Un-fit for work?

Currently reading:
Un-fit for work?

Too right. And I'd happily pay out of my tax for that purpose. The problem is rent should be 'affordable' on minimum wage but due to the lack of social housing private rent rates have shot up to the point of ridiculous and far faster than inflation.

I think I can remember reading somewhere that Morpeth has the highest % of benefit reliance than anywhere else in the country! I think the footage there proves his lung 'condition' isn't anywhere near serious enough to claim disability.

My dad gets breathless climbing the stairs since a botched NHS operation he doesn't claim anything...
 
Last edited:
I snapped at my sister a few weeks ago...she's on maternity leave with her 2nd child and was bragging that she was better off on benefits than she was working. Also trying to rub it it that she was earning more than me!!

Imagine my delight when she discovered that with the changes to the system, if she doesn't go back to work - she's screwed.

Now, don't get me wrong, I love my little sister and my niece & nephew and would never wish any harm to come to them. However, I hate the fact she was turning into the stereotypical young mother. Especially when prior to getting pregnant she had a reasonably well paid job (for her age and the area).

Anywhoo...short version: I agree, tax payers shouldn't be funding lazy arse people on benefits living in relative luxury.

(Although, this year hasn't seen me pay tax whilst being paid by the Government ;-)...seafarers earnings deductions and technically I'm a Civil Serpant)
 
some people are going to now going to have to live on only 350 quid a week I nearly fell off my chair...that's what 18000 a year? Oh no to be in such poverty...there are Africans sending shoes and food parcels to help them..

The was a story on BBC website about the capping of benefits to single parents to £500 week, this includes rent.

I work my f*cking ass off 52 hours a week not including all the work I have to do at home in my own time for a lot LESS than this amount.
 
Last edited:
Benefits should be capped at less than working 40 hrs a week on minimum wage. That way people are better off working.

Oh and for the record I don't think X-boxes, fidges, microwaves, big screen tellys, blu ray players and cars are not essential for living, they are luxurys.
 
The was a story on BBC website about the capping of benefits to single parents to £500 week, this includes rent.

I work my f*cking ass off 52 hours a week not including all the work I have to do at home in my own time for a lot LESS than this amount.

often its not the single parents fault they are living off the state! they could be in a relationship think they are financially secure, the the bloke fecks off and wont pay for what he has left behind. in bristol:confused: rent might be cheap but some other places 500 wont even cover the rent, so now the kids don't just have to suffer from a useless dad that has fecked off and csa wont find but have to move away from friends and family, now without the friends and family the mum cant even go to work part time as she has lost the free child minders. whole family now feels the state has let them down and the kids may rebel against that by turning to crime.

low paid workers in high rent citys rely on top ups from housing benefit, with that gone they have to move out so there will be no low wage workers left in citys apart from those living 10 to a room,
 
In a lot of countries you get f*ck all, there is no benefit system/help.

£500 week is way too much, it's more than most people earn. If I default on my payments I lose my house, if I default on gas or electric I get cut off...yet it's the tax I am paying,£550 month, that goes to people who don't want to work...and yes I know some do but can't get work I understand that.

I have lived in some of the poorest places in the country, been there done it but people don't realise how lucky they really are. IMO being poor is a 16yr old in Africa about to die of starvation in the street.
 
If the people assessing the claimants weren't brain dead robots we wouldn't need a one size fits all system, but benefits could be apportioned to need. Now I know this doesn't apply to everyone but around here some girls deliberately get pregnant and then get 'thrown' out of home so they get to the top of the housing list on full benefits. That is wrong, very very wrong.
 
but they are in Africa, if we left ours homeless the cold will kill them before they even get to 16

some other countries also have more affordable government housing as they didn't sell it all and not build more.

True but you know what I mean Dave, poor is certainly not buying 20 cigs and 4 cans of special brew every morning and the corner shop on the estate then complain about the amount of dole money they get and how crap the government is etc.....I see/hear it every day.
 
I was once told by a JobCentre advisor that they only even push the people they think are capable of getting, and holding down a job. She said that in a lot of cases, they give the "customer" everything they want for fear of them losing their rag and beating the **** out of them.

The security guards they have are useless - they aren't really allowed to do anything (a friend of mine used to do it in Truro - he quit when a "customer" ripped a monitor off the mounting bracket and cracked him round the head with it. When he tried to pursue the matter, he was told there was nothing he could do and that he shouldn't have tried to diffuse the situation...by asking the chap what was wrong...)
 
