Exemplary scroungers...

However, she claims that by doing so she would be financially disadvantaged and is adamant that she has "no intention" of ever going back to work while this is the case. Mrs Taylor told the Packet: "It's just crazy - the world's gone mad. What's the point of going to slave your guts out for 40 hours and what do you get for it? Absolutely nothing."

Welcome to the real world.
Lol, just about sums up the state of our society today.
Some people knock out kids for the fun of it and then expect everyone else to pay for their upkeep, like that ****** from derby (Mick Philpott).

Anyway, if she had depression after the birth of her first baby, why did she carry on having more. Surely that would make her more depressed??
 
She's right as far as working but getting less is concerned - but all that this proves is that the government is giving far too much money out to these people in the first place. If someone's entitled to recieve benefits, then they should take them... if the benefits are far too high, then the rules should be changed so they recieve less or aren't entitled to them! I don't think its people fault for claiming benefits, I think it's the governments fault for giving out too much and making too many people entitled to them.

They should give them a rent-free council house, which should be nothing more than sufficient, and enough money for very, very basic meals.

I know being a single parent must be tough, but a lot of people manage to work and just about cope with it - so why should anyone be an exception to that? And besides, she's not even a single parent - she has a partner living with her!

If we cut their benefits by 50%, there'd be a lot less people living on benefits and getting jobs. And there'd be a lot less of our tax money going to them.

At £500/week, she's getting £24,000 a year for doing nothing. If that went down to £12,000 or even £8,000, I bet it wouldn't take long for those two to get their asses in gear and start working.
 
Last edited:
TheMagicPirate said:
Its not the people that are the problem, its the system.
Click to expand...

Problem is the system needs people to have kids and sadly it appears these are the type of people that appear to be having big families. I'm not sure that's a good idea.

Jokester
 
I was going to make a thread about two 'scroungers' I know but I might as well put it here.
However, remember that technically they're not scroungers because they have a 'legal' right to this money.

Case 1 -
My cousin has lived in Spain for 17 years and is now a Spanish citizen. This time last year he got blown up in a LPG accident, spent 3 months in a special burns unit in Barcelona and then came back home to recuperate with his daughter back in Blighty.
He has just been granted £170 (+) a week for life by our British Government and told he can go back to Spain :eek:

Case 2 -
I work with a lad (about 37) who is registered blind. If he holds the paper 2" from his face he can read it and he can make out people from a distance.
He earns about £8 an hour and lives with his Mummy & Daddy.
Yesterday he told me that he gets £100 + extra a week because he's disabled and was granted this at age 16 :eek:
I don't mind him getting it if he was totally blind and couldn't work or if his mummy has to do everything for him but this is not the case because he's totally independant.
Only yesterday he was looking at property and saw a house for £150,000. Another workmate asked how much mortgage he would need and he said he could just write a cheque.

These two cases just show examples of whats wrong with this country.
 
jesus chirst :eek: thats makes me sick, my mums a single parent atm with 2 young kids (recently divorced) and she admits she does'nt have to spend a penny of child support on the kids it just gets banked, theres no way on this planet she needs £501 a week, what she does need is to go on a course to learn how to budget, jesus, how do these familiys survive in third world countrys with a billion kids.
 
It says they get £501 in benefits, but they only actually get £333 in the bank to spend. The rest goes to the council

And i too wouldnt work and be £130+ a week worse off if i was in her position

5 kids in 5 years - do they not have a TV :eek:
 
Whether this is fair or not depends on how much disposable income they have from their benifits. If all the handouts are paying bills and not much more, then I think it's maybe a *little* unfair for them to be worse off.

However, it is my taxes they're spending and the horney gits should have children they can't afford to keep.

Burnsy
 
Well at the moment they get about £330 in benefits paid direct to them. If they work the council benefits ( housing and council tax ) will stop

Chances are if one of them works full time they would most likley get £333 with wages + tax credits + child benefit - but theyd then have to pay full rent, coucil tax, school dinners, baby milk etc.

