The state benefits system mega-thread.

[Will21st]

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

hey you will pick me up on what I say please allow me the same privilege. Mind you I will do it anyway of course

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Will21st

Yes,like I said the old boy network exists,but even that network only goes so far.In any case we were talking about start in Life though,weren't we?



Yup,that's exactly what they're doing to get kind of a guilt trip going,or maybe to paint themselves as victims and poor creatures who shouldn't have to sacrifice?


Rubbish... he's just wondering how it's possible for someone to work full-time and not be able to afford such trainers and for someone on benefits to be able to do just that. Is that sensible?

Work should always pay,that's the bottom line.If someone on benefits can afford more,or as in some cases families on benefits have more disposable income than working families then there's something seriously wrong with the system. Agreed?


Maybe you should go and see your GP about your 'Dave depression'. If Dave's face and voice are enough to cause depression I'd say you got problems.Get help,Gary!


Neither,I just rebuked your nonsense assertion that most of Britain is depressed.... in any case most of the population on this Island isn't working anyway so your statement is a load balls from the get go.




you do that.

---------- Post added at 21:05 ---------- Previous post was at 20:57 ----------



What if the sky falls in tomorrow?What if a massive meteor hits us tomorrow afternoon? What if the Borg really exist and invade later tonight? What if all the nonsense predictions the eco-fascists and luddites made don't come true and man learns and adapts and thrives for a long time to come?

Questions that no one has answer to and don't matter in the slightest right now... how about that.

No were not agreed, I couldn't particularly careless what someone on benefits gets or what they spend it on, its none of my business. Work should pay more but imo rather that cutting benefits perhaps wages should be increased instead of this race to the bottom people are currently enduring.

Where do you think the old boy network begins with, what school you went to perhaps.

---------- Post added at 00:21 ---------- Previous post was at 00:20 ----------

Originally Posted by Gary L

What happens when all the bees die?

We all die or go hungry at least.

[MovedGoalPosts]

Having just read the last page or so, I'm wondering where the topic is. Get back to it thank you.

[Derek]

It appears Mr £53 a week may have been exaggerating things a bit.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9968...-gets-156.html

It later emerged that Mr Bennett, who was back on his market stall selling household goods on Tuesday, receives £232 a month in housing benefit and £200 a month in working tax credit, triple the amount of money he quoted in the challenge to Mr Duncan Smith.
His average weekly income, including market stall earnings, is in fact £156 a week.

Irrelevant IDS said anyone can live on £53 per week it matters not about this guy you are just clouding the issue with semantics > this guy said prove it that's all

---------- Post added at 10:32 ---------- Previous post was at 10:28 ----------

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

Well what a surprise. Often the case that those who shout about only having so much money conveniently forget the standing bills that are being paid for by the taxpayer: Gas, electric, council tax, rent, etc, etc.

Those are the bills that working people have to pay in addition to food, booze & fags.

I do not understand what you mean? council tax and rent are paid via benefits then the rest comes out of whatever income you get whether benefits or low paid work. There is no benefit alone for Gas and Electric there is a fund for water but it is a charity. Do you mean the other utilities are paid via JSA or ESA or did you think there was a benefit for them too?

[Derek]

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

Irrelevant IDS said anyone can live on £53 per week it matters not about this guy you are just clouding the issue with semantics > this guy said prove it that's all

He was ambushed with an unanswerable question based on false information. If he said he couldn't survive on what was claimed to be weekly benefits it would have been seized upon by certain people as proof benefits are not enough to lie on.

If anything the fact that this guy cannot live on £53 a week either makes the point more valid.

Originally Posted by Derek

He was ambushed with an unanswerable question based on false information. If he said he couldn't survive on what was claimed to be weekly benefits it would have been seized upon by certain people as proof benefits are not enough to lie on.

So he tried to blag us?

---------- Post added at 11:01 ---------- Previous post was at 11:01 ----------

Originally Posted by Damien

If anything the fact that this guy cannot live on £53 a week either makes the point more valid.

Makes what point more valid? the one about IDS talking crap ?

I meant it makes the point that £53 isn't enough to live on

Originally Posted by Damien

I meant it makes the point that £53 isn't enough to live on

Oh right that's cool then but of course IDS was still talking crap lol

[Arthurgray50@blu]

RizzyKing, l am in total agreement with what you are saying.

I also want to say soomething about foriegn workers taking the jobs in the UK.
If l was unemployed and looking for work l look at several points, the rent on my council house, my wife and the bills, l therefore look at what is there, l could not go for a job under £18.000 per year- reasons simple, if you get a job you have to work SIX weeks before claiming any benefit to put your money up, if you claim one benefit, you lose something else.

What l beleive is wrong is true what Rizzy King is saying if you go for Anti Tory, you get knocked down on this forum, it seems that everyone is saying that the coalition is correct in whats its doing.

Its always been known that the Tories will look after the rich, it proved yesterday that they will reduce the 50p tax down to 45p - WHY, if the rich have to pay more in taxes then so be it. They earn more money in interest sitting in the bank.

EVERYTHING has been done by the government is hitting the poor and the vulnerable - nothing to hit the rixch - in my book that is bad.

Foriegn workers, companies will always take on workers at the cheapest rate possible, and sometimes below the minimum wage, and dont please tell me that this does not go on - becuase it does.

This one might have wider implications for more of the membership here lets see if any change their view now

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...nto-doing-more

I have no idea if this should go on in the big thread as its a different benefit so I created a new one and its upto the team then

Workers on tax credits face frequent interviews and may have to change jobs to boost their pay to claim less from the sate

Under the proposals, jobcentre staff will have powers to withdraw universal credit if claimants are deemed to be doing too little to increase their earnings.

[Taf]

They've already increased the minimum hours required to qualify.

If you're not responsible for children, you need to work the following hours to get Working Tax Credit:

if you're aged 25 or over, you need to do paid work of at least 30 hours a week

if you have a disability and are aged 16 or over, you need to do paid work of at least 16 hours a week

if you're aged 60 or over, you need to do paid work of at least 16 hours a week

Plus for the over 50's returning to work, they, and those already recently returned, have to work a minimum of 30 hours too.

[Will21st]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

No were not agreed, I couldn't particularly careless what someone on benefits gets or what they spend it on, its none of my business.

You couldn't care less what someone spends their benefits on? Guess what,neither could I! Slight problem being this was of course never the point I made in the first place.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Work should pay more but imo rather that cutting benefits perhaps wages should be increased instead of this race to the bottom people are currently enduring.

Wages should and can indeed only be increased if the market can carry that higher rate.Furthermore,if the government would stop paying nonsense benefits like working tax credits maybe some employers would have to raise their wages... as I've made clear before I oppose Corporate welfare and I think some parts of the welfare state are indeed a negative influence on our wage structure.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Where do you think the old boy network begins with, what school you went to perhaps.

Yes,possibly,however like I said that still doesn't guarantee success,although I do agree on the soft-cushy fall for those hurtling towards earth from high altitude.
Hard work goes a long way and your attitude sounds self-defeatist,sorry.

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

Well what a surprise. Often the case that those who shout about only having so much money conveniently forget the standing bills that are being paid for by the taxpayer: Gas, electric, council tax, rent, etc, etc.

Those are the bills that working people have to pay in addition to food, booze & fags.

Come on,Rent and council tax being paid for aren't real benefits since the claimants don't have the cash in their pockets.

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

Irrelevant IDS said anyone can live on £53 per week it matters not about this guy you are just clouding the issue with semantics > this guy said prove it that's all

So someone who doesn't have to live on £53 pounds a week gets all offended on behalf of those who have and then challenges someone to do what he himself doesn't have to do,and there's not a problem with that?

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

I do not understand what you mean? council tax and rent are paid via benefits then the rest comes out of whatever income you get whether benefits or low paid work.

Yes,but what Heero was saying was Mister-156-quid-a-week conveniently forgot about that part of his benefits,that's all. Or don't they count?

Originally Posted by Derek

He was ambushed with an unanswerable question based on false information. If he said he couldn't survive on what was claimed to be weekly benefits it would have been seized upon by certain people as proof benefits are not enough to lie on.

Yup,like I said yesterday these are acting like an addict coming off his gear,so it's best to let then scream and shout and in a few years no one will remember and Britain will be much happier due to people being allowed to be self-sufficient once more.

---------- Post added at 12:12 ---------- Previous post was at 12:04 ----------

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

RizzyKing, l am in total agreement with what you are saying.

I also want to say soomething about foriegn workers taking the jobs in the UK.
If l was unemployed and looking for work l look at several points, the rent on my council house, my wife and the bills, l therefore look at what is there, l could not go for a job under £18.000 per year- reasons simple, if you get a job you have to work SIX weeks before claiming any benefit to put your money up, if you claim one benefit, you lose something else.

So what you're saying,Dear Arthur,is that you are the prime example of everything that is wrong with the attitude of a big part of the indigenous population on this beautiful island.... you're just too good to get up in the morning for the minimum wage,and instead making the low wage up with increased hours you'd rather remain on the dole and have others pay your way.... well done.

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

Its always been known that the Tories will look after the rich, it proved yesterday that they will reduce the 50p tax down to 45p - WHY, if the rich have to pay more in taxes then so be it. They earn more money in interest sitting in the bank.

a higher tax rate doesn't mean the revenue will rise proportionally.... indeed it may well fall.

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

EVERYTHING has been done by the government is hitting the poor and the vulnerable - nothing to hit the rixch - in my book that is bad.

If you say so....

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

Foriegn workers, companies will always take on workers at the cheapest rate possible, and sometimes below the minimum wage, and dont please tell me that this does not go on - becuase it does.

If many more people display your attitude towards work there won't be anyone left BUT foreigners to do the work....

[Will21st]

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

This one might have wider implications for more of the membership here lets see if any change their view now

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...nto-doing-more

I have no idea if this should go on in the big thread as its a different benefit so I created a new one and its upto the team then

Good!

as I've said in the other thread this is a form of corporate welfare and quite simply shouldn't go on at all or not as much.
This actually means some companies would have to pay higher wages since the state doesn't artificially subsidise the Labour market. Meaning this measure is actually hitting 'the rich!!'....

....but,you disagree with it?