Anna B Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 maybe they should get a better paid job What an insensitive thing to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 Why are you so pathetic? What's with the personal abuse? The man has a point and a right to express it. Affordable housing is an issue for the working, as well as the unemployed. To resort to abuse shows a lack of ability to express yourself and a lack of a cogent argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackLakeland Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 I think that's a totally false test. People need to get off their arses and look for work. There are far too many in people in Britain who do nothing and rely on on the state to provide. There are also far too many people who think this is how it should be! I've done many poorly paid jobs in my life but each one has contributed in some way in my being able to get the next better job. Employers would much sooner see someone with experience of employment even if its the most menial than someone who has no experience. I feel sorry for the youth of Britain mainly because many of them believe that the state has the responsibility to provide for them and they are supported in this view by far too many people. Very few people are now brought up with a strong worth ethic. Okay I understand. A link to a jobs site that shows plenty of applicants for jobs is misleading... What about someone who's been in the army from 16 to 24 returns home and has no family to live with. Should they get housing benefit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackLakeland Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 It seems more than a little unfair to me, either everyone should be entitled to housing benefits or no one should be entitled, I'd go with everyone that has worked and no one that hasn't worked, but I’d limit it to six months and after that it would be a bed and food in return for work. What would you do with those that haven't worked. Bearing in mind the cuts are to save money. What should we do with their children? What if they are elderly? The scheme will not work, its just a sound bite.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 What's with the personal abuse? The man has a point and a right to express it. Affordable housing is an issue for the working, as well as the unemployed. To resort to abuse shows a lack of ability to express yourself and a lack of a cogent argument. What comes around goes around ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teddybare Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 What comes around goes around ... Handbags at ten paces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dory Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 The way I see it is no job=no money=no food= no house=DEATH. You've got to be having us on surely, Do you seriously believe that people without a job should die? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badlittlepup Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 Personally I think it's a terrible idea to get rid of housing benefit for under 25s, for all the reasons about vulnerable people being made homeless etc. But even if you don't care about 18-25 year olds being made homeless, two points; a) Because if you only get it when you're under 25 if you have kids more people are going to have kids for benefits. b) Is it really going to be pleasant in our towns and cities if we have a massive upturn in 18-25 year olds sleeping rough in them, which there will be. Personally I was proud to live in a country where nobody would be left on the streets destitute and thought it was part of what made us civilised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 What would you do with those that haven't worked. Bearing in mind the cuts are to save money. What should we do with their children? What if they are elderly? The scheme will not work, its just a sound bite.. I would expect someone that is elderly to have worked and paid into the system, someone who thinks having a child is the way to getting an free house and free money would have a shock and be expected to work for their benefits. Alternatively they could get a job, find an affordable house and then have a child when they can afford it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 But they dont get thrown out onto the streets do they!! Those who are genuinely homeless get sorted out. We have organisations, laws, rules and regulations in this country which would put those in need in hostel, B&B and/or interim accommodation. However, if it does become apparent that someone is living on housing benefits when they COULD be accommodated and supported by their parents/guardian/relatives but CHOOSES not to - why should the taxpayer have to fork out for accommodation if they cannot afford it themselves. I never ever understand why those who are fit and healthy for work should be owed accommodation by the state. Interim benefits are just that - allocated for an interim period. Nothing else. Nobody fit and able to work should be living on state funds be it benefits and/or a roof over their heads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.