Carers are a FAR cheaper alternative than the official NHS provided staff, so it'll end up being a more costly exercise, robbing the NHS, to force those people back into the job market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26738 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 However small carers allowance is, when added to the housing, council tax, child benefit and that, if it takes them over the top, then it's a kick in the teeth to say they ain't getting it and they should get a proper job. I'm not expert on the matter but my understanding is that carers allowance is currently not awarded to those already in receipt of other state benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christmas Tree 4003 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Happy, are you suggesting the £26,000 cap is too low? If you are, what do you think the cap should be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Happy, are you suggesting the £26,000 cap is too low? If you are, what do you think the cap should be? There's already caps on each of the individual benefits anyone receives. So I'm saying those caps should remain as they are. Superseding those caps with an arbitrary totaliser cap, after the fact, ignoring the reality of the individual situation is vote winning barbarism. Let's simplify reality to ignore the extreme cases that have been identified as needing most help. It's ridiculous to means test someone, look at the kids they have, where they live, what other income they might have, other inhabitants, arrive at a figure for what someone in those circumstances needs to live on, then arbitrarily say that despite those circumstances we'll cut your benefits so you're forced to live on less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 3989 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 I think that on the issue of where people live there is a case for stopping claimants moving to an area with high rents but forcing people out who had moved there when they could afford it is a bit much. Of course the lack of social housing underpins this as well but that's been a failing for decades now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted January 24, 2012 Author Share Posted January 24, 2012 People on benefits shouldn't have a telly? People on benefits, not working , with a council house which i'm paying for should not have a 50" plasma and skyHD no see that link i sent, within the first row of houses how many sky dishes can you see? oh woe is me, i need benefits, i can't afford this and that, but aye a £50 a month sky sub no bother, they can fuck right off. (Nevermind the fact they'll do anything in their power to avoid the work the polish and stuff will happily do here) i've a mate who works in the agency here and the stories she sends me are unreal like, major point being that millions of people who are working and earn less than 26k are subsiding those who are getting more than they are, for doing fuck all. The system encourages spongers, and is also encouraging foreigners to come to the country with no intention to work. The money will run out one day. Its all about setting up long term standards and seeing them out, we know there will be cases of genuine hardship and but you can't go down the road of allowing others to take advantage of the benefit system rather than look for jobs. The long term implications of that are dire and getting worse as the population increases [and I know people are going to give me flak for that, but its a fact and part of the problem], with no jobs for our youngsters, no prospects, already they stay on at school longer than I did because there are no jobs for them. More people are expecting more and more for nothing, where does it end ? They have got to understand that although life can be difficult, you can't have something for nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) quite right, it might not get through, because of the softies and clueless liberals, but it should. No scrounging cunt should get more than 26 grand a year for doing nowt, even that is far too much, especially those who haven't even paid into it. How many million of those are there ? No wonder the country is going bust. This legislation would impact 67000 families if it goes though. Estimating an average of 2 claimants in each of those familes, that's 134,000 individuals. There ar 6,000,000 benefit claimants in this country. So 2% of benefit claimants are affected. Not quite the overhaul you're hoping for.. Edited January 24, 2012 by Happy Face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Bring back hanging, it was cost-effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now