The state benefits system mega-thread.

[peanut]

Sign on everyday... That's fine if you live near a job centre, but if it was me that would be nearly £4 a day.

[richard s]

Last week a Family of six in Maidstone, Kent... got a four bedroom house... the so called male of the family has never worked, they just bonk and have kids.. they get benefits of £27,000 a year... scummers...

Those of you who are unemployed and seeking work good on you.

I only said some 4 weeks ago on another thread that people will have to work for their benefits, with travel expenses paid.

Just recently there was an article in our local rag... showing what some of our Countys MPs have claimed in expenses... the average was £155,000. (blimey).

Six years on their expenses and I could retire.

[nomadking]

Expenses are just recompense for money spent, so how could anybody retire because of it.

Originally Posted by nomadking

Expenses are just recompense for money spent, so how could anybody retire because of it.

A lot of what MPs claim on expenses are things the rest of us have to pay out of our salaries. It might be a stretch to say you could retire on it, but expenses fairly stretch your income when you can use them to pay for furniture, electronics, meals and travel.

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

honestly that is all well and good but to do that there has to be something they can do, If there is something they can do then it would normally be done by someone and this someone would be paid.

So if there is a job needs doing give the long term unemployed that job they have to take it and pay them otherwise they are doing someone else out of that job and that changes nothing

All it will mean is that instead of 6 paid employees picking up litter there will be 12(example) 6 paid and 6 receiving dole ,the job can done by the original 6paid employees so no one loses their jobs

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by martyh

All it will mean is that instead of 6 paid employees picking up litter there will be 12(example) 6 paid and 6 receiving dole ,the job can done by the original 6paid employees so no one loses their jobs

Oh yes because that's what will happen.

I heard they're going to ask them to go into old.peoples homes and keep them company, read to the and cook their dinner. Let's hope everyone they send can cook then and read and are all crb checked.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by martyh

All it will mean is that instead of 6 paid employees picking up litter there will be 12(example) 6 paid and 6 receiving dole ,the job can done by the original 6paid employees so no one loses their jobs

And at the end of the week 6 will pick up a full wage.
the other 6 get their dole money.

what makes you think councils will be stupid enough to carry on employing the original 6?
they can take advantage of the cuts distraction and use it as a cover to make them redundant.

they were going to lay them off anyway. and as unfortunate as it is, it's just a coincidence.

---------- Post added at 16:15 ---------- Previous post was at 16:09 ----------

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Oh yes because that's what will happen.

I heard they're going to ask them to go into old.peoples homes and keep them company, read to the and cook their dinner. Let's hope everyone they send can cook then and read and are all crb checked.

I wonder if when they read them the stories, and not doing the characters voices (like the big bad wolf) properly.
they can use that as a breach and a sanction?

Originally Posted by Chris

No. There is no necessary connection between fulfilling legal obligations and getting paid at national minimum wage or better.

You don't get paid for jury service, you don't get paid for attending compulsory schooling, I'm pretty sure I could come up with a longer list without too much effort.

Depends on the job though doesn't it? If it's one for which you would normally expect to be paid then that would be problematic. I.E The street cleaning example used in this thread.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Chris

A lot of what MPs claim on expenses are things the rest of us have to pay out of our salaries. It might be a stretch to say you could retire on it, but expenses fairly stretch your income when you can use them to pay for furniture, electronics, meals and travel.

You still wouldn't have spare cash left over. The expenses for things like furniture are because the job requires them to have 2 homes. Their salary is meant to fund one of the homes, not both.

Originally Posted by Gary L

And at the end of the week 6 will pick up a full wage.
the other 6 get their dole money.

which should encourage the 6 on the dole to get a job

---------- Post added at 16:33 ---------- Previous post was at 16:30 ----------

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Oh yes because that's what will happen.

I heard they're going to ask them to go into old.peoples homes and keep them company, read to the and cook their dinner. Let's hope everyone they send can cook then and read and are all crb checked.

and what do you think will happen if LA's suddenly start laying of their workers in favour of "free DWP workers",there will be safeguards in place to prevent that as there are now with the other schemes

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by martyh

which should encourage the 6 on the dole to get a job

The council could employ them. everyone's happy.

Why not?
they can't afford to employ them?
so what makes you think another company can afford to employ them, then?

someone will have to employ them. because sooner or later they're gonna stick that broom handle up someones bum

---------- Post added at 16:40 ---------- Previous post was at 16:37 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

and what do you think will happen if LA's suddenly start laying of their workers in favour of "free DWP workers",there will be safeguards in place to prevent that as there are now with the other schemes

I'm sure Dave and his men will have that covered now.

his sheep and brain dead will be distracted by the talk about what the **** are doing to be more of a burden to good honest hard working workers.

Originally Posted by Gary L

The council could employ them. everyone's happy.

Why not?
they can't afford to employ them?
so what makes you think another company can afford to employ them, then?

someone will have to employ them. because sooner or later they're gonna stick that broom handle up someones bum

Yep,so what you will get is cleaner streets, neater public parks and more chewing gum and pidgeon crap scraped of the floor for the same amount of money spent ,of course the council could employ all this extra labour by raising your council tax if it makes you feel better

Originally Posted by martyh

which should encourage the 6 on the dole to get a job

---------- Post added at 16:33 ---------- Previous post was at 16:30 ----------



and what do you think will happen if LA's suddenly start laying of their workers in favour of "free DWP workers",there will be safeguards in place to prevent that as there are now with the other schemes

or go and mug the other 6 on their way home lol

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by martyh

Yep,so what you will get is cleaner streets, neater public parks and more chewing gum and pidgeon crap scraped of the floor for the same amount of money spent

And the guilt trip of knowing that 6 of those that made such a nice job. did it alongside 6 others that got paid a full wage, compared to their welfare payment. for doing the same work.

of course the council could employ all this extra labour by raising your council tax if it makes you feel better

See. it all comes down to money.

if they made the original six redundant and used the free 6 instead. then the council tax would go down anyway.
there's no fairness when it comes to things like this. the unemployed will tell you that.

so I don't know what you're moaning about.

[Sirius]

This has shocked me, i did not realise so much is being paid out in just one council area.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-24259715

inside Out's Mark Jordan joins Westminster Council's fraud inspectors in a raid on one of hundreds of illegal sub-lets.

The cost to the taxpayer from these fraudulent claims is estimated to be around £10m in lost revenue.