Mecky Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Maybe you could expand a little further? Seriously .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnailyBoy Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Picking on unemployed again Seriously .. Yep........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discodown Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 The Mail is wrong. This legislation is still going through Parliament. The way its going to work is that families where nobody works will be limited to a maximum of £500 per week of benefit. Starting with cash benefit which then stops when you reach the limit. So if you get Income support and child benefit and tax credits and that reaches £500 you won't get housing benefit or council tax benefit, you'll have to pay your rent and council tax out of your £500 like everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 The Mail is wrong. This legislation is still going through Parliament. But there are going to be further exemptions, in addition to the ones already planned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hardie Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Yes but do you know that under Dave Cameron's current reform plans claiming benefits will be like getting blood out a stone. And so it should be. Where's the incentive to work? Too many people knocking out a few kids as a passport to idleness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hardie Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 That wasn't what I wanted explaining, Could you explain why benefits not being cut to £26000 would please Daily Mail readers? I quote 'Tory ministers are to backtrack on their pledge to cap state welfare hand-outs at £26,000 a year. The retreat, which is a sop to Lib Dems, will overturn a promise that no household on benefits should be given more than the average family earns' Not good enough. It should be 75% max. Otherwise where is the incentive to work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastbank Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 i would pay them £240 a week for a family no matter how many kids they had....out of that they would have to pay rent/council tax/utilitie bills and feed/clothes the kids..... not a penny more....just like our parents had to do back in the day.....and they were working Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppins Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 Three children would be £2,200 a year then. I suspect it's only people living in London who get anywhere near those sort of amounts. The alternative to paying them, would be to force people on benefits to move out of London to somewhere with lower rental costs... Bit off topic but is England the only country that pays people when they have children, or is it just in some certain circumstances they get money ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandad.Malky Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 Do you see?! I see that you are destined to a lifetime on benefits so why keep going on about it, what you are saying is its not worth you doing paid work even if you could (No offence) , to me that is no different to someone with a brood saying its not worth me doing a minimum wage job. PS Not all Mail readers are Tory voters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treatment Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 It's comforting to know that we can still afford to fire Cruise missiles at Libya though, only 1 million a pop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.