Theyd easily be at least £100 worse off a week
 
MeatLoaf said:
Well at the moment they get about £330 in benefits paid direct to them. If they work the council benefits ( housing and council tax ) will stop

Chances are if one of them works full time they would most likley get £333 with wages + tax credits + child benefit - but theyd then have to pay full rent, coucil tax, school dinners, baby milk etc.

Theyd easily be at least £100 worse off a week
Click to expand...
Why did they have kids they couldn't afford then. Oh hang on, I know this one: because they knew the taxpayer would pay for it.
 
Jesus christ,dont have kids!!!! :(

I like the attitude of Helen,the first person to comment.
I my self am a 29 year old mum of 2 who has have postnatel depressen but work, does this mean i am a bad mother i beleave not. I am providing for my children that i brought into the world, not having hand outs from the goverment for having children.It's all about self worth and i feel that working and providing for my children sets them a better example then not working. The amount of money that Anna Taylor recieves weekly is nearly the same amount that i recieve monthly for working 24 hours a week.My children have not been at a disadvantage from having a working mum if anything it has set an example to them.I can't believe that someone who has this amount of benefits could possibily complain because the state want her to get a job.Set your children an example and go to work and earn your own money.Helen camborne
Click to expand...

If she had qualifications she wouldnt need to work a minimum wage job,if she didnt keep havign children she wouldnt be in this situation. Its not soo much about that she cant get a job,she could easily go to college and get qualified to get a decent job. couple of days a week while her kids are at school and she can use the college nursery for the other two kids.

Its easy to sit back and say that you cant do anything but as far as ive been brought up to believe,you dont get nothing for nothing.....put work in and you get results back. :o

(my mum worked lots of minimum wage jobs when she brought me and my brother up,it may have meant we had to go to grans after school or stay in ourselves till she got home but i see no problem with that!)
 
Jonny ///M said:
Jesus christ,dont have kids!!!! :(

I like the attitude of Helen,the first person to comment.


If she had qualifications she wouldnt need to work a minimum wage job,if she didnt keep havign children she wouldnt be in this situation. Its not soo much about that she cant get a job,she could easily go to college and get qualified to get a decent job. couple of days a week while her kids are at school and she can use the college nursery for the other two kids.

Its easy to sit back and say that you cant do anything but as far as ive been brought up to believe,you dont get nothing for nothing.....put work in and you get results back. :o
Click to expand...
If 'Helen' receives £500 a month then she must either have a working partner or be in receipt of benefits herself. Because it goes without saying: she and her kids aren't living on that amount.
 
The trouble is, if you reduce the benefits then it ends up being the kids who suffer, more than the parents. (Its not as if the children have done anything wrong, afterall. They have as much right to be brought up properly as the rest of us did.)

What about replacing 'cash' child benefits with vouchers or something, so you know the money's going where it's supposed to? It said part of their benefits was free school meals and milk, if they extended that to make sure none of the benefits could go on alcohol, cigarettes, a car etc then the system might work better. (I dont see why they should need a car tbh.. if they're not working, they can certainly walk their kids to school and the shops.)

The parents have to feel they're missing out on something to have the motivation to start work.
 
calnen said:
The trouble is, if you reduce the benefits then it ends up being the kids who suffer, more than the parents.

What about replacing 'cash' child benefits with vouchers or something, so you know the money's going where it's supposed to? It said part of their benefits was free school meals and milk, if they extended that to make sure none of the benefits could go on alcohol, cigarettes, a car etc then the system might work better. (I dont see why they should need a car tbh.. if they're not working, they can certainly walk their kids to school and the shops.)

The parents have to feel they're missing out on something to have the motivation to start work.
Click to expand...
Or sterilise them.
 
calnen said:
Unfortunately, we don't live in Nazi Germany. ( :p )
Click to expand...
Well anybody who doesn't like sterilisation has no right to complain about people having loads of kids and claiming benefits for them...
 
calnen said:
Unfortunately, we don't live in Nazi Germany. ( :p )
Click to expand...

True but this could almost be viewed as eugenics in reverse- the state is essentially paying the bottom end of the gene pool to procreate whilst the middle-high end of the gene pool produce less children either due to expense or lack of time/ work commitments :)

Just a theory of course :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom