Malik Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 Very true, the current government are trying to do something about it. I mean, i have seen people going from disability to job seekers because they are now classed as able to work. Lowering the amount they're entitled to etc. which means its better for them to work than not to. Stuff like this will all be reversed if labour get in again. The only problem is, people start pleading poverty and say they cant live on it etc... But thats the whole idea! Its a temporary safety net, not full time. The other thing is, you cant tell someone how to spend their money or budget. You get the ones that smoke 20+ a day and are down the pub most nights and then say they haven't enough to eat. When universal credit comes in, you can guarantee there will be a few that don't bother paying there bills, they just spend the lot. Its a real shame for the genuine people out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 Henry No one with a brain read's the sun. !! - Those who buy it only look at the pictures - Thicko's to be sure. Dave It would appear that people only skim read the sun.... He was backed by MPs who called on Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith to change the system which sees jobless Choudary able to claim £25,000 a year in handouts. Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4941734/Taxpayers-fund-terrorism-as-benefits-go-to-hate-preachers.html#ixzz2Utw2UErZ My emphasis.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diceman Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 Oh Henry, don't confuse us with facts, we want outrage! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twistedsanity Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 David Cameron is worth an estimated 30 million and owns six homes yet had the brass balls to claim disability living allowance from the state for his disabled son . Clearly he has no issues claiming what he is legally entitled to and he is the Prime Minister so why should we expect others behave any differently ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewluke Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 Benefits should be a safety net but they become too comfortable, that's the problem. My cousin is a good example, he's a good man but after a couple of years on the dole (after a redundancy) he just settled into the lifestyle, you could see it was happening. If you get into that sort of rut you can start to stack one benefit on top of another. He has sciatica, well so have I, it should not have stopped him working but some doctor put him on the sick and that was his ticket punched for life. His wife has arthritis and she's on the sick now too. They get a mobility car and he is her carer on carers allowance. She could work, Ok her options may be limited but my options are limited, most people's options are limited. Its a one way street and that's a fact, once you are on it the system keeps you on it. It is all too easy. I'm sure in my own mind that all those years ago, had they said to him "You've got a year on the dole to sort yourself out and they it stops" his life would have turned out very differently. The point I would like to make is its the system that draws people into benefits dependency and professionals like social workers, doctors, council workers, civil servants etc have a vested interest in not rocking the boat. you cannot be on the 'sick' yourself and claim carers allowance as a carer, andrew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sable Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 It's not just him, I know some serial white British, violent, lazy, druggy, lobotomy candidates who do the same. name them please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 (edited) name them please ima chavlad. ben efit and jobe seeker Edited May 31, 2013 by overandunder2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Galore! Posted June 1, 2013 Report Share Posted June 1, 2013 Very true, the current government are trying to do something about it. I mean, i have seen people going from disability to job seekers because they are now classed as able to work. Lowering the amount they're entitled to etc. which means its better for them to work than not to. Stuff like this will all be reversed if labour get in again. this was started by the previous government, along with medical reports from doctors hired by the benefits agency. not that i'm a fan of labour, i'm just not a fan of the tories either. too many people abuse the system because they think they have a right to, just makes it harder for anyone else who isn't clued up on how to play the system to receive any benefits when needed, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twistedsanity Posted June 1, 2013 Report Share Posted June 1, 2013 incapacity benefit was invented by maggies government as a way of massaging the unemployment figures before election time came round, suddenly the largest number of people signing on ever known dropped dramatically as people were swapped to incapacity from unemployment benefit which made the Tories look more likley to be re-elected Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted June 1, 2013 Report Share Posted June 1, 2013 incapacity benefit was invented by maggies government as a way of massaging the unemployment figures before election time came round, suddenly the largest number of people signing on ever known dropped dramatically as people were swapped to incapacity from unemployment benefit which made the Tories look more likley to be re-elected is the right answer. KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diceman Posted June 1, 2013 Report Share Posted June 1, 2013 (edited) incapacity benefit was invented by maggies government as a way of massaging the unemployment figures before election time came round, suddenly the largest number of people signing on ever known dropped dramatically as people were swapped to incapacity from unemployment benefit which made the Tories look more likley to be re-elected So Maggie introduced it to massage the figures because she's an evil tory. Cameron tries to rein it in because he's an evil tory. I'm confused, is it a good thing or not? Edited June 1, 2013 by Diceman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted June 1, 2013 Report Share Posted June 1, 2013 you cannot be on the 'sick' yourself and claim carers allowance as a carer, Andrew Andrew - sadly, that is not correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewluke Posted June 1, 2013 Report Share Posted June 1, 2013 Andrew - sadly, that is not correct. have a look at rule 6 here http://www.helpandcare.org.uk/system/site/uploads/content/docs/Factsheets/Carers/02-HC-Carers%20Allowance.