George Osborne,does he have a point ?

[BigGully]

Has it ever occurred to you, you utter gobshite, that if people on benefits get more money than you, the problem is that you're not paid enough, rather than they get too much?

Wow, an odd wrong way round assessment.

There is a benefit conundrum, how can a generally unqualified and uneducated family on benefits walk out on their £25000+ benefit career and take a low paid unskilled job.

Its a problem, but to somehow blame those running business's that employ low skilled people to do low paid work is not the answer.

Your logic seems to say keep paying those not working £25000+ whilst also legislate that cleaners etc should receive a minimum of £30000+ too. ( I accept you would expect some transfer from benefits to work ), but it doesnt really add up.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Has it ever occurred to you, you utter gobshite, that if people on benefits get more money than you, the problem is that you're not paid enough, rather than they get too much?

This. If it's so easy to get a job you should be looking for a better one instead of moaning about your salary.

 

[BigGully]

This. If it's so easy to get a job you should be looking for a better one instead of moaning about your salary.

It seems you unequivocally support those in receipt of benefits, whilst sniping at a guy working hard and paying his taxes.

I perfect example of why the system is broke.

 

[Twinkle Toes]

Maybe I should pack my day job in and claim benefits as it seems you're better of on the dole. How much was he getting a month tax free £4,000? I take home after tax £1,600 and I'm up at 5am every day, **** that in future. Going to find myself a slut and have shit loads of kids and live of you? Is that ok? Tuff shit.

You utter moron. Here's a radical idea for you then: Just pack your job in & get on the benefits gravy-train, if you think you'll be so much better off.

 

[BigGully]

You utter moron. Here's a radical idea for you then: Just pack your job in & get on the benefits gravy-train, if you think you'll be so much better off.

But financially he may well be better off.

Isnt this the point of the discussion, not sure why you should feel so angry at him making a point about those in receipt of benefits.

He seems to have a point, he is working hard yet his reward is comparable to those not working.

It seems a fair frustration to me.

 

[Nibble]

I heard they are going to cap benefit at 26,000 a year. 26,000 THOUSAND PUOUNDS A YEAR. **** me, when i was on benefit they wer desperate to take my 59 quid a week away and these council estate scum are getting more than double the minimum wage to live on. Utter scum. Givbe them food vouchers and bus passes and a suit and tell them to get a job. Scum. Tory's are doing the wrong thing by going after easy targets like disabled and intelligent people to reduce their JSA figures. It's a mess of epic proportions. Torys need to go after scum who have no intention of ever getting work and kep squeezing kids out. If theTory's had any real balls they would. They don't therefore they don't.

 

[Chicken Runner61]

And in this thread here lies the truth.....

Working people should not need benefits to supplement their lifestyles. When working people on average wages need benefits to help pay rent or utility bills some thing is very wrong with the system.

If you cant work or can't find work then the welfare system has a duty to support you for a while why you find work or until the government provides a solution to employment.
But if you don't earn enough to live the way you do then why should every other working person pay for it especially as often that lifestyle is easier, richer and includes holidays and items that hard working people on average wages cant afford.

 

[Dandyman]

This is NOT correct and is part of what many people with an agenda want us to believe. The judge's summing up (the full transcript is out there) clearly indicates that the motivation for the fire was to frame Willis. It fits in with a long pattern Philpott had of abusing and controlling women and vengeful actions against those women that left him. It was an emotional response and not one motivated by the need for child benefits or a bigger house. He had the same response previously when he stabbed his ex 20 odd times. At this point he had much less child benefit coming in AND he had a job.

Spot on.

 

[Dandyman]

And in this thread here lies the truth.....

Working people should not need benefits to supplement their lifestyles. When working people on average wages need benefits to help pay rent or utility bills some thing is very wrong with the system.

If you cant work or can't find work then the welfare system has a duty to support you for a while why you find work or until the government provides a solution to employment.
But if you don't earn enough to live the way you do then why should every other working person pay for it especially as often that lifestyle is easier, richer and includes holidays and items that hard working people on average wages cant afford.

Or possibly the real problem is a low wage economy for millions of people. If some often big profitable companies paid a proper wage and if we had a properly regulated housing market then people would not need social security payments.

 

[Guinness Boy]

It seems you unequivocally support those in receipt of benefits

Where did I say that? Quote me. I support a benefits system that keeps the most vulnerable in society from starving. In this sort of case the most vulnerable include Philpott's children. Not him. But definitely his kids.

perfect example of why the system is broke.

