On Benefits & Proud

TheLegendOfMart · 17 Oct 2013 at 13:41

The Dread Pirate said:
I accept the iPhone point regarding the Handset as a gift however if they actually got the Phone with a contract and the SKY subscription can be cancelled at your request true the Phone one does incur a cost however the sky subscription can be cancelled at your own convenience.

Sky can be cancelled but then you are liable to pay off the rest of the contract, if you don't then you default and your credit score is ruined. I lost my job and asked Sky to cancel my contact and they basically said tough.

You would rather people screw up the rest of their life just because they lost their job just please you?

MooMoo444 · 17 Oct 2013 at 13:46

TheLegendOfMart said:
Yet people still rag on people on benefits when in 99.97% of the cases through no fault of their own.

These jobless people could get themselves the GSCE's required if they were that bothered.

TheLegendOfMart · 17 Oct 2013 at 13:48

MooMoo444 said:
These jobless people could get themselves the GSCE's required if they were that bothered.

Many do, I still fail to see why there is a cause for so much hostility towards people on benefits.

Dolph · 17 Oct 2013 at 13:55

TheLegendOfMart said:
Many do, I still fail to see why there is a cause for so much hostility towards people on benefits.

Because they take from the working without contributing back, and in many cases have a lifestyle that working people cannot afford.

As I have said, it is the systems fault, not the people, but we need to change things to fix both the problems and the perceptions

Neil79 · 17 Oct 2013 at 14:08

Dolph said:
Because they take from the working without contributing back, and in many cases have a lifestyle that working people cannot afford.

Even the disabled?

The Dread Pirate · 17 Oct 2013 at 14:14

TheLegendOfMart said:
Sky can be cancelled but then you are liable to pay off the rest of the contract, if you don't then you default and your credit score is ruined. I lost my job and asked Sky to cancel my contact and they basically said tough.

You would rather people screw up the rest of their life just because they lost their job just please you?

Then I'd say wait for the subscription to end and then don't renew it but no some idiots seem think that Sky is a requirement and not a Luxury which is my real gripe here!

TheLegendOfMart · 17 Oct 2013 at 14:16

The Dread Pirate said:
Then I'd say wait for the subscription to end and then don't renew it but no some idiots seem think that Sky is a requirement and not a Luxury which is my real gripe here!

You are 31 days into a new contract and you lose your job, what happens?

You don't have a gripe you are just using the same tired old excuses to have a go at people on benefits.

Dolph · 17 Oct 2013 at 14:17

Neil79 said:
Even the disabled?

Disability is somewhat different, but unless you really believe we are twice as sick as the oecd average, we still have work to do, and that is without factoring in those who don't claim.

By the way, be careful where you go from here in this line of debate without doing some research in previous threads...

Dolph · 17 Oct 2013 at 14:19

TheLegendOfMart said:
You are 31 days into a new contract and you lose your job, what happens?

You don't have a gripe you are just using the same tired old excuses to have a go at people on benefits.

How do these people who haven't worked in years (or ever) get these things?

What about higher than average levels of drug and alcohol use among the lower income groups?

The issue is not as black and white as people on either side are trying to make out.

The Dread Pirate · 17 Oct 2013 at 14:27

TheLegendOfMart said:
You are 31 days into a new contract and you lose your job, what happens?

You don't have a gripe you are just using the same tired old excuses to have a go at people on benefits.

I'm talking about the idiots who don't stop the contract after the subscription ends and not the majority of people who are sensible in what they do with their benefits for legitimate reasons I never stated this was a general wide sweeping comment about all benefits claimants you've just decided this is a general attack on all of them.

To be clear I'm talking about the idiots who purposefully after their under no obligation to continue wasting their money on Luxury's they shouldn't be this is not just selfish but tbqf Lunacy!

MooMoo444 · 17 Oct 2013 at 14:31

If I was on benefits like that I'd at least show a bit of humility, and not go on TV showing off my 50 inch plasma telly and full sky packages etc.

The money should be put towards training so they can get a job. Not towards the next premiership season.

Uther · 17 Oct 2013 at 14:34

MooMoo444 said:
If I was on benefits like that I'd at least show a bit of humility, and not go on TV showing off my 50 inch plasma telly and full sky packages etc.

The money should be put towards training so they can get a job. Not towards the next premiership season.