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted June 1, 2013 Report Share Posted June 1, 2013 Thanks for sight of the rule, but the reality is somewhat different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 (edited) Benefits should be a safety net but they become too comfortable, that's the problem... Its a one way street and that's a fact, once you are on it the system keeps you on it... The point I would like to make is its the system that draws people into benefits dependency and professionals like social workers, doctors, council workers, civil servants etc have a vested interest in not rocking the boat. Gordon Brown re-designed the tax and benefit system to acheive this, to deliberately entrap as many people as possible and create State dependancy across the population regardless of income. It was perhaps his most toxic legacy. It has turned Britain into an eternally bankrupt Nation of thumb-sucking infants. He knew this catastrophically wasteful system would be almost impossible, politically, to unpick. If Iian Duncan-Smith manages it he will go down in history as a greater politician than Bevan and Beveridge put together. David Cameron is worth an estimated 30 million and owns six homes yet had the brass balls to claim disability living allowance from the state for his disabled son . Clearly he has no issues claiming what he is legally entitled to and he is the Prime Minister so why should we expect others behave any differently ? Not any more he doesn't. His son died. Surely even a politician would not claim benefits for a dead child. Edited June 2, 2013 by Gimlet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mossy835 Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 (edited) Gordon Brown re-designed the tax and benefit system deliberately to entrap as many people as possible and create State dependancy across the population regardless of income. It was perhaps his most toxic legacy. It has turned Britain into a Nation of eternally bankrupt thumb-sucking infants. He knew this catastrophically wasteful system would be almost impossible, politically, to unpick. If Iian Duncan-Smith manages it he will go down in history as a greater politician than Bevan and Beveridge put together. Not any more he doesn't. His son died. Surely even a politician would not claim benefits for a dead child. i would not put any thing passed them. Edited June 2, 2013 by mossy835 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aris Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 David Cameron is worth an estimated 30 million and owns six homes yet had the brass balls to claim disability living allowance from the state for his disabled son . Clearly he has no issues claiming what he is legally entitled to and he is the Prime Minister so why should we expect others behave any differently ? Why should someone who pays such a large amount of tax not get a small refund to help his disabled child? Same goes for child benefit. It may be a 'benefit' for the unemployed, but for everyone else it was a tax break to help offset the costs of raising a child. It would seem that higher earners get absolutely nothing in return any more for their higher rate of tax - apart from subsidising the feckless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 Why should someone who pays such a large amount of tax not get a small refund to help his disabled child? Same goes for child benefit. It may be a 'benefit' for the unemployed, but for everyone else it was a tax break to help offset the costs of raising a child. It would seem that higher earners get absolutely nothing in return any more for their higher rate of tax - apart from subsidising the feckless. So there we go if your working and receiving benefit your not really receiving benefit! child benefit is there to help kids out of poverty if anyone needs it less then its those working and receiving a higher wage, so why not reduce the taxpayers bill by means testing child benefit totally, rather than hit the "feckless" but of course all on benefit are feckless and wasters, not just the ones highlighted by low quality trash TV who have the indignant clueless frothing at the mouth believing that's how all benefit claimants live. KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aris Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 It's not a benefit for all, rather a tax refund. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnleydave Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 So there we go if your working and receiving benefit your not really receiving benefit! child benefit is there to help kids out of poverty if anyone needs it less then its those working and receiving a higher wage, so why not reduce the taxpayers bill by means testing child benefit totally, rather than hit the "feckless" but of course all on benefit are feckless and wasters, not just the ones highlighted by low quality trash TV who have the indignant clueless frothing at the mouth believing that's how all benefit claimants live. KW Why shouldn't those who pay get something back. In my opinion high earners shouldnt be paying for benefit claimants, benefit claimants should be forced to get a job. Why should someone better themselves just to ave to pay 50p in the pound. No wonder so many of our highest earners are now based and pay tax abroad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 It's not a benefit for all, rather a tax refund. its a benefit as is tax credit etc etc, simple as. KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 Why shouldn't those who pay get something back. In my opinion high earners shouldnt be paying for benefit claimants, benefit claimants should be forced to get a job. Why should someone better themselves just to ave to pay 50p in the pound. No wonder so many of our highest earners are now based and pay tax abroad I wonder if you could use your negotiating skills and come round my way in order to help the young find non existent jobs. KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aris Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 Why shouldn't those who pay get something back. In my opinion high earners shouldnt be paying for benefit claimants, benefit claimants should be forced to get a job. Why should someone better themselves just to ave to pay 50p in the pound. No wonder so many of our highest earners are now based and pay tax abroad Indeed - at this rate we will be a nation of benefits claimants reliant on the state. Anyone who actually generates wealth will have left as they no longer get anything back for their hard work. Not even a university education for their children. I wonder if you could use your negotiating skills and come round my way in order to help the young find non existent jobs. KW Half of eastern Europe appears to have found jobs. Funny that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnleydave Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 How is it a benefit? You just get some of what you earned back from the government. I'm sure most high earners would just like to pay a fairer rate of tax than having to subsidise upbringing your children mate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnleydave Posted June 2, 2013 Report Share Posted June 2, 2013 aris what some of these bleeding heart liberals don't want to admit is that the problem is, to get a job you actually need to try and get one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.