What, highlighting the hypocrisy in moaning about your lot while doing nothing about it? It's people that are broken, not the system.

You seem to think that living on a rough council estate in an overcrowded house is the lifestyle choice of champions. The vast majority of people of benefits would give their eye teeth not to be. Your mate seems to think getting off them is a piece of piss. If the labour market really is that good at the moment it really shouldn't be too hard to find a higher paid job either.

 

[Twinkle Toes]

But financially he may well be better off.

Isnt this the point of the discussion, not sure why you should feel so angry at him making a point about those in receipt of benefits.

He seems to have a point, he is working hard yet his reward is comparable to those not working.

It seems a fair frustration to me.

I'm not actually angry. I just don't understand why he doesn't act on his own observations. It strikes me that his level of income is actually a greater issue than his thoughts about the supposed advantages of living on JSA. Perhaps he should listen to somebody who's on the said benefit & inform himself of the harsh reality - rather than thinking the vast majority of claimats are basking in the land of milk & honey? No doubt there'll be a good number of folk on here who could share their experiences, although in this current climate I could understand them not disclosing their present state of unemployment through fear of being branded scroungers & 'Dole Scum'. It's funny how such scapegoating happens when an economy goes into a state of protracted recession...

 

[BadFish]

But financially he may well be better off.

Isnt this the point of the discussion, not sure why you should feel so angry at him making a point about those in receipt of benefits.

He seems to have a point, he is working hard yet his reward is comparable to those not working.

It seems a fair frustration to me.

With benefits that good you would think that people would be coming from all over europe to enjoy them!

 

[BadFish]

I'm not actually angry. I just don't understand why he doesn't act on his own observations. It strikes me that his level of income is actually a greater issue than his thoughts about the supposed advantages of living on JSA. Perhaps he should listen to somebody who's on the said benefit & inform himself of the harsh reality - rather than thinking the vast majority of claimats are basking in the land of milk & honey? No doubt there'll be a good number of folk on here who could share their experiences, although in this current climate I could understand them not disclosing their present state of unemployment through fear of being branded scroungers & 'Dole Scum'. It's funny how such scapegoating happens when an economy goes into a state of protracted recession...

But lazily throwing about half truths and hearsay is a far better way to make people angry than dealing with silly ideas like facts or the truth.

 

[Chicken Runner61]

Or possibly the real problem is a low wage economy for millions of people. If some often big profitable companies paid a proper wage and if we had a properly regulated housing market then people would not need social security payments.

I don't disagree with you, wages are too low and it seems to me that things got worse for most people when ironically the MINIMUM WAGE came in!
It seems to have allowed large private companies to take over our high streets by paying the minimum wage rate and creating "part time" shift jobs that enable them to operate with overlapping staff. This means they can compete against any existing business that was paying decent full time wages to long serving employees and then when those well run profitable businesses have been destroyed they can charge what they want and recoup their set up costs.

And the benefit system which pays out to people working "part time" helps these companies do this!

So you now have a system that is actually destroying hard working full time jobs that paid tax for more jobs that pay less tax but require topping up from the tax system!

You now have small business owners and self employed people earning less than people they employ or even on less money per hour than the minimum wage just so they can survive! They can't complain and so whilst they are on say £30k per annum they are working 80 hours a week to get it!

Its nuts!

 

[Twinkle Toes]

But lazily throwing about half truths and hearsay is a far better way to make people angry than dealing with silly ideas like facts or the truth.

Quite.

 

[Billy the Fish]

Maybe I should pack my day job in and claim benefits as it seems you're better of on the dole. How much was he getting a month tax free £4,000? I take home after tax £1,600 and I'm up at 5am every day, **** that in future. Going to find myself a slut and have shit loads of kids and live of you? Is that ok? Tuff shit.

It won't work. You will go to the bottom of the housing list and have to wait 6 months before you can claim JSA. Unless you are vunerable or have children you will not get housed because there is a shortage of social housing.

This is where the system is f**cked. If you'd grown up in social housing you will get a house no matter your income, they can't kick you out. I know a few people who earn way more than I do that get a house for a fraction of what I pay because they've never left the system and have never been means tested, this is why I have no problem with the so called "bedroom tax" in principle, even if they are cocking up the implementation of it.

The only way to really coin it in on benefits is if you've never worked, are basically unemployable and churn out a load of kids.