Its catch 22 though.They are on more in benefits than they will ever get working, not that anyone would give them a job anyway.
As said already, blame the system, not necessarily the tiny amount of people that abuse it.

TheLegendOfMart · 17 Oct 2013 at 14:41

MooMoo444 said:
If I was on benefits like that I'd at least show a bit of humility, and not go on TV showing off my 50 inch plasma telly and full sky packages etc.

The money should be put towards training so they can get a job. Not towards the next premiership season.

You don't know when they got the TV though, it could have been bought before they lost their job or given as a present or handed down.

I have a 32" TV I got from my father when he bought a new one.

It's easy just to assume, I hope you never lose your job and are on benefits for a relatively long period of time then people can judge you by how big your TV is.

*waits for the "I've never been unemployed, I've worked since I was a child, blah blah blah" response

MooMoo444 · 17 Oct 2013 at 14:47

TheLegendOfMart said:
*waits for the "I've never been unemployed, I've worked since I was a child, blah blah blah" response

I have been unemployed, and it was a struggle to get by on JSA. Since got myself a job and am now completely independent.

It is just frustrating to see people living it up at our expense, when we are the ones working full time.

Dolph · 17 Oct 2013 at 14:48

TheLegendOfMart said:
You don't know when they got the TV though, it could have been bought before they lost their job or given as a present or handed down.

I have a 32" TV I got from my father when he bought a new one.

It's easy just to assume, I hope you never lose your job and are on benefits for a relatively long period of time then people can judge you by how big your TV is.

*waits for the "I've never been unemployed, I've worked since I was a child, blah blah blah" response

The problem with the benefit of the doubt is that it only happens in the occasional circumstance. When you get into a pattern that establishes a stereotype, then you end up with a situation where people who deserve the benefit of the doubt become indistingishable from those who do not.

Make · 17 Oct 2013 at 15:00

Even people on benefits do need some luxuries. Try staying inside for 30 days eating rice and mince, without owning a TV; internet, or a mobile phone. It's like being in prison.

Do you think you'll be in a mental state to look for jobs, to work, or to function in any way?

You can't even save money on benefits because as soon as you reach a certain amount your benefits get reduced till you spend it, so you're not saving anything there, neither is the state.

I do think unemployed people should be forced to go for useful training. But having some luxuries does not always mean they are lazy. Of course those idiots on the telly do deserve to be kicked to the street.

Disclaimer: I work 3 jobs, not on benefits.

The Dread Pirate · 17 Oct 2013 at 15:04

Make said:
Even people on benefits do need some luxuries. Try staying inside for 30 days eating rice and mince, without owning a TV; internet, or a mobile phone. It's like being in prison.

Do you think you'll be in a mental state to look for jobs, to work, or to function in any way?

You can't even save money on benefits because as soon as you reach a certain amount your benefits get reduced till you spend it, so you're not saving anything there, neither is the state.

I do think unemployed people should be forced to go for useful training. But having some luxuries does not always mean they are lazy. Of course those idiots on the telly do deserve to be kicked to the street.

Disclaimer: I work 3 jobs, not on benefits.

I'm not saying all Luxury's should be taken into account but the extravagant ones like a sky subscription should well be the last thing on their mind TV & freeview or FreeSat are Luxury's they can afford Sky isn't!

Schlong&Stable · 17 Oct 2013 at 15:08

Everyone who is able to work, should work. Where there are no jobs, the unemployed should be given value-adding work by the government.

I'd then cut overseas aid and use the savings to fund further tax cuts for the poor. Ideally raising the tax-free cap to get it as close to £15,000 as possible.

Dolph · 17 Oct 2013 at 15:15

Thompson_NCL said:
Everyone who is able to work, should work. Where there are no jobs, the unemployed should be given value-adding work by the government.

I'd then cut overseas aid and use the savings to fund further tax cuts for the poor. Ideally raising the tax-free cap to get it as close to £15,000 as possible.

How far do you think 9bn goes when it comes to the tax free threshold?

Pwc estimate that each £100 increase costs 0.5bn in lost reveue. So completely abolishing all international aid will only give scope to raise the threshold by around £1800.

http://m.accountancyage.com/aa/news/2141816/raising-tax-threshold-cost-gbp11bn

d_brennen · 17 Oct 2013 at 15:49

It's a start. I don't understand why any nation sends money to another. Why not British produced goods? I can't see how this would be bad for anyone except corrupt officials abroad who can't pocket a sack of spuds or farm tractor etc