Benefit entitlements

Just read in one of the leading news papers today that the top ten benefits claimants in this country are receiving on average more than someone earning £85,000, who would have a take home pay of £56,564 a year, an income higher than some dentists, policemen, firemen, secondary school teachers, chartered accountants and the like. This is absolutely ridiculous,scandalous and offensive to the honest tax paying worker. This government say they have now capped benefit rates to £500-a-week, or £26,000-a-year for couples and £350-a-week for a single adult living alone. I am bent over puking sick, what the hell is this country coming too, i am 61yrs old and have worked all my years from the age of 15 and have recently returned back to work after a six week layoff following a serious heart attack. i now make £16,830-a-year before stoppages working a 39hr week with not a single benefit claim. I believe the current minimum wage for an over 21 is £6.31, if this is so and this is a figure set by the government standards, then make this the maximum claimable benefit available for a single person as a standard, at least this would be a more realistic figure. Sorry about this rant but i`ve had a gut full, every day you can see some of these so called unfortunate unemployed types standing and drinking outside the pubs smoking luxury length cigarettes and discussing what benefits they might be entightled too and counting down the days to their next giro  

Bring back National Service.

I have the same thoughts about the state pension. £6.31 an hour for a 35 hour week is £220 a week. Possibly for a single person living at home with their parents and paying minimal housekeeping. I'd be more than happy with that - but then I'd get taxed on it I suppose. You can't win.

Nora

When I was working, I totally missed all this, but since retirement 3 years ago, all I seem to see on my travels are fat young women shoving pushchairs, baby offspring  each side in tow, a 'hoodie' slob swaggering behind, can in one hand, phone in the other, effing & blinding at each other, during the DAY, so none are working, & I think to myself, 'I'm b****y  well paying for this lot, & there's THOUSANDS of 'em. Sorry but I'm getting very resentful as I get older.
Now I KNOW a lot WANT to work & can't find it, but one look at these types & you can instantly see that they'll NEVER work as long as (we) pay, its the SYSTEM that's wrong & needs modifying.

Model man makes a good point but the problem is who would employ these people?

I think it might cost the overall economy more to put these people into work than to pay benefits.

That said I would prefer people of working age who claim to be given an incentive to do voluntary work.

Agree with all the above, I think in the case of the young girls having babies, (I call them pramfaces) in order to get council houses and all mod cons thrown in should be housed in converted empty factories in a dormitory system or given a small room, shared kitchen and bathroom facilities on each floor and no male visitors, and the child benefit given in vouchers which could only be exchanged for food and baby clothes instead of buying fags and booze I bet the teenage pregnancy rate would reduce then.
Don

THIS THREAD IS GOING TO GIVE ME A HEADACHE   

And I totally agree with what you are saying. If you haven't got a job (other than genuine illness/disabilities as many of them still struggle ) you should be subsistence living. I.e enough money for a roof, food, light, heat and basic clothing. No telly, sky subscription, phones, cars, cigarettes, booze, gym membership etc etc etc.
If they want more them go and earn it. Thieving because 'you are poor' doesn't wash either.   

Now I have a headache  

Oh how I agree with all that has been said, trouble is their children are going to grow up knowing nothing different,  so they will not be working, so it goes on and on unless someone can alter the benefits system, no housing etc, might make them think, in our nearest town 4 miles away, there is a shop that sells second hand goods, they have some lovely prams in, do the young girls want them, NO  they get brand new ones , £100`s of pounds worth from the state, where is the sense in that.   

Totally agree, they take the view that if parents don't work why should they, D***head parents produce D***head children, hence the voucher system should be introduced to give them the basics, if they want more get a job, did you see the plonker on a benefits show a couple of weeks ago unemployed but moved to Gt Yarmouth to draw his benefits by the seaside,  said he could not believe his life was like that he thought he would have been a footballer on £200,000 a week by now, he got a job making pizza`s and packed it in after a week, all the kids now think it is their entitlement to be a footballer or a pop star, if they wont work conscript them in the army!

One of the main problems is that if you make sudden, sweeping changes, all you do is punish the children that are growing up within this system of dependence. There are no easy answers to a problem that has developed over many years, and any changes that are made need to be done in a measured and carefully thought out way, with all of the implications for all of those involved (not just the parents) considered.

Please don't make the mistake of giving the politicians the option of a quick, easy, knee-jurk (spelled wrongly because of the ridiculous swear-word filter on this forum) reaction to any problem, because they will take it, irrespective of the long-term damage caused. Because they believe it will gain them votes in the short term - and that's all most of them care about.

Vote ...........  

Jaytee wrote:Vote ...........  

But who for jaytee? You couldn't get a Rizla paper between any of the current 'professional politicians' we have previously voted into power. They're all *^@$%* as far as I'm concerned.

Agreed.

At the next election you will be able to vote for;
A Westminster game-player with a blue tie,
A Westminster game-player with a red tie,
A Westminster game-player with a gold tie,
A Westminster game-player with a green tie,
A Westminster game-player with a multi-coloured tie,
and maybe even a Westminster game-player with a funny shade of purple tie,

Guess who we will elect?

A Westminster game-player wearing a tie!

Derek

rogerblack wrote:Can't disagree with what's been said above.

So what are you all going to do about it . . . ?

Cor, wish I had some sort of 'Ailen ultimate-power', I could have all these problems sorted by the week-end     

Jaytee wrote:Vote ...........  

As Ken Livingstone (remember him) once remarked " if voting changed anything , they would abolish  it "

pablo wrote:

Jaytee wrote:Vote ...........  

As Ken Livingstone (remember him) once remarked " if voting changed anything , they would abolish  it "

Let's go for a revolution then  

Ah yes....... Revolution! And as Roger Daltry  once sang:


There's nothing in the streets
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Are now parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again
No, no!

Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

       To above

This should have gone after jaytee

Is it not an offence against the State to incite a revolution on social media? ..........

G

pablo wrote:Ah yes....... Revolution! And as Roger Daltry  once sang:

Ah Yes! Roger Daltry CBE. Millionaire isn't he?
I wonder whose side he's on now?

Frank

Okay, I can't resist so ….

…. I agree ….   

…. let's get rid of the parasites within our society ….   

…. let's start with families who own more than one castle ….   

…. who breed like rabbits ….   

…. who take more money from state hand-outs than any other single family in the country and ....   

…. who exhibit less morals than fruit flies.   

After we have rid our society of these parasites get back to me and we will discuss the next tranche ….    

…. until then please stop reading the Daily Wail.     

Best regards,
 

Hmmm, Dutto, I have the feeling you are not a Royalist  

We could always have president 'Bliar'  

Jaytee wrote:We could always have president 'Bliar'  

And I didn't know that you were a Sun reader (which is an oxymoron, I know)   

Frank

Jaytee wrote:Hmmm, Dutto, I have the feeling you are not a Royalist  

We could always have president 'Bliar'  

I could go for any elected Head of State with power and influence limited to four years before re-election or dismissal!     

It has taken many generations to accumulate the wealth and influence exercised by the UK aristocracy; too many in my opinion.   

I would just like be to be a Citizen of the United Kingdom instead of being a Subject!   

Best regards,
 

Agree with Dutto, well said, why should an accident of birth entitle anyone to these positions.