Soldato
- Joined
- 11 May 2007
- Posts
- 9,269
- Location
- Surrey
First thing to do is rebrand 'benefits'. It's not a benefit. There are no benefits to being on benefits. It's welfare. "Welfare: Monetary help in a time of need."
Poll: Benefit cap vote.
- Thread starter Danthus
- Start date
People live to their means. You cut those on larger wages and you increase the burden on the state and/or the level of borrowing those people need to do.
There's no benefit being realised there, you're just shifting the problem.
People would just move to areas where benefits are higher. The problem with the benefits system isn't that people need it but those who make false claims. There needs to be a tighter crack down on people claiming benefits when they are not eligible.
I think the people who are annoying me most in this thread are the shallow minded users who think its ok to generalize everyone to one opinion because of a minority of people who abuse the system. or "scum" as they've been referred to.
Yes there are people out there on Welfare who shouldn't be. yes there are people who choose not to work and just live on JSA as they can get by on it. Yes there are people out there who even have kids to acquire benefits / council house etc etc etc this does not mean everyone does this and to punsih those who do not because of this minority is wrong.
There are plenty hard working individuals out there who just cant find work. There are plenty single mum's out there who didn't choose or want to be in the situation there in but are, and raising a child by yourself is probably harder than what most of you do at work everyday.
Everyone should be treat and judged on as an individual.
Yes there are people out there on Welfare who shouldn't be. yes there are people who choose not to work and just live on JSA as they can get by on it. Yes there are people out there who even have kids to acquire benefits / council house etc etc etc this does not mean everyone does this and to punsih those who do not because of this minority is wrong.
There are plenty hard working individuals out there who just cant find work. There are plenty single mum's out there who didn't choose or want to be in the situation there in but are, and raising a child by yourself is probably harder than what most of you do at work everyday.
Everyone should be treat and judged on as an individual.
Why would that be a problem if the cost of living is higher?
Someone in Middlesbrough or Hull is not going to move to London to receive slightly elevated benefits. Though they're all as scummy as each other.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 4,652
- Location
- Nottingham
Its quite simple really, the bulk of the people that the news will focus on, are those who abuse the system and take advantage, they do this for shock reasons, because it encourages outcry in the average joe in the street.
The vast majority of the 2.8million people that are unemployed at the moment, do not get large sums of money, are not comfortable, and the only reason that they can afford things like sky tv, is due to making cuts in other areas, like heating, or food, places where they can save a few pennies each month to make life a little better.
However, the opinion of the vast majority of people around here is "Arbeit macht frei" and as such, all unemployed people should be forced to queue up each morning for a handout of foodstuffs that the retail stores have deemed 'unsellable', in fact, they should mostly be reduced to gruel and potatoes, that'll teach them the lazy scroats. Once a year they should be given a piece of sacking with which to make their clothing, and any children that are born should be taken from their parents and placed into institutions of development where they will learn to be productive members of society. We could also insist that all unemployed people be relocated to somewhere like the far north of scotland, where nobody lives anyway, there they will be held until such a time as they can get a real job.
The vast majority of the 2.8million people that are unemployed at the moment, do not get large sums of money, are not comfortable, and the only reason that they can afford things like sky tv, is due to making cuts in other areas, like heating, or food, places where they can save a few pennies each month to make life a little better.
However, the opinion of the vast majority of people around here is "Arbeit macht frei" and as such, all unemployed people should be forced to queue up each morning for a handout of foodstuffs that the retail stores have deemed 'unsellable', in fact, they should mostly be reduced to gruel and potatoes, that'll teach them the lazy scroats. Once a year they should be given a piece of sacking with which to make their clothing, and any children that are born should be taken from their parents and placed into institutions of development where they will learn to be productive members of society. We could also insist that all unemployed people be relocated to somewhere like the far north of scotland, where nobody lives anyway, there they will be held until such a time as they can get a real job.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 12 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 21,679
- Location
- Aberlour, NE Scotland
That report is a load of bull. Atos healthcare, who are doing the so called "assessments" are a complete and utter joke. You obviously do not understand how this utter farce of a system affects people. This is a bit long winded but is what is happening to someone i know.
One of my neighbours who is a good friend of mine, got a injury to his back while serving in the RAF. He has three degenerated vertebrae in his lower back along with two dehydrated discs between the three vertebrae. His movement is impaired as a result. The discs are pressing against the sciatic nerve so he also suffers from sciatica (burning sensation) down both legs. His condition was bad enough to get him medically discarged from the RAF from which he gets a small disability pension. His condition is getting worse and will never get better. Basically his spine is crumbling. He is 45 years old.
