Radical benefits shake-up

arknor said:
it was trialed in some areas.
people spent the money.
the idea was scrapped.
Click to expand...

nonense. it's gone direct to tenant for years with my local council.

if people spend it, they'll get into arrears and then evicted. plus they will still owe the money so it's not a very smart thing to do. i'm sure there are plenty of weak willed people who will insist on payments going direct to the landlord so the temptation isn't there. as nice as money is to spend, nothing quite beats having a roof over your head.
 
arknor said:
it was trialed in some areas.
people spent the money.
the idea was scrapped.

Unless something has changed which I doubt
Click to expand...

yup. my mate ended up having to spend his on food and got himself into more debt over it.

Mr Jack said:
When even our frickin' military is calling for the foreign aid budget not to be cut you have to wonder how that makes sense. Even if you ignore the moral imperative for a staggeringly rich country like ours to give a tiny amount to help out, our aid budget makes sense as a means to ensure stability that allows our companies to trade and avoids costly military projects; as a means to boost our reputation worldwide; as a means to grow export markets; and as a means to exert soft power the world over.
Click to expand...

its not just that. why do we give india billions in aid? yet they have enough money for a space program.... :rolleyes:

arknor said:
it's not such a bad idea in theory but in practice I don't think it could work.

It might however open up more jobs because people would work to the cap most likely.

but then would the company hire another guy in a high position? or would they lower the actual wage and get around it with bonuses and back handers.......:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

that will never work. the top 1% hold all the power over us mere plebs. all parties are scared ****less over big business.
 
arknor said:
I could never survive on JSA anyone who thinks they are better off not working are clearly insane
Click to expand...

A single person with no kids... Agreed

But there's plenty of single people knocking out kids who earn more than someone working full time just above the benefits line (working tax credits etc)

There's also plenty of people who would absolutely love to have kids but know they can't afford them.

This is without even considering the thousands who are on the dodgy . Cash in hand jobs while they get their London flat paid for etc. or the genuine people who have been managing for years but suddenly find themselves unemployed
 
what is your local council so I can try to confirm it?
A single person with no kids... Agreed

But there's plenty of single people knocking out kids who earn more than someone working full time just above the benefits line (working tax credits etc)

This is without even considering the thousands who are on the dodgy . Cash in hand jobs while they get their London flat paid for etc. or the genuine people who have been managing for years but suddenly find themselves unemployed
Click to expand...
But that is comparing apples to oranges if you compare people in similar circumstances it's not the case..
There's also plenty of people who would absolutely love to have kids but know they can't afford them.
Click to expand...
#
and they think they would be better off on benefits? lol tell them to actually do the maths and they will see they would have to make serious cutbacks to manage
 
MrMoonX said:
It won't work unless they bring in rent controls, it effectively means that people for whatever reason need benefits have to move out of London, this is unacceptable to make people move out of areas they have links to etc.
Click to expand...

A lot of Working families can't afford to live in central London. Why should someone who isn't working be allowed to live there.

this is unacceptable to make people move out of areas they have links to etc.
 
Mickie said:
A lot of Working families can't afford to live in central London. Why should someone who isn't working be allowed to live there.

this is unacceptable to make people move out of areas they have links to etc.
Click to expand...
So your solution to it being unacceptable is to add people on benefits to the list of people who endure this "unacceptable" consequence?.

Would it not be better to ensure both working people & those out of work can afford to keep living near friends & family in modest accommodation?.
 
As a tax payer I don't want jobless people in expensive houses. I want them in a cheaper house and if they'd want to move back in they'd need to find a job.

The working wage in London obviously needs looking into if people can't afford to live there even though they're working.

If working people can't live there. It's not right that jobless people can.
 
AFAIK if you are a private tenant housing benefit goes directly into your account unless you are in arrears or have a proven bad track record with money management. Does here at least.

I got the form yesterday because while I've just accepted a job and thus will be signing off in a week or so i wont be getting paid for close to a month and wanted to see if i could back track claiming the rent i paid on the 1st to tide me over rather than borrowing the money for next months rent till i get paid.

The form is an absolute joke however. I live with 2 other people, both work close enough to full time. Therefore i must provide
Proof of earnings

Last 5 payslips if paid every weeks, last 3 if paid every two weeks or last 2 if paid ever month
Click to expand...

for both of the other people living here. Original copies too, no photocopies. If i can't provide that the claim is automatically denied. ****ing hilarious even though i have nothing to do with the other people except for living under the same roof.

And as arknor said above, i get £56 a week. Minus food, bills, phone contract.. Yeah not much left already before i decide to actually have a life. Spent ~£35 on bus/train tickets in the past couple weeks for interviews, luckily i could get that back although i'm still waiting on half of it.


Love being grouped into the same scum as the chavs with 14 kids who are actually getting more money than some working people.

edit

ZWnAU29.png
 
Last edited:
arknor said:
it was trialed in some areas.
people spent the money.
the idea was scrapped.

Unless something has changed which I doubt
Click to expand...

Actually I think the way it worked was :-

They trialed it in some areas
People spent the money
Rent arrears and defaults soared
It got the go ahead to be rolled out nationally*

:p

* Especially when tied in with the Universal Credit idea....which is proving to be another expensive bureaucratic shambles
 
Freakbro said:
Actually I think the way it worked was :-

They trialed it in some areas
People spent the money
Rent arrears and defaults soared
It got the go ahead to be rolled out nationally*

:p

* Especially when tied in with the Universal Credit idea....which is proving to be another expensive bureaucratic shambles
Click to expand...
It makes you wonder why they even bother.

I guess they are hoping it will work, but have already decided to do it regardless as to how the trail turns out.....
 
elmarko said:
It makes you wonder why they even bother.

I guess they are hoping it will work, but have already decided to do it regardless as to how the trail turns out.....
Click to expand...

I suppose it's evidence based policy of a sorts...

Get the evidence, ignore it, and do what you wanted anyway!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom