Poll: which party are you going to vote in up coming elections?

[Shadez]

Isnt it about time we get back to the important debate because the pro UKIP's have derailed the thread again.

Why vote for UKIP in the EU. What good will they do for the country if all they do is fail to participate in parliament?

 

[C64]

Might work better if you go back and check my posts again

don't buy it I already knew you'd say stayed at friends relatives before you said it no doubt your brother was getting housing benefit though but I don't believe you anyway

 

[Caged]

don't buy it I already knew you'd say stayed at friends relatives before you said it no doubt your brother was getting housing benefit though but I don't believe you anyway

You are a fantastic poster and I hope you post post post some more.

Assuming you are in a low paid menial job yourself (hence the attitude), why are you so convinced that you are funding housing benefit for migrants? Maybe you're a net drain on the system?

 

[Zethor]

you didn't answer the question ? how did you afford your rent doing a part time blockbuster job ? you were living in a tent right I am mistaken
I am not anti immigration or anti europe but it has to be a level playing field

how can you not see the point of view of people that think I am paying so someone can come and have a decent lifestyle on the back of a low paid menial job ?
whats the point lets all just have kids and claim for everything and just do low paid part time work and get all our rent paid

The Portuguese family in your example, their child was born in the UK, which makes them a citizen. You are therefore concerned about the benefits received by a fellow citizen based on their ethnicity, which makes you a xenophobe. If you think child benefits costs the country too much, you should perhaps look at the "pure blood" britons as they are the ones who claim most of the benefits.

 

[krooton]

don't buy it I already knew you'd say stayed at friends relatives before you said it no doubt your brother was getting housing benefit though but I don't believe you anyway

Sorry what?

My brother moved over here 2 years before, skilled labor, network engineer. His wife managed a bar in London. I slept in their lounge until I was earning enough money to rent elsewhere. I claimed diddly squat, in fact, I got screwed out of emergency tax for ages due to employer incompetence.

So because I don't fit your made up view, you don't believe me? The stickler in me almost wishes there was a way to link my NI number to anything claimed to prove you wrong.

 

[robgmun]

Isnt it about time we get back to the important debate because the pro UKIP's have derailed the thread again.

You intolerant bigot

See, it works both ways

 

[Shadez]

don't buy it I already knew you'd say stayed at friends relatives before you said it no doubt your brother was getting housing benefit though but I don't believe you anyway

Ok so now if a friend of your brothers, uncles, sisters former roommate claimed benefit all immigrants are bad.

 

[deuse]

You are a fantastic poster and I hope you post post post some more.

Assuming you are in a low paid menial job yourself (hence the attitude), why are you so convinced that you are funding housing benefit for migrants? Maybe you're a net drain on the system?

A person\family should put into the pot for at least 5-10 years before taking out.

 

[krooton]

Ok so now if a friend of your brothers, uncles, sisters former roommate claimed benefit all immigrants are bad.

My brother couldn't have even claimed if he wanted to, he missed the cut-off to get Naturalised via our mom, so he was initially over on a 2-year working visa.

 

[Shadez]

A person\family should put into the pot for at least 5-10 years before taking out.

This is something i have thought in the past, and i would support a law that states you must have been a UK resident for 5-10 years before you can claim benefits.

 

[robgmun]

I think 5 years and have passed the natrulasation test is fair. 10 is a little exsessive

 

[krooton]

I was digging through my brother's old server to see if I could find anything from around 2002 when I was couch-surfing, but I only have entries in to my blog (yeah, I had one of those!) from 2003 onwards.

This nugget from 10 years ago when I broke up with my first gf is pure emo gold!
http://kr00-t0n.packetslut.co.uk/weblog/archives/archive-122004.htm

 

[RedvGreen]

The issue with benefits and immigrant receiving funds is one that isn't recent or new. Benefits started a long time ago, and is so far ingrained in society that we are stuck with it.

If benefits were axed for child support (for the Daily Mail mothers), there'd be outrage and probably conflict of some sort.

If benefits were axed for people 'faking disability' or the 'job seekers' then we'd once again have outrage and conflict.

The big problem that I believe most people see in the benefit culture is that it is being abused - money isn't being spent for essentials, instead it goes on other things such as Sky TV, alcohol, drugs, latest fashion etc. Add to that the seeming fact that many of the persons claiming benefits cause trouble and issues for those citizens who do contribute to the country and pay tax etc.

If benefits were given as vouchers or special credit for specific uses, with the option for change through a merit/appeal process, then we'd see greater harmony with those funding benefits, those who *need* benefits, and those who are being Daily-Mail-stereotypically-lazy (forced to then work).

 

[platypus]

A person\family should put into the pot for at least 5-10 years before taking out.

Why not 15? Where do you stop?

 

[Mr Jack]

All the evidence shows that benefit abuse is actually pretty rare, and so any response should be in proportion to the actual problem rather than fighting fictional battles. If you want to get people off benefits what is needed is education and training, more jobs, and better help and support for people with poor mental health or addiction problems.

Voucher based schemes simply cost money (in administration), degrade the value of benefits (since they lack the flexibility required to allow people to make the best choices with their money), create a black market in vouchers (those who want booze will still get it and fraudsters will need to convert vouchers into cash), penalise those who have always played by the rules (i.e. the majority) and further stigmatize those on benefits.

The biggest problem with benefits in this country is that they are too low, and too cruelly administered.

 

[Caged]

The problem I have with vouchers is that everyone would have to accept them, otherwise you're pretty much handing money straight to Tesco or whoever. And if everyone can accept them then I can't see it being more than about 5 minutes before a dodgy corner shop decides that they will take £5 of vouchers off people in exchange for £3 of booze and then fiddle the records to say it was bread.

And if you had a list of 'approved retailers' then it stop people on the lowest incomes being able to turn to places like Gumtree for a used fridge and instead off to one of those horrible "pay weekly and get shafted" places.

 

[Mr Jack]

The problem I have with vouchers is that everyone would have to accept them, otherwise you're pretty much handing money straight to Tesco or whoever. And if everyone can accept them then I can't see it being more than about 5 minutes before a dodgy corner shop decides that they will take £5 of vouchers off people in exchange for £3 of booze and then fiddle the records to say it was bread.

And if you had a list of 'approved retailers' then it stop people on the lowest incomes being able to turn to places like Gumtree for a used fridge and instead off to one of those horrible "pay weekly and get shafted" places.

Indeed. And what exactly counts as "approved" or "unapproved" spending anyway? Apparently Sky TV is right out, but is it okay to save up some of your meagre benefits to take your child to the Cinema for a birthday treat? If that's okay, why is it not okay to pay for Sky TV (which, btw, is actually a pretty cheap form of entertainment). If it's not okay to take a child to the cinema on their birthday is it okay to buy them a toy? What about a video game?

 

[Caged]

Bread and gruel only

 

[deuse]

Why not 15? Where do you stop?

Because that's fair and it's what I done(10 years)

 

[Schlong&Stable]

The Portuguese family in your example, their child was born in the UK, which makes them a citizen. You are therefore concerned about the benefits received by a fellow citizen based on their ethnicity, which makes you a xenophobe. If you think child benefits costs the country too much, you should perhaps look at the "pure blood" britons as they are the ones who claim most of the benefits.

I absolutely resent it, and it has nothing to do with xenophobia. My family have paid with sweat and blood for hundreds of years, we've earned the right to be citizens of this nation. Someone who hops off a plane at Heathrow and drops a sprog has not.

Being born in the UK should not be the only criteria for citizenship when your parents are not British. It has nothing to do with xenophobia or racism; I like the Portuguese. But we're not operating a bloody charity here and I for one am not willing to pay taxes to take care of someone who came here to leech off our welfare system.

The fact attitudes are hardening on the welfare system is bad news for everyone, the mandate for the welfare state is shrinks with every government. If you care about providing good social services, you ought to be tough on immigrants and the lazy bone idle.

Accusations of racism, xenophobia and so forth will no longer fly: look at the rise of UKIP and you'll see why you've wrought with that approach. The longer our political class resist the tough changes people demand, the more harsh peoples demands will come.