He was on incapacity benefit (not the full amount because of his pension) but recieved a letter back in October stating that he was going to be assessed for ESA. He asked me if i could drive him to the assessment centre in Inverness (124 mile round trip from here). His assessment was in November so off we went. He was all worked up about it as he had heard the horror stories about Atos. I accompanied him to the centre which was on the second floor of the building and after a wait he went in for his assessment. Ten minutes later he came out and it was over. On the way back to the car he said that he had'nt been examined and that she just asked some questions. She seemed sympathetic to him and he felt it went ok.
Two weeks later he got a phonecall from the DWP stating that he failed the assessment and that he did'nt qualify for ESA. His options were to either sign on for JSA or get nothing. They informed him he would be sent a copy of the assessors report within a week or two. When i saw him later in the day he was in a hell of a state and worried sick about how he was going to make ends meet. Myself and one of the other neighbours stayed with him for a few hours to calm him down and there was'nt a lot to do until the report arrived.
It arrived a few days later and was a complete load of tosh. Basically it said that because he turned up (you don't have a choice) he was fit for work and did'nt qualify for ESA. He said the report was as if a different person than the one who was in the room with him had written it. None of his mobility problems were mentioned. The constant pain he is in does'nt count for anything either. He takes so many pills he should rattle everytime he moves. He was rushed to hospital over Christmas as he was having heart problems which have been linked to him being so distraught about the situation he now finds himself in. His last payment was in mid December and he has'nt signed on for JSA as he does'nt want to be forced into a job that will see him end up in a wheelchair.
This is a guy who has been to many crappy places (Kosovo, Zaire, Falklands, Kuwait, Afghanistan) all over the world in the name of this country and is now facing a very difficult time ahead.
You really think this is fair!!
I think more should be made of this scenario. has he written to his MP? The local paper? The national news?
Move? With what money exactly? The costs of just moving into a shared house are:
1 x months rent in advance
1 x months rent as deposit
(general standard for renting)
Based on my area that would be in the region of £800 before you can even move in. For a large ish family you'd be looking at a few grand. Nobody out of work has a few grand laying around.
Then you have to find a landlord willing to accept benefits, which is nigh on impossible these days. There is no way of getting around the landlords either because HB will require a tenants agreement signed by landlord before they will pay. Only way to move into a place without the landlord being aware of the tenant being on benefits is to falsify a tenants agreement.
So, no, people will not move just to get an extra few quick in another part of the country.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 22,441
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
But the measures are short term, to do with rebalancing not long term thats the whole point. Thats short term pain not long term pain. China is so powerful due to being cheap, their long term gain comes whilst they can maintain that advantage. The economies that will endure are those that manufacture, just look at Germany over that last 4 years, they are adding far more economic wealth by manufacturing yet if you look back the germans have had very interesting wage issues over the last 10-15 years.
No one has said long term these actions will carry on, they may be slowly reversed or completely scrapped. BUT short term we HAVE to achieve more balance, all those in work are suffering pain, I work in the private sector as do most people I know, most of them are earning practically the same as 5 years ago, some less, its not been 3% pay rises all round every year for the majority. Everyone is worse off, either directly having had to cut back or they see less surplus in income to save/invest for their future.
The issue is should benefits also be cut back or maintained just the same. To me the absolute key is benefits should be enough to survive, the absolute minimum, there could be no more encouragement to do whats necessary to get a job than that. And I mean look to relocate, retrain etc.
I looked to relocate years ago to improve job prospects yet most people on benefits just expect to sit in the same town waiting for the job to come to them.
No goverment in the UK (just like the USA for example) can afford to plan more than 1 term ahead, as the general population is far to short termist to be able to do the necessary things like massive infrastructure improvements.
Eg everyone moans about the roads but if told tax is going up 2% to pay for massive road investments 99% would go "*******, no way, I'm voting for the other guys come the next election."
We have to get away from deeming economic growth as the signs we are improving as its so flawed as a measure with our current economy its just not a worthwhile measurement. Many know that hence why there are other options being looked at, problem is as soon as a change comes people shout "fix!" Spending alone is such a flawed way of thinking, its a measure but not a perfect one, its should be one of a number of measures giving a balanced scorecard measurement. Just the same as RPI and CPI are flawed so another new measure is on the cards (I forget what its called). Simple quick headline type measures are normally flawedas they can mask significant issues underneath.
