Who pays for the pets

[Mecky]

Is this another have a go at people on benefits thread? Just remember anyone could find themselves in this unfortunate position.

 

That's about the size of it, gotta keep the pressure on you know, distract and influence public opinion and all that rubbish. Sometimes you know what people are going to say before they actually say it.

[El Cid]

There are lots of benefits for OAPs. Attendence Allowance, Carers Allowance, Guaranteed Pension Credit, Winter Fuel Allowance. Plus, they'd be in their late 80s and above now, if they fought in WW2. There is a generation of pensioners who didn't make that sacrifice.

 

The rent allowance must be the biggest drain on public finances. Anyone that is approaching old age should get rid of their house and start renting, give all your money away(just keep £5,000), to relatives or charities. And then you get free housing.

[Glamrocker]

Inane comments and always finishing with a worthless question. I've finally found something I agree with you about.

Those were not worthless questions ,just ones that get continually evaded,be careful with agreeing with me, god forbid you may get labelled as a Nazi you know there are some very paranoical posters on here

[janie48]

I'm genuinely interested in how animals can help peoples mental health and well being

In some areas of health care, assisted animal therapy has been recommended for its benefits.

Its especially good for the elderly. Some volunteers do regular visits with their dogs to Nursing homes for that purpose.

[Hillpig]

If we weren't so gullible and didn't throw taxpayers money about like confetti we would be able to support genuine claimants properly.

[rickiethecat]

The best solution would be to pay benefits in the form of food vouchers, as this would mean benefit claimants with pets would have the choice to keep their pet but would have to sometimes go hungry themselves to keep it fed. It might help them loose weight as well, seeing as so many people on benefits seem to be morbidly obese.

 

It'd also stop them blowing their dole money on booze, fags and gambling.

[Glamrocker]

It seems that if it were left to some, people on benefits should have no entertainment ,no holidays in short no life,lets open the workhouses again fire the treadmills up and grind the poor into the ground,it must be nice to be so perfect, I wonder when you are filling your tax returns in and exaggerate them a little do you hold a guilt complex ? the biggest leeches on society seem to be those with money not those without.....Denis McShane anybody

[bassy]

blimey why cant we just leave people alone! i expect most who are out of work are genuinely trying to get back into paid employment, and the 'scroungers' are making them all get tarred with the same brush, if people have a cat or dog then so what its no one elses responsibilty than theirs, a lot of people who are down on their luck have probably already lost quite a lot so who are we to tell them what they can and cannot own while they claim benefits, and id assume most had the pet before things took a turn for the worse, those of you saying just ged rid of the animal probably shouldnt have animals anyway as they are not to be just gotten rid of when it suits, they are a loving member of the family in most cases and should be taken on as a commitment even when times are bad........leave people alone

[peewee84]

No it isnt thats a stupid thing to say. Think like that and youll never work, and we know some people dont want to.

They dont mind having pets though. Strange that. In any case, if they "cant get a job" then get rid of the pets until they get one.

 

A question - where exactly do you think the pets will go when they "get rid"? To rescues right? Do you have any idea how many dogs get put down on a daily basis because rescue centres don't have the space for them all? And then people like me who have a full time, paid job run around in their spare time trying to save these poor creatures. Is there ANY thought whatsoever for the animals when you make flippant comments about "getting rid"? Why should the animals have to suffer and be taken out of their loving home because of a problem that humans have created? They didn't ask to be born and have done nothing wrong yet, as usual, they're always the ones to suffer first. I suggest you look further into the subject of animal welfare before you comment further on this thread.

 

 

And some of the attitudes on here go a long way to explaining why so many animals are ending up in rescues or being pts. When you take on an animal, it is for life. If times are tough, cut back on cigs and booze and junk food, don't just 'get rid' of an animal that has given you unconditional love since the day you brought it home.

 

As people have already mentioned, there are services available to people on low incomes to help with vet bills, and it doesn't need to cost a fortune to feed a pet (and feed it well).

 

Animals are not just a possession. They are living, breathing, sentient beings that deserve love and loyalty.

 

Like.

 

Pets are a luxury like children should be.

 

Hopefully children will live a little longer but its a long term commitment which costs thousands of pounds.

 

Dog food aint cheap.

 

Now if you want to go without to keep a pet then fine but if you have children & you can keep a pet then you either are not spending all you can on your kids or your getting too much money.

 

What if you have kids then lose your job? Do you take them to an orphanage? No. So don't expect people to do that to their pets either. Some people love their pets like children - in fact, I choose to have pets rather then kids - much more pleasant

[WeX]

I take that as a given. All right minded people would think that. I don't agree that most people do see benefits as a career, but we all know some people who do.

 

To take pets off all benefit claimants would be an awful thing to do.

 

I agree, plus when benefits have been squeezed even more, families will at least have something to roast come Christmas