Working full-time, fined by government for going on holiday!

[Sidonica]

I'm in the same position as you, you obviously think benefits claimant deserve everything they get despite not knowing their circumstance, and I think they get too much despite not knowing their full circumstances. Why do you think you are in a position to claim that benefits aren't too high and that I am wrong?

 

I'll answer that in the same way as you did - I have NEVER claimed that benefits aren't too high, please re-read my posts.

 

Please do not assume that you know what I think either.

[sutty27]

I'll answer that in the same way as you did - I have NEVER claimed that benefits aren't too high, please re-read my posts.

 

Please do not assume that you know what I think either.

 

That's good then, if you are not claiming that I am wrong we can leave it at that.

[Sidonica]

That's good then, if you are not claiming that I am wrong we can leave it at that.

 

Actually I am claiming you're wrong, you just don't have a clue do you?

I think we can leave it though Sutty, Sweep and Soo have gone to bed and I think it's past your bedtime too.

[sutty27]

Actually I am claiming you're wrong,

 

You really need to make you mind up, if you are claiming that I am wrong then this statement can't be true.

 

I'll answer that in the same way as you did - I have NEVER claimed that benefits aren't too high, please re-read my posts.

 

Please do not assume that you know what I think either.

 

For you to believe that I am wrong you must believe that benefits aren't too high.

[Cyclone]

I would ask.

 

When someone on benefits is splashing the cash questions need to be asked about where that cash came from, and if necessary evidence provided.

 

 

No it was a means of belittling someone that put an argument across that you couldn't counter.

 

So you now want the right to track their movements and to investigate how they pay for things.

 

All entirely proportionate to the aim of making sure that they never have a tenner to put aside.

 

You're not just benefits bashing at all.

[Mister M]

You really need to make you mind up, if you are claiming that I am wrong then this statement can't be true.

 

 

 

For you to believe that I am wrong you must believe that benefits aren't too high.

 

My own experience of being in receipt of benefits (which was a little under 20 years ago) is that I couldn't manage.

Having said that I wasn't in paid employment, like the woman in question is.

There are many problems with Universal Credit, however the theory behind it, that someone in work shouldn't be financially worse off than someone out of work (all other things being equal), is generally sound.

[sutty27]

So you now want the right to track their movements

 

Where do you get these bizarre ideas from, you have a very vivid imagination.

 

---------- Post added 26-04-2016 at 21:48 ----------

 

My own experience of being in receipt of benefits (which was a little under 20 years ago) is that I couldn't manage.

Having said that I wasn't in paid employment, like the woman in question is.

There are many problems with Universal Credit, however the theory behind it, that someone in work shouldn't be financially worse off than someone out of work (all other things being equal), is generally sound.

 

What kind of things did you have to give up because I see claimants smoking, boozing, taking holidays, using expensive mobile phones.

Edited April 26, 2016 by sutty27

[Mister M]

Where do you get these bizarre ideas from, you have a very vivid imagination.

 

---------- Post added 26-04-2016 at 21:48 ----------

 

 

What kind of things did you have to give up because I see claimants smoking, boozing, taking holidays, using expensive mobile phones.

 

I went without lots of things that would've made my life reasonably pleasant; and I don't have expensive tastes.

And, as others have pointed out, people's circumstances and benefits are different.

[sutty27]

I went without lots of things that would've made my life reasonably pleasant; and I don't have expensive tastes.

And, as others have pointed out, people's circumstances and benefits are different.

 

Benefits shouldn't be there to make your life pleasant, they should be a means to get by until you can make your own life more pleasant by working, the only exception being the severely disabled that can't work.

[Mister M]

Benefits shouldn't be there to make your life pleasant, they should be a means to get by until you can make your own life more pleasant by working, the only exception being the severely disabled that can't work.

 

Whether or not for the time that someone is in receipt of benefits should be pleasant or not is a matter of opinion. As I said, I couldn't manage. Incidentally I was working, I wasn't in paid employment at the time.

 

---------- Post added 26-04-2016 at 22:05 ----------

 

Where do you get these bizarre ideas from, you have a very vivid imagination.

 

---------- Post added 26-04-2016 at 21:48 ----------

 

 

What kind of things did you have to give up because I see claimants smoking, boozing, taking holidays, using expensive mobile phones.

 

Do you tell the people who you see using expensive mobile phones that they shouldn't have them? Perhaps they were a gift from someone else.