I'm fully supportive of the welfare system, I want it to remain, the problem is, it too expensive for us to maintain. Its been built up over years with two main blocks allowing it, the UK being a relative economic powerhouse and some good years with relative high employment (even if they were adding to problem longer term). So things looked rosy and a welfare culture was built on the back of that. Things are now different, we are a declining economic power, not in absolute but in relative terms, and the good times are gone.
There is so much to fix, most countries agree with the fact that globalisation and eg european legislation has made it too easy for companies to retain too high a percentage of income and not give enough back by offshoring etc. Ive said for some time, tax paid in the UK by every company should be based as a perfect inverse curve to value added in the uk, with forced transfer pricing applying to globals where the price deductable for tax purposes is the original price paid to the original supplier. If that creates a lot of work, simple buy direct from that supplier direct to the UK the same as a UK based company would do, and pay tax on the profits you make here adjusting for the value added here (or economic wealth generated if you so wish). The other problem (but one we should live with) is investments (eg pensions) are normally invested in these same companies we want to make pay over more profits, so if we devalue these companies by "raiding" them for tax we only shoot ourselves in the foot as our own investments will go down.
I'm sorry but I would rather my investments (ie my pension) gained value than stagnated to pay for someone to sit and home breeding the next generation of welfare claimants.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 12 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 21,679
- Location
- Aberlour, NE Scotland
He is waiting on the outcome of an appeal but the poor chap is in such a state worrying about it. Writing to the MP might be worth thinking about but it's not likley to do much. Not sure abouth the paper as we all know how papers have the habit of turning things around.
Nice post.. There is a lots of hysteria being deliberately whipped up by the Government and media in order to justify "austerity measures". Many, many ordinary families are really struggling at the moment with child care, mortgages, even heating and food. The press always seem to point the finger at the odd family that abuses the system because it makes good headlines; not the ordinary families who quietly scrape by week on week. Meanwhile the people who hold the real wealth of the country, the financial and banking institutions walk away nigh on scot free after squandering trillions.
- Joined
- 9 Dec 2012
- Posts
- 1,457
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...ents-rise-fastest-in-the-suburbs-8442313.html
I'm against the 1% cap, they should enforce polices to stop non brits gaining access to welfare, they should start to do something about tax avoidance, they should start allowing private companies to become non state funded after telling us how privatisation is good.
Its government policy failure, they let house prices rise, destroyed social homes, and pushed those that would have lived in social homes into the private rental market, which ends up in the hands of private landlords.
I'm against the 1% cap, they should enforce polices to stop non brits gaining access to welfare, they should start to do something about tax avoidance, they should start allowing private companies to become non state funded after telling us how privatisation is good.
Its government policy failure, they let house prices rise, destroyed social homes, and pushed those that would have lived in social homes into the private rental market, which ends up in the hands of private landlords.
Last edited:
There is enough for people to get outraged without them spinning it the other way. The papers won't need to skew that story to sell it to the people.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 22,441
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
So difficult, part of me says its wrong, since hes served for his country etc.
But then you look at the other angle, what does he do all day at home (assuming he is at home). By the length of the journey you made hes quite clearly able to sit for periods, so could he not just get a job predominantly sitting down.
Most office work jobs involve a lot of sitting with some limited movement about. So surely he could do this tyoe of thing...
I knew a guy on disability due to having a dodgy leg. He was a friend of a friend and we ended up going to the motor show some years back together as 2 people in a group of 4. We drove to near London, tubed across from one side to the other (was about 1 hour driving then 1 hour tube), walked around the motor show for hours, like 6 or 7 then repeated the same journey in reverse. (We luckily didnt need to que to get in as I got us VIP access from a supplier so we didnt have wasted time queing to get in). I was knackered at the end of the day yet he seemed fine to do exactly the same as me with his disability, unfit to work? By what measure.
I vote 0% rise but 1% wouldn't be so bad...
The reason that they should not rise by inflation or more is simple, I work for a living indirectly for the government which has meant I have had no real pay rise in that time, not even close to inflation for the past few years due to the pay freeze put in place by the government.
I'm not by any means saying I am hard done by or skint but raising benfits in such a way is another insult to those who work and are seeing their money buy less and less each month.
The reason that they should not rise by inflation or more is simple, I work for a living indirectly for the government which has meant I have had no real pay rise in that time, not even close to inflation for the past few years due to the pay freeze put in place by the government.
I'm not by any means saying I am hard done by or skint but raising benfits in such a way is another insult to those who work and are seeing their money buy less and less each month.
How is that fair to the people who do not receive benefits?
Fairness works both ways.