Whats your views
there are some, but also some risks
most people know very little about state benefits in this country yet have loud opinions
It's for cheats and foreigners.
Fundamentally unBritish.
I like the ones I get and wholeheartedly disapprove of those I don't get.
Thread closed 🙄
I guess they vary from job to job.
Apparently, 3" more makes for faster rolling.
concerns me less than tax evasion/avoidance
Ooh - get him changing the thread title. Luckily, we can still see the original in the URL.
title edit. 😆
Let's talk State Benefits
In fairness, let's not.
Perhaps the OP would like to lead the discussion?
Yeah OP, what do [i]you[/i] think?
As someone who worked full time for 27 years then spent 6 months unemployed following redundancy, I would say that there is a lot of bollocks talked about state benefits from those who have no direct experience and get their information direct from the Daily Heil. It is not what some would like to believe.
They are a damned good thing. For those that need/deserve them. We should protect that at all costs.
so flashheart, who gets to decide who are people that need/deserve benefits?
is that need [b]or[/b] deserve, or need [b]and[/b] deserve?
They are a damned good thing. For those that need/deserve them. We should protect that at all costs
Agreed , but then there's the people like who i saw at today whilst out getting my dinner, 2 lads walked in to the shop, put 4 3 litre bottles of strongbow on the counter saying he was having a good afternoon, he also said he had already had a 3 litre bottle before coming out, this was at 1 o clock 😯 . Why should taxes be paid to people like that when they have no intention of getting a job. If they are going to piss it up the wall then at least buy something decent!
ok, I'll bite - how about getting rid of all non-means tested benefits?
Agreed , but then there's the people like who i saw at today whilst out getting my dinner, 2 lads walked in to the shop, put 4 3 litre bottles of strongbow on the counter saying he was having a good afternoon, he also said he had already had a 3 litre bottle before coming out, this was at 1 o clock 8O. Why should taxes be paid to people like that when they have no intention of getting a job. If they are going to piss it up the wall then at least buy something decent!
Sounds like students.
Beleive me, they weren't students.
Agreed , but then there's the people like who i saw at today whilst out getting my dinner, 2 lads walked in to the shop, put 4 3 litre bottles of strongbow on the counter saying he was having a good afternoon, he also said he had already had a 3 litre bottle before coming out, this was at 1 o clock . Why should taxes be paid to people like that when they have no intention of getting a job. If they are going to piss it up the wall then at least buy something decent!
Where do you live? Much work round is there?
why not get rid of all non means tested benefits?
as the majority are either paid to disabled people or as state pensions
Where do you live? Much work round is there?
Live in Bolton, work in Bury. Yes, lots of work.
How do you know where they got their money from?
Look they were scroats, chavs, scum.
As I got a redundancy package I probably didn't [b][i]need[/b][/i] JSA. However as a redundancy package is classed as compenstation for losing your job it was a benefit I was deemed deserving of.
JSA is jackshit in terms of supporting a family so I lived off the redundancy. By the time I was back in work there was very little left.
I can see this thread turning into a benefits bash-fest. I'd just say that they aren't all they are cracked up to be.
Look they were scroats, chavs, scum.
ah good, well balanced reasoning.
ok, I'll bite - how about getting rid of all non-means tested benefits?
I'd say that the manpower required to make means testing efficient would outweigh the cost of the current system, although there is a certain amount of means testing in place now.
Look they were scroats, chavs, scum.
Nice.
As I got a redundancy package I probably didn't need JSA. However as a redundancy package is classed as compenstation for losing your job it was a benefit I was deemed deserving of.JSA is jackshit in terms of supporting a family so I lived off the redundancy. By the time I was back in work there was very little left.
I can see this thread turning into a benefits bash-fest. I'd just say that they aren't all they are cracked up to be.
When I got made redundant my redundancy package was 2 weeks wages, I was out of work for 5 months, it left me financially crippled.
You have my very sincere, genuine sympathies. Your example also lays to ghost the myths about easy living on benefits.
BBC 2 now may raise some different opinions on both sides of the bench.
BBC2 now
Look forward to seeing people with attitudes that apparently don't exist 😆
winstonsmith - Member
why not get rid of all non means tested benefits?
Indeed. I've never understood why child benefit is paid regardless of need. We don't claim child Tax Credits either - although we qualify.
Is the cost of means testing really more than the cost of paying those not in need?
I've never understood why child benefit is paid regardless of need
Prizes for all......
I've never understood why child benefit is paid regardless of need
Stopping in England if there's a 40% tax rate payer in da hoose.
I haven't had any state benefits since 1986 so I couldn't even tell you what there is.
Obviously I make use of the NHS when I have to, but otherwise it seems to be all one-way traffic
so flashheart, are you any further on in working out who need/deserve benefits?
druidh - really? you're entitled to tax credits? i thought you'd have too high a household income for much child tax credit. you seem far too well off 😮
Indeed. I've never understood why child benefit is paid regardless of need.
widening the electorate to whom benefits are paid gets "buy in" from those that might otherwise not have much support for them.
I think we're due £40-odd per month??? Remember, we might have no mortgage, but we're not high income.winstonsmith - Member
druidh - really? you're entitled to tax credits? i thought you'd have too high a household income for much child tax credit. you seem far too well off
PS - no bottles of champers hidden away either!
I am a single parent and work part time. Me ex ****ed off a few years ago and left me "holding the baby". Until recently I worked full time and found it virtually impossible to balance books with all the child care involved. Me being a bit thick and limited to type of work I can get didn't help. At the moment my wages are topped up with housing benefit and tax credits. I haven't lost a penny and if anything I am slightly better off. On the plus side I get shite loads of time with the nipper and a load of time to ride.
Every cloud eh...
Welfare universalism, to put it another way:
*"It speaks to another important thing: are you for a residual welfare state that is just for the poor, which is the Tory position, or are you for a more inclusive welfare state? What the Tories are saying about child trust funds, child tax credits and Sure Start – they're saying, 'let's residualise, let's make the welfare state just for the poor' but [this goes against] all the evidence in terms of maintaining public support [for the welfare state]. Why does Sure Start work as an institution? Because it brings people together." The People's bank would be aimed as much at the well off as the less well off."
if you think that [b]"maintaining public support [for the welfare state]"[/b] is really what's important as opposed to making sure the welfare state is meeting the needs of those most needing it then universalism is all fine and dandy. Cant say I agree, but that probably makes me a "Tory boy" or some such labelled rubbish.
* http://www.nextleft.org/2010/03/milibands-manifesto-to-defend.html
ah yeah druidh, it's the lack of housing costs - that must make a massive difference
Maybe that's one of the fundamental flaws in the system then?
there's flaws in any system
You can be right/left wing and support/not support/support to a certain degree a state welfare system. Or you can turn it into a left-right argument.
I've never understood why child benefit is paid regardless of need.
Yeah as Stoner suggests, we once had what was called "the universal welfare state". Unlike Stoner, I totally support the concept - it's the bedrock of social democracy. Welfare "for the needy" is a neo-liberal concept.
In a universal welfare state/social democracy those who can contribute more, do, there is therefore no need to stop their entitlement.
I don't support safety nets for the needy, a universal social wage helps to maintain social cohesion and maintains higher standards. It is absolutely imperative imo.
ernie - I thought the original welfare "product" was specifically a safety net measure, pensions, nhs etc?
[hijack]
PS, Ernie while you're in here, would you mind passing on the benefit of your experience over here pls
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/neighbours-have-fitted-power-shower-on-wall-adjoining-our-bedroom#post-3105036
ta 🙂
[/hijack]
Watching this on BBC2, it occurs to me that universal childcare and lots of social housing would be pretty handy..
In a universal welfare state/social democracy those who can contribute more, do, there is therefore no need to stop their entitlement.
If you do this properly with a progressive taxation system (or at least one which isn't too regressive) you should get the same result as with means testing without the social stigma. Then again child tax credits is mean tested, and whilst a lot of criticism can be levelled at the system it does generally seem to work OK - extending it to a level where it's not just the "poor" claiming it seems to have removed the stigma from claiming (just leaving the bureaucracy as the main disincentive).
It's not often I agree with ernie and disagree with Stoner - I must be getting old.