If the people assessing the claimants weren't brain dead robots we wouldn't need a one size fits all system, but benefits could be apportioned to need. Now I know this doesn't apply to everyone but around here some girls deliberately get pregnant and then get 'thrown' out of home so they get to the top of the housing list on full benefits. That is wrong, very very wrong.

I know a couple of such 'girls' who have half a dozen kids each. Their eldest are now having kids of their own - and all thanks to our wonderful benefits system.
They started life in the local council bedsits & quickly rose through the housing ranks to live in better accommodation than most of us here can dream of.
And now their unemployed offspring are following the same pattern.
 
I also think anyone on benefits should not have a vote, if they don't contribute then they shouldn't have a say in the way the country is run.

And they shouldn't be allowed to breed either.
If you have no work ethic, you shouldn't be allowed to pass this along.

I'm sick of working my butt off just so's a load of workshy breeders can have a comfy life.
Benefits should be there to HELP people through a bad time NOT provide them with a lifestyle. People capable of working should have to work for their benefits - then they might choose to get a better paid job - something they will never do as long as everything is found for them.
 
a lot of people on benefits do work but the benefits top up a crap wage, so why don't government force large employers to put the wage up so it don't need benefits to top it up?

why are people not moaning at the low paying companies who's staff can only afford to work there because you(s) as tax payers are paying the benefits to top up the wages they are not paying.


loads of people moan because they work hard for less than people on benefits get, so the governments answer is to lower benefits, wouldn't them people prefer it if their wages went up to more than the benefits? cutting benefits isn't going to make any low earning tax payer better off with this government.
 
I was once told by a JobCentre advisor that they only even push the people they think are capable of getting, and holding down a job. She said that in a lot of cases, they give the "customer" everything they want for fear of them losing their rag and beating the **** out of them.

The security guards they have are useless - they aren't really allowed to do anything (a friend of mine used to do it in Truro - he quit when a "customer" ripped a monitor off the mounting bracket and cracked him round the head with it. When he tried to pursue the matter, he was told there was nothing he could do and that he shouldn't have tried to diffuse the situation...by asking the chap what was wrong...)

Simple, all the people claiming benefits at that job centre pay for a full time policeman to be there, it would only be a pound or two from each individual.

Working gives you self respect, socialises you and of course you are contributing to society. Yes there are reasons you cannot work this is perfectly understandable but way too many people have it in their heads that society owes them which as we all know kids it f*cking does not!

3 women moaning in the local shop while dressed in their pyjamas (in the afternoon) about the fact they don't like any of the kitchen colour options the local council are given them FREE of charge/fitting at my expense...and I am ment to feel sorry for them as they buy 20cigs and a bottle while I am scrapping pennies together for something to eat at lunch break...that'll be shining bright!
 
a lot of people on benefits do work but the benefits top up a crap wage, so why don't government force large employers to put the wage up so it don't need benefits to top it up?

why are people not moaning at the low paying companies who's staff can only afford to work there because you(s) as tax payers are paying the benefits to top up the wages they are not paying.

I don't have a problem helping people out who are working and need a hand


loads of people moan because they work hard for less than people on benefits get, so the governments answer is to lower benefits, wouldn't them people prefer it if their wages went up to more than the benefits? cutting benefits isn't going to make any low earning tax payer better off with this government.

If wages went up as you say then we would all be out of work as the 'product' would be too expensive and no one would buy. This was something the Unions could not get a grasp of back in the '80s. (It's called inflation and that's not good)
 
The issue most people are angry about is the fraud that goes on, anyone with a ounce of decency does not have a problem with someone needing help after all life can take a turn for any of us without warning whether it be illness, injury or losing job etc.

The problem is determining those who really need help, like Dave (quite rightly said) a woman could be dumped with the kids and the guy wont help financially so yes this family needs help. The guy who wears crutches during the day but not at night in the pub (shopkeeper pointed an individual out to me a while back) needs put in jail...it's fraud! The 15 yr old that gets pregnant to get a house and 'is set for life' needs a wake up call by being forced to help the local community to keep the place clean for the benefit of everyone since the councils are cutting back local services. You want something from this country then you have to put something back in for everyone's benefit not just the selfish individual.

Some really tough decisions have to be made for the future of this country and the ones it should affect first are not the ones that work to pay for themselves and others!
 
I don't have a problem helping people out who are working and need a hand
but you don't want them to have a right to vote


If wages went up as you say then we would all be out of work as the 'product' would be too expensive and no one would buy. This was something the Unions could not get a grasp of back in the '80s. (It's called inflation and that's not good)

the product don't have to go up the people at the top just have to take a cut and business rates have to come down and that used to give people a liveable wage,
 
Back
Top