Taxpayer support

[Flanker7]

If the Tories are so concerned with the large numbers 'problem', their concern will stem from figures, not "my mate int pub told me" Those figures will be available of course..I stand to be corrected but cyclone asked you to supply those figures. 'Spin' doesn't need figures, it relies on stupidity and unquestionable gullibility.

 

* my bold. Not relevant to this discussion but IMO worth it for clarity.

 

Spin is the interpretation of figures and many other things. Like the classic:-

 

A cup 50% full is also 50% empty whichever way you spin it.

[cassity]

I of course do not have the figures. How could I? - I have said this all along I talk from my own experience. Perhaps I am the bloke in the pub. I do like going to pubs. I listen to spin from both sides, observe the evidence with my own eyes and ears and come to my own conclusions. I am of course happy to share them on SF.

Just cause I cant prove them, doesn't make them untrue.

 

So what exactly have the Tories wasted spent money on regarding the "problem"? and what was the result of that spending? If the result of that spending is zero then what else are the Tories wasting taxpayers money on? Rather ironic don't you think?

 

You keep saying you have no figures (because there are no figures) but insist that the figures are large.

You keep saying 'bloke dahn pub' with his and your experience is evidence that large numbers are on the take, which isn't evidence but anecdotal.

 

The evidence and knowledge in the increase of obesity for instance isn't garnered from 2 blokes chatting in a pub, but from data...not spin, spin is a tool for manipulation amongst other things, and comes in real handy when you have SFA..

[RonJeremy]

So what exactly have the Tories wasted spent money on regarding the "problem"? and what was the result of that spending? If the result of that spending is zero then what else are the Tories wasting taxpayers money on? Rather ironic don't you think?

 

You keep saying you have no figures (because there are no figures) but insist that the figures are large.

You keep saying 'bloke dahn pub' with his and your experience is evidence that large numbers are on the take, which isn't evidence but anecdotal.

 

The evidence and knowledge in the increase of obesity for instance isn't garnered from 2 blokes chatting in a pub, but from data...not spin, spin is a tool for manipulation amongst other things, and comes in real handy when you have SFA..

 

NO I don't.

[cassity]

NO I don't.

 

Ok, for the sake of brevity we'll accept to agree that was a croc if it makes you happy..

 

So what is it you are actually saying which supports you theory on large numbers on the take? Just run it by us again would you..preferably concise please.

[El Cid]

Why help single parents and not couples?

 

Single parents do get more help, because help is needed when a relationship breaks down, and parents dont have support from the other parent.

Some think that they get too much help, but most single people go on to form a relationship.

I personally think more benefits should be tapered, benefits should not carry on, year after year, without a good reason.

I also think that the CSA should be reformed to make ascent parents pay for their offspring.

A relative of mine, living in London, is pregnant with her third child. The father lives separately, and has six children of his own.

[999tigger]

Single parents do get more help, because help is needed when a relationship breaks down, and parents dont have support from the other parent.

Some think that they get too much help, but most single people go on to form a relationship.

I personally think more benefits should be tapered, benefits should not carry on, year after year, without a good reason.

I also think that the CSA should be reformed to make ascent parents pay for their offspring.

A relative of mine, living in London, is pregnant with her third child. The father lives separately, and has six children of his own.

 

Sorry El cid this is about WTC and reform of the system as part of a conversatuion I was having, so you are slightly out of context. The context was why help single parent and not couples if they are both on the same income? Thats different from saying why not give single parents a bit of extra help. They currently get the single parents supplement.

 

Benefits are already tapered.

 

There is a difference between working tax credits and child tax credits.

[RonJeremy]

In case you don't have a back button Cassity - here you go...

 

 

What kind of a social security system allows this to happen?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3269511/Britain-s-Shameless-mother-twelve-rakes-40-000-year-benefits-reveals-spent-1-300-gifts-son-s-sixth-birthday-tells-taxpayers-ve-got-opinion-stuffed.html

 

I don't blame the woman for scrounging every penny she can, but this kind of lifestyle should not be possible at the expense of hardworking taxpayers.

[Mister M]

* my bold. Not relevant to this discussion but IMO worth it for clarity.

 

Spin is the interpretation of figures and many other things. Like the classic:-

 

A cup 50% full is also 50% empty whichever way you spin it.

 

Whether a cup is 50% full or empty is irrelevant, not least as it's not politically charged, and isn't being trailed as a justification for huge social security cuts.

 

Stop going on about the "3 generations of family that have never worked" because it's irrelevant. There probably either aren't any or are maybe less than 10. But there will be thousands of "3 generations of family that have barely worked". And that is far more relevant.

 

Moving the goalposts HH?

[RonJeremy]

 

Moving the goalposts HH?

 

Not really. It's the same net effect.

 

Grandma- never worked

mum - never worked

daughter - tried work for a week, didn't like getting up early. Hasn't worked since.

Doesn't count as 3 generations who have NEVER worked, but in effect they are a family of serial spongers off the taxpayer. And for all intents and purposes are a 3 generational problem who see benefits as a way of life.

[999tigger]

Not really. It's the same net effect.

 

Grandma- never worked

mum - never worked

daughter - tried work for a week, didn't like getting up early. Hasn't worked since.

Doesn't count as 3 generations who have NEVER worked, but in effect they are a family of serial spongers off the taxpayer. And for all intents and purposes are a 3 generational problem who see benefits as a way of life.

 

People keep changing what the issue is and fail to make it clear, hence its annoying. My tutor would take you to task and tell you to pick to which horse you are riding and stick to it. You need to be clear about the point you are making. I cna see at least three conversations that you are having Ron.