I don't know what the answer is, it is too complex and everything you do affects something else. Cut benefits and more people will turn to crime, kick people out who can't pay their bills and there will be loads more homeless. The only way out as far as I can see is to means test everything and have some kind of sliding scale benefits so that it's financially beneficial for people to take low paid jobs.

As I said earlier, you also need to attack the root causes by making sure that the next generation is well educated enough that they are not useless, aspire to do more than sit around smoking and getting pissed all day, able to raise children properly. Of course once you do that, if there are areas of high unemployment like there are up north you are still f**cked because there's no jobs for your well educated population to do and we're back to square one. Not easy is it.

P.S forgot to say build more social housing

 

[Chicken Runner61]

It won't work. You will go to the bottom of the housing list and have to wait 6 months before you can claim JSA. Unless you are vunerable or have children you will not get housed because there is a shortage of social housing.

This is where the system is f**cked. If you'd grown up in social housing you will get a house no matter your income, they can't kick you out. I know a few people who earn way more than I do that get a house for a fraction of what I pay because they've never left the system and have never been means tested, this is why I have no problem with the so called "bedroom tax" in principle, even if they are cocking up the implementation of it.

The only way to really coin it in on benefits is if you've never worked, are basically unemployable and churn out a load of kids.

I don't know what the answer is, it is too complex and everything you do affects something else. Cut benefits and more people will turn to crime, kick people out who can't pay their bills and there will be loads more homeless. The only way out as far as I can see is to means test everything and have some kind of sliding scale benefits so that it's financially beneficial for people to take low paid jobs.

As I said earlier, you also need to attack the root causes by making sure that the next generation is well educated enough that they are not useless, aspire to do more than sit around smoking and getting pissed all day, able to raise children properly. Of course once you do that, if there are areas of high unemployment like there are up north you are still f**cked because there's no jobs for your well educated population to do and we're back to square one. Not easy is it.

P.S forgot to say build more social housing

Spot on - trouble is its a perfect storm in the making, we must be at tipping point soon the amount of debt we are borrowing.

The only thing they can do is slowly whittle away benefits and hope no civil disorder takes place in the meantime, that or let the whole thing go bust and blame Europe and immigrants!

 

[BigGully]

I'm not actually angry. I just don't understand why he doesn't act on his own observations. It strikes me that his level of income is actually a greater issue than his thoughts about the supposed advantages of living on JSA. Perhaps he should listen to somebody who's on the said benefit & inform himself of the harsh reality - rather than thinking the vast majority of claimats are basking in the land of milk & honey? No doubt there'll be a good number of folk on here who could share their experiences, although in this current climate I could understand them not disclosing their present state of unemployment through fear of being branded scroungers & 'Dole Scum'. It's funny how such scapegoating happens when an economy goes into a state of protracted recession...

With respect, you should come under the scrutiny of us taxpayers contributing to your benefits and you should be challenged as to why you are not in employment and how you might find employment very soon.

Its quite reasonable to effect your current position, it doesnt follow that it is nasty or lacking compassion, employed persons are accountable everyday for their actions so why shouldn't you.

I too, have had to use the system some time ago, I have to say I was surprised how generous it was, compared to my working life it was relatively stress free.

But I was soon in work, working hard for quite a low wage, but I genuinely felt I had an obligation to get off benefits asap. and I accepted the inevitable scrutiny, although it was quite low level stuff, just a form filled here and there.

I made the transition from welfare and to a job in a short time and whilst I was thankful of its help, I was mindful that others weren't as determined to find employment as I had been.

 

[Ernest]

I wonder how many condemning benefit scroungers collect their child benefit money each month ?

 

[Silk]

Wow, an odd wrong way round assessment.

There is a benefit conundrum, how can a generally unqualified and uneducated family on benefits walk out on their £25000+ benefit career and take a low paid unskilled job.

Its a problem, but to somehow blame those running business's that employ low skilled people to do low paid work is not the answer.

Your logic seems to say keep paying those not working £25000+ whilst also legislate that cleaners etc should receive a minimum of £30000+ too. ( I accept you would expect some transfer from benefits to work ), but it doesnt really add up.

It all depends on the cost of living, wouldn't you say? You can't just pluck a figure out of thin air, and you can't say such-and-such an amount is too much, just because it looks like it is. You seem not to take it into account that billions are paid in benefits to people who have jobs. This MUST be an acknowledgement that wages are too low, but instead of making employers pay a living wage, politicians have passed the buck to the taxpayer.