lazarus Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 So most of us feel that it is right to penalise once more those of us that live in the North? Nobody no matter what their circumstances should be better off on benefits than people who work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms Macbeth Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Isn't he the MP for Doncaster? When Nottingham was moved to somewhere North of Sheffield recently, was Doncaster moved to the Home Counties? (I googled 'Ed Milliband' to confim his constituency and the first response I got was: "Erectile Dysfunction (ED) - Get the Facts:" :hihi: Doncaster North to be exact, a long term labour stronghold. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doncaster_North_(UK_Parliament_constituency) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazarus Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Benefits should be capped at £8,000 per annum, and no more than 2 kids to be paid for by the state. I bet many people on the minimum wage would like have a wage cut of £35,000 (£26k after taxes), or £19.23 an hour based on a 35 hour week Well said, this should be a pop up. A family near me with four kids, she doesnt work, boyfriend doesnt work, they both smoke ordinary cigs plus canabis and they are forever buying cans of lager, the council house they have looks like a compleat dump, the outside is filthy and they receive a thousand pounds per month plus rent and council tax allowances. I work 39 hours per week and I dont take £1,000 a month home. Why should we the tax payers pay somebody to have kids, if they have more than two thats their problem and they should not get a penny more in benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Creant Posted January 28, 2012 Author Share Posted January 28, 2012 Why? Just because Labour are coming to their senses and realising their previous policies of handing out something for nothing has ruined the country? I assume you are one of the Old Labour supporters who vote for them on the basis of being given something for nothing. Now that Labour are abandoning that policy who can you vote for? Don't despair Labour's paymasters, the unions, will stop Minibrain from bringing Labour into a 21st century reality. They'll make sure Labour go back to their socialist roots and make themselves unelectable. Oh Jim Graham please do not assume anything about me. I have voted Tory since the first time that I could vote. That was just over thirty years ago, I certainly won't be changing any time soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Creant Posted January 28, 2012 Author Share Posted January 28, 2012 but it always has been right from its origins in the 11th century am not sure why this point is specifically linked to the proposed benefit cap or ed milliband in particular Because it is a public forum and because I can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERDREAM Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Well said, this should be a pop up. A family near me with four kids, she doesnt work, boyfriend doesnt work, they both smoke ordinary cigs plus canabis and they are forever buying cans of lager, the council house they have looks like a compleat dump, the outside is filthy and they receive a thousand pounds per month plus rent and council tax allowances. I work 39 hours per week and I dont take £1,000 a month home. Why should we the tax payers pay somebody to have kids, if they have more than two thats their problem and they should not get a penny more in benefits. Another spot on answer. How the hell can this go on? Its clear that there arent many jobs about, but there ARE jobs out there to be had. The problem is how much they pay per hour. A lot seem to think they are better off on the dole. Well the only answer to that is to REDUCE the benefits payments, then there is no problem. It will help bring down the defecit AND get people back to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cytine Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 When a working person has a baby they do not automatically get a pay rise to pay for it, so why should people on benefits? Why should anyone expect to be paid for having a baby anyway. Your baby, your responsibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANGELFIRE1 Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 What a great post. When I heard about this the other day, I could have screamed. It seems that the human rights brigade thinks that its wrong to expect families on benefits to move house because their reduced benefits wont cover the cost of their rents. Oh dear, what a shame. That has to be the biggest load of scrounging crap I have ever heard. If I was to lose my job tomorrow, I would have NO OPTION but to move out if I couldnt afford my rent/mortgage. What is the difference? The opposers say it will put more children into poverty if the benefits are capped at £26,000. My neighbor with two kids dosent earn that with his wage AND tax credits. Its no wonder this country is knackered and skint. If I were in charge of benefits, it would be enough to look after the kids, and a bare minimal payment to the adults, which might give them the push to go and look for a job, whether it pays 4 quid an hour or 10 quid an hour. We should all take responsibilities for our lives and work to earn money, not EXPECT it to be given free to able bodied people. Seems about right to me. Angel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blades89 Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Benefits should be capped at £8,000 per annum, and no more than 2 kids to be paid for by the state. I bet many people on the minimum wage would like have a wage cut of £35,000 (£26k after taxes), or £19.23 an hour based on a 35 hour week Sorry to requote myself but, A cap like the one I mentioned would stop the likes the Abu Quatada (or whatever he is called) and all the jihadi types in the UK in their tracks. Trying to survive on 8k per annum would prove almost impossible and mean he (and his terrorist friends and jihadi followers - who happen to live on handouts kindly supplied by the very people they hate) would have no choice but to find employment to try an keep his head above water. If you give certain people too much money, and too much unoccupied time then you have chaos. If I got 35k paid to be by the state (26k after tax) I could do all kinds of strange and wonderfull activities, I could start a dog farting orchestra, or spend my time training the mother in law how to correctly reverse into a car parking space. Too much money and too much time turns little timmy into a bad boy. Meanwhile, I about to go out in my car with a loud exhaust and zoom around the streets intimidating people - just got to wait for my mum to come down to give me my spending money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyofborg Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Do you honestly think that the more deprived areas of Sheffield are suddenly going to become better places to live, clean sparkly and shining, full of happy honest people when they are squeezed more and more? no i dont and i've never said i did Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.