The benefits class

[*_ash_*]

Another spot on post from Purdy

 

I also agreed with this post. I can see why the original point was misquoted, but basically, if people took responsibilty for themselves, and their prospective families, it wouldn't be necessary to post such things.

[cloudybay]

I fit into this class, but I still pay taxes, NI and my own mortgage. Not everyone without a job is a scrounger you know- some of us were clever enough to insure our incomes before we got ill.

 

You shouldn't be paying NI. NI is only payable on earned income.

[Ms Macbeth]

You shouldn't be paying NI. NI is only payable on earned income.

 

You can actually pay voluntary (class 3) NI contributions, around £7 per week I believe. For someone who doesn't earn, but doesn't sign on, these are an option.

[Rivelin6]

And where do you get £7.00 a week from, plus money for insurance, when you are expected to live on £40.00 per week?

[Mathom]

I'm not a fascist, I believe that when people are at the bottom of the barrel they should not be able to reproduce until they are are able to look after their chilldren properly. That's simply being responsible. And it is only while they are claiming benefits - please stop trying to make me out to be some Nazi, it's a fact that the people at the bottom are the ones most likely to have babies they are in no posution to care for. And once they are in that trap they are least likely to get out again.

 

If people think taxpayers' money should be doled out with conditions, the primary condition should be that they sort themselves out before starting a family, or making the existing family bigger.

 

It shouldn't be any surprise at all that I believe in making contraception a condition for receiving benefits. I believe in reproductive responsibility - my commitment to stamping out child neglect, cruelty and abuse is absolute, but the accepted credo is that every human has the right to breed, even if they are incapable of looking after the children they produce. If their circumstances are so serious that they rely on benefits, they shouldn't be indulging in producing children at that moment in time. I think that's only sensible and fair.

 

I notice on the thread Nick2 referred to someone wanting to sterilise people. I can't see anyone suggesting that, and if he meant me in referrence to my post mentioning contraception, I would like an apology as it is a gross misrepresentation of what I said. He might not agree with what I said, but at least have the decency to disagree with what I said, not some distorted misquote of it.

 

Sorry but that IS fascistic. You are wanting to deny a basic human right to people who you do not know anything about with no regard to their personal circumstances.

 

You want to deny a human right to the following:

Disabled people

Uneducated people

Victims of economic circumstance

 

If someone loses their job tomorrow through no fault of their own why should they be denied a human right? That people who laud the BNP and NF agree with this idea should give you an idea of just how wrong it is.

 

What about women who cannot take contraception? It isn't like taking a paracetamol or munching a bag of sweeties you know, it can screw up someone's health! Why should we force people like Catholics to go against their religion?

 

we know its not an ideal situation for people on benefits to have kids but this is not the way a modern, civilised society should or would deal with it. 'Undesirables' have been having children for millennnia and will continue to do so. My own father was born to parents who were out of work. Just because they were poor (oh what a crime!) did not mean they did not know how to care for him - it's disgusting that people equate poverty with child cruelty and shows us up for being not mere snobs but bigots.

 

What would you like to see? The police dragging hapless, poorly educated women to abortion clinics to have their unborn children ripped from them for refusing to fill their bodies with chemicals? Doctors doing midnight raids on women and strapping them down to shove needles in their arms? Families facing starvation or a life of crime to feed the hungry mouths they have produced?

[JoeP]

Sorry but that IS fascistic. You are wanting to deny a basic human right to people who you do not know anything about with no regard to their personal circumstances.

 

You want to deny a human right to the following:

Disabled people

Uneducated people

Victims of economic circumstance

 

If someone loses their job tomorrow through no fault of their own why should they be denied a human right?

 

Actually, many people strive to be responsible parents and deny themselves that 'human right' to have children because they cannot afford to care for them adequately. It's a shame - because they're probably the folks who'd make excellent parents with such a responsible attitude.

 

I've been self-employed for the vast majority of my working life. That means that if I can't find work, I can't claim that I'm unemployed, so can't claim much in terms of benefits. That's cool - I chose my lifestyle. the last time I claimed benefit was 25+ years ago, and that was to pay my mum rent between University and 'real life'.

 

However, when I am between gigs I go down on to subsistence level living - belts get pulled in and I cut my cloth to suit my circumstances. I'm not asking more of anyone else than I ask of myself. If you're out of work, and on benefits or relying on the state, YOUR part of the deal is to do what you can to help yourself out. That means, unfortunately, that if you're not expecting a child you may want to consider how you're going to afford it.

 

It's self discipline, rather than fascism.

 

Many people do self-regulate these things - they're responsible members of society, the offspring of whom we could do with. Some of those who DON'T self-regulate are basically just adding more of their own selfish progeny to the community.

[Mathom]

I agree Joe, you should think responsibly! It is not ideal at all to bring children into the world if you can't afford them. I don't think anyone would disagree that it's not an ideal.

 

However, I totally and utterly disagree with the State exercising legal control over people's individual reproductive systems! It's one of the marks of Totalitarianism and it's a despicable idea.

[Halibut]

I agree with Mathom's view. Purdyamos's assertion ''that when people are at the bottom of the barrel they should not be able to reproduce until they are are able to look after their chilldren properly.'' is an outrageously fascistic view, built on very poor reasoning.

 

Firstly it appears to equate a persons parenting ability to be directly related to their capacity to earn money, which is errant nonsense. Income affects a parent's ability to provide materially for a child, but to suggest that it somehow affects a parents capacity to love, nurture and guide a childs developement is frankly, stupid.

 

Secondly, the claim in support of this that ''people at the bottom are the ones most likely to have babies they are in no posution to care for.'' completely ignores the fact that poor parenting/child abuse is no respecter of social class or earning capacity and even if it were true, would be a ridiculously blunt instrument by which to judge someone's fitness to be a parent.

 

Thirdly, as a man who loves a woman who raised her child on benefits for many years I find it grossly insulting. That mother is a very caring, loving mother who devoted herself utterly selflessly to her child for years and did so on a very low income. Her child - her beautiful, clever, caring, inquisitive and

loving son - wouldn't have been born by Purdy's twisted way of thinking.

 

Your devotion to abolishing child cruelty is a laudable one Purdyamos, but your thinking here is deeply, deeply flawed.

Mathom's right - it is a fascistic point of view. You know nothing about my sweetheart, nothing about Mathom's parents, nothing about the many responsible and caring parents who survive on benefits and yet you're quite prepared to deny them the right to have children, based on your own prejudice and narrow mindedness.

 

I note your horror, Purdyamos when someone mentions forced serilisation. Frankly, I think your notion isn't a million miles away and is based on a dangerously similar line of thought.

Do you extend your view to encompass those who suffer mental illness being barred from breeding? Those who've ever been found guilty of a crime?

People with low IQ?

Don't be surprised Purdyamos if people describe your ideas as fascistic when they're so closely aligned to a fascistic worldview.

[grafikhaus74]

Whew! Having sat and read every post on this thread, a few things occur to me.

 

1) Divide and rule. They (the political class) have got us all bickering away between each other. Nothing ever changes. Last night I watched the excellent Andrew Marr prog. about The Building of Britain. After the miseries of WW2 when the British people were on the floor, how were they rewarded? With foul, inedible fish from South Africa called snoek which even a cat wouldn't eat. But hey! Let's cheer them all up in 1948 by staging an exhibition! See any similarities? The Dome springs to mind. I think it was the Romans who said "Give them bread and circuses." Nowadays it's Tax Credits and Big Brother.

 

2) It seems to me to be part of an on-going myth that any criticism of systems/society provokes the usual "Nazi/BNP/Daily Mail" stuff. Now I'm totally non-poitical (I've learnt to hate all of 'em), but it does seem to me that the people who bandy these terms around conveniently forget that many of the ills of our current systems/society stem directly from the other end of the political spectrum. The luvvie/bien pensant Guardianistas have moulded the way we are today and continue to do so.

 

So what's the solution? There simply ain't one. This country is finished. Taxi!

[mr contrite]

Hang on, your neighbours are paying rent of over £1200 a month????

 

Do you live in Mayfair?! You can rent a brand new penthouse apartment in Sheffield for around £700 a month or a rambling house in Dore or the Peaks for about £900!

 

I think they are winding you up

 

 

On the open market the 3 bedroom house next to me would command a sale price of approx J250,000 and a rent of approx J900 a month, but as its rented through a housing assosciation, the rental they can demand is significantly higher.