Won't somebody please think of the children?

[Zamo]

In reality a very small proportion of tax revenue is spent on the things you are so worked up about.

 

Far more tax is wasted on other things.

 

Not really, welfare is the biggest spend after pensions an the NHS. And let's not forget the indirect benefits these people receive because the tax-payer is also having to make up for their lack of contribution by paying their share of the cost of having a state pension, the NHS, defence, the education system, emergency services, local government, national debt repayment, overseas aid etc, etc.

 

I believe in a welfare system that provides a safety net but there are people taking the Michael using it as a hammock. Those people need kicking out of the hammock and allowed to hit rock bottom. Once there, they should find the motivation needed to start taking some personal responsibility for themselves.

[RichSiddall]

Lets introduce a contraceptive into the drinking water, couples who are working are given a counter to it thus allowing them to breed, a child per bracket of income.

Scroungers who have no intention of ever working will never breed and will have none of their work shy genes passed on. They may at a later date be executed as they contribute nothing to the state. We can put the current offspring into camp/orphanages where childless working couples who contribute to the state can choose some for adoption. Mass sterilisation could be an option along with work camps.

[Zamo]

Lets introduce a contraceptive into the drinking water, couples who are working are given a counter to it thus allowing them to breed, a child per bracket of income.

Scroungers who have no intention of ever working will never breed and will have none of their work shy genes passed on. They may at a later date be executed as they contribute nothing to the state. We can put the current offspring into camp/orphanages where childless working couples who contribute to the state can choose some for adoption. Mass sterilisation could be an option along with work camps.

 

Don't need to do any of that. Just replace the welfare hammock with a welfare safety net and people will start taking responsibility. What would your objection to that be?

[RichSiddall]

Don't need to do any of that. Just replace the welfare hammock with a welfare safety net and people will start taking responsibility. What would your objection to that be?

 

I'd have no objection at all. But this thread is more about bashing people that our government has demonised, any tyrannical government will do that, they'll create a sub class that the masses can get inflamed about.

[ivanava]

I'd have no objection at all. But this thread is more about bashing people that our government has demonised, any tyrannical government will do that, they'll create a sub class that the masses can get inflamed about.

 

I would disagree with that on the grounds that politicians and governments tend to be influenced by public opinion, rather than the public being influenced by their opinions.

[Zamo]

I'd have no objection at all. But this thread is more about bashing people that our government has demonised, any tyrannical government will do that, they'll create a sub class that the masses can get inflamed about.

 

The sub-class you refer to is not the victim of a tyrannical government but the product of an over-generous society that has allowed people to become dependant. We have excused people of personal responsibility by removing the consequences associated with irresponsibility and by replacing the sense of stigma (associated with not being self-sufficient) with a sense of 'right' to be supported.

 

We need to stop blaming ourselves (or our government) for people who contribute nothing and instead hand them back some responsibility by letting them feel the consequences more.

[Bonzo77]

Maybe all children from these families should receive private education with the hope that being well educated will give them the chance to improve their lives and break the cycle they were born into

 

Your idea is far too liberal and sensible to be taken seriously!

 

---------- Post added 06-05-2014 at 12:15 ----------

 

Not really, welfare is the biggest spend after pensions an the NHS. And let's not forget the indirect benefits these people receive because the tax-payer is also having to make up for their lack of contribution by paying their share of the cost of having a state pension, the NHS, defence, the education system, emergency services, local government, national debt repayment, overseas aid etc, etc.

 

I believe in a welfare system that provides a safety net but there are people taking the Michael using it as a hammock. Those people need kicking out of the hammock and allowed to hit rock bottom. Once there, they should find the motivation needed to start taking some personal responsibility for themselves.

 

Just because the welfare system is one of the biggest bills, doesn't mean that it's all down to scroungers.

 

Yes, the system is abused and it could do with a bit of an overhaul, but I don't think that a large proportion on the money is being claimed fraudulently. Granted, it's hard to get exact figures.....but I bet it's lower than people think.

[Cyclone]

Don't need to do any of that. Just replace the welfare hammock with a welfare safety net and people will start taking responsibility. What would your objection to that be?

 

Just how comfortable is life in the welfare hammock then?

 

---------- Post added 06-05-2014 at 12:26 ----------

 

I would disagree with that on the grounds that politicians and governments tend to be influenced by public opinion, rather than the public being influenced by their opinions.

 

Hahahaha, breath, hahahhaha.

 

---------- Post added 06-05-2014 at 12:27 ----------

 

Not really, welfare is the biggest spend after pensions an the NHS.

 

And have you ever looked at how the welfare cost breaks down?

[I1L2T3]

Not really, welfare is the biggest spend after pensions an the NHS. And let's not forget the indirect benefits these people receive because the tax-payer is also having to make up for their lack of contribution by paying their share of the cost of having a state pension, the NHS, defence, the education system, emergency services, local government, national debt repayment, overseas aid etc, etc.

 

I believe in a welfare system that provides a safety net but there are people taking the Michael using it as a hammock. Those people need kicking out of the hammock and allowed to hit rock bottom. Once there, they should find the motivation needed to start taking some personal responsibility for themselves.

 

Whoa, you missed the point entirely from your first sentence. This debate is not about welfare in general but about the idea that a big proportion of tax revenue is spent on benefit scrounging parents. It isn't.

[Zamo]

Whoa, you missed the point entirely from your first sentence. This debate is not about welfare in general but about the idea that a big proportion of tax revenue is spent on benefit scrounging parents. It isn't.

 

I'm afraid you are the one missing the point. The point is that the cost of benefit scrounging parents is far more than just what they directly take out of the welfare budget. Their lifestyle choose mean they also contribute nothing towards education, the NHS, law and order, local authority services, repaying debt, defence etc, etc. If the welfare system returned to it original intention of being a safety net then people would be forced to behave more responsibly (which includes not having kids you can't afford) and we would see reduced burden and more contribution across many different budgets.