Benefits Britain 1949
- Thread starter Stretch
- Start date
I don't think it was a show designed to really show "anything" other than polarise opinion with a negative slant... I mean take the Woman on Sick Benefit she is portrayed as rude and obnoxious (she well maybe) with the "back ache" high blood pressure Diabetic, all the cliché FAT lazy people diseases.
I would LOVE a normal non bias non sensational, factual bit of TV once in a while.
No one can argue the Modern welfare state isn't being abused by some put an Historical spin on it ?? Tv is rubbish. Tahts what i learned today again,, 3rd post in thread ? :O
I would LOVE a normal non bias non sensational, factual bit of TV once in a while.
No one can argue the Modern welfare state isn't being abused by some put an Historical spin on it ?? Tv is rubbish. Tahts what i learned today again,, 3rd post in thread ? :O
Indeed.
If they had chosen a couple of people who had been crippled in a car crash or 100% paralysed & require constant care peoples opinions would be different.
Most of this kind of trash TV seems to be designed to whip up hatred for the poor.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,717
Does anyone know if it will be on repeat tonight?
Re house pricing it has to crash seriously at some point.
With wages going up so slowly, if at all, and property prices getting higher and higher for even poor to average properties and credit difficult to get this generations kids have no chance of getting a property.
This will be exacerbated by the fact of everything else getting so expensive parents will be less able to support youngsters growing up getting on the ladder
Sad state of affairs.
With wages going up so slowly, if at all, and property prices getting higher and higher for even poor to average properties and credit difficult to get this generations kids have no chance of getting a property.
This will be exacerbated by the fact of everything else getting so expensive parents will be less able to support youngsters growing up getting on the ladder
Sad state of affairs.
Housing won't crash as long as we have such low interest rates, the people that can't afford to buy have to live somewhere so they just rent, meaning rents go up and buy-to-let booms.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/535f956c-000c-11e3-9c40-00144feab7de.html#axzz2bqKgPWr9
We have a huge supply/demand deficit in this country as well which helps keep the housing market up.
We need to build more council houses again, we're pouring huge amounts of cash into private landlords hand in housing benefit.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/535f956c-000c-11e3-9c40-00144feab7de.html#axzz2bqKgPWr9
We have a huge supply/demand deficit in this country as well which helps keep the housing market up.
We need to build more council houses again, we're pouring huge amounts of cash into private landlords hand in housing benefit.
Last edited:
Young girls will be alright, they just have to have a baby or two.
Both Labour and the Conservatives are both guilty of selling off social housing and not addressing huge need for new affordable social housing. Almost all the headline grabbing benefits pay-outs are down to ridiculous amount of housing benefit paid mainly straight into the pockets of landlords (buy to rent is still a booming market)
Building more social housing would potentially save the country billions in the coming years but the Conservatives won't do it because spending money on the "needy" is outside their mantra. Plus if they actually did something constructive to reduce the spend on benefits it would take away their excuse to blame the unemployed for all the countries financial woes. (sorry little rant there, I have a low opinion of Labour too.) But it just seems like madness to keep putting money into the pockets of landlords for it just to disappear out of the system. At least if there were more social housing the money paid out in benefits would make it's way back into the system.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,798
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
Playing the percentages game what percentage of claimants were involved in s crippling crash where insurance was not involved vs those who claim back ache and benefits?
You tell me, it doesn't change the fact these programs pick to get ratings - genuine cases don't make as good television as a few "scroungers" to get the idiot public foaming at the mouth.
One of the pros for not having a kid for me is this.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,798
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
So you think they should have created an unrepresentative example over a representative one? What woukd ne the purpose of that?
How do you know this is representative? do you have any data?.
We are in complete agreement, also building lots more social housing would give the construction sector a big boost as well.
I just can't understand why the Government are happy to pay out billions that is basically money down the drain
HEADRAT
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 4,652
- Location
- Nottingham
While I am sure that the creators of these programs think that they are doing the right thing, the situation is much more complicated than they always seem to complain. It always seems to be the 'workshy' that they target, who always appear to be claiming vast sums of money, when the reality is far from it. After all, your average claimant of JSA, can claim 3 benefits, JSA itself, Housing Benefit, and Council Tax Benefit. JSA is £71.70 per week, the other two benefits can be mostly ignored as the claimant never see's them. However, for the sake of arguement, let's say that they claim £80 a week in rent, and £800 a year for single occupancy council tax. That would result in an annual total of.. £8688.40, which is a far cry from the commonly reported £20,000+ that people read in the papers.
Of the £8688.40, the claimant only ever sees £3728.40 per annum, which really does not add up to much.
Of the £8688.40, the claimant only ever sees £3728.40 per annum, which really does not add up to much.
I think we're lucky that 2.5 million people are "happy" to receive such a pittance, we'd have a huge problem if they all decided on mass to cause civil unrest. It's a shame that the aspirations of these people have been set so low to be happy with so little.
2.5M are not happy to recieve so little. There is a small minority that are, but the rest would much rather have some spare cash.
I went from brining in 350 a week to JSA at 71 quid a week. It's hard. 71 quid wouldn't cover my weekly food bill when I was bringing in a wage(I work manual hard jobs, so eating a lot is vital). So I went from 80/90 quid food a week, down to 10-15. That sucks. I lost over a stone within a month.
Also out of my JSA i had to deduct 30 to add to rent as HB didnt cover the full amount.
Then you still got bills to pay etc you end up going into debt.
Anyone who thinks it's a life of luxury is a ****.
I went from brining in 350 a week to JSA at 71 quid a week. It's hard. 71 quid wouldn't cover my weekly food bill when I was bringing in a wage(I work manual hard jobs, so eating a lot is vital). So I went from 80/90 quid food a week, down to 10-15. That sucks. I lost over a stone within a month.
Also out of my JSA i had to deduct 30 to add to rent as HB didnt cover the full amount.
Then you still got bills to pay etc you end up going into debt.
Anyone who thinks it's a life of luxury is a ****.
There was supposed to be a tone of sarcasm around "happy", obviously it's didn't quite make it across
Ah my bad 
This subject riles me up a little.....
Some who live cushy well-to-do lives can't grasp the hardship required to drop from making a OKish wage to getting next to nothing. Luckily I've escaped Britain, and got myself some decent work elsewhere. Can't say I miss the place too much
This subject riles me up a little.....
Some who live cushy well-to-do lives can't grasp the hardship required to drop from making a OKish wage to getting next to nothing. Luckily I've escaped Britain, and got myself some decent work elsewhere. Can't say I miss the place too much