Jump to content

The benefits class


Recommended Posts

Completely wrong.

I am now self employed as I could not get low paid unskilled work, no matter how I tried.

They took one look at my CV, weighed up my experience and qualifications, and I was given coffee and biscuits and out the door.

When you are a highly qualified engineering manager, who wants a career change to a labourer, they just do not believe you.

I was fed up with high pressure neverending stress and wanted to work in a low key job.

But when you are more qualified and experienced than the man running the department he is too frightened to employ you even as the tea boy.

 

I'm 61, and working. I had a management job (the last promotion at 56), but decided I wanted and needed a less pressured job. Since I quit last year I've been offered several part time, lower level jobs. I'm now working two of them. I matched my experience to the job requirements, and understated some of what I'd done - it seemed to work ok for me.

 

Now we have, in theory anyway, no age discrimination, I think there will be lots of people like me who carry on working after retirement age. For some of us its a financial need, for others its the feeling of being useful and keeping active. I disagree that there isn't work available for over 50s. I think in some ways its easier for people of our age to find work. Also, we can often take lower paid/part time work as our children may well be established in their own homes and careers and our houses may be nearly if not completely paid for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So bug infested rat holes wouldn't be where you'd put 'these people'. Precisely what would you do?

 

Do you need to ask? Just look up some of Bartfast's old posts? They usually involve the kind of Nazi ubermensch fantasies that sad men sitting in front of computers in nowt but their underpants in their parents' back bedroom dream up to be 'different'. ;)

 

Meanwhile in the real world real solutions are needed. There have always been a certain amount of people who will be hardcore cases and will use every excuse in the book NOT to work. In the past, they resorted to crime to live, when the welfare state came in they did not have to resort to crime, and that's one big reason why we opt to use that system in this country. We've moved on from Dickensian times, for the good.

 

The answer is to remove every possible excuse, however the problem is that as soon as we block off one escape route another appears. In the 80s/90s we had recession. Now we have the lack of housing due to the property boom, and polarisation of jobs into urban areas.

 

The state's job is not to penalise people for the circumstances in greater society which give them excuses, but to remove or alleviate those circumstances. Which is why we are now going to compel 16-19s to work or train, why we have anti-discrimination laws, and why Tax Credits have come in to encourage mums to work.

 

I'd far rather look for intelligent solutions than something that might have been dreamed up by an oaf grunting in a cave. I'd hope society has now advanced beyond the febrile fantasies of impotent fascists. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

m8 stright up and let god strike me down, she gets DLA for a skin rash. They are awarded £160 each per month + care allowence and clothing allowence and bedding as the cream they use marks things.

 

She even gets holiday money from DLA cos' she's taking them to Skegness on Friday for a week all paid for by the DLA @ tax payers expence.

 

I recon it's how you play the system rather then how bad your illness is.

 

Eric, you are in error, here.

 

The allowance that used to be given to people for things like excessive wear and tear on clothing/ bedding or to replace extra clothing needed for example because the subject is incontinent and needs changes of clothing/ clothing is damaged by creams etc/ worn out by rubbing on a wheelchair's wheels went out almost 20 years ago, when the benefit which was called "Supplementary Benefit" was replaced by the benefit called "Income Support".

 

You used to get 50p a week extra on your supplementary benefit if you needed extra baths over the week. There were some strange things that you could claim for.

 

re this woman getting a holiday, via DLA, it may well be that she has been able to be prudent enough to manage to put a little money away each month out of her allowance, and put it toward a holiday, but I can assure you that neither component of DLA, whether Care or Mobility is awarded for holidays.

 

The care component is awarded in order to pay for care; the mobility component is awarded to pay for a motability car, or wheelchair, or to enable other means of getting around, eg taxis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

could someone please pass me a tow rope,i think its time to end it all, billions of pounds being lost annually ,inter racial disharmony,soaring interest rates,global warming,air pollution ,the food we eat is killing us the food we DON'Tis killing us,the holidays we take are killing the earth.

theres no hope for any of us mass suiside appears to be the only answer:gag:

 

or maybe not as i've just been gifted 2 more beutiful grand son's,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So bug infested rat holes wouldn't be where you'd put 'these people'. Precisely what would you do?
If such places were sufficiently basic and comfortless to provide nothing more than shelter, heat and somewhere to eat and sleep, the scroungers would have more incentive to get out and work to provide for themselves.

 

I don't mind paying a 4-figure tax bill every month if the portion used by the welfare state is going to help people who genuinely need it, but it does gall me that so many claimants are either the professional work-shy or on the fiddle for cash jobs.

Half of the houses on our council estates should carry banners saying "kindly sponsored by the hard-working middle class taxpayer" to remind the spongers inside to get out and look for work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Child Benefit is an entitlement to all with children,
Indeed it is, but why should it be? Why should one person pay for another to have kids?

 

My parents, and those of their generation, planned for a family. They would save, do without luxuries, and plan for when they had the resources in place to settle down and have children.

 

They didn’t go around irresponsibly getting each other up the duff and expecting the taxpayer to foot the bill for their hordes of illegitimate, mal-adjusted tearaways. Our underclasses are growing because we encourage them to breed through our ridiculously lax and generous benefits system.

 

It is ridiculous that people who choose to have a family are given extra money for it through child benefit, family tax credits or whatever it’s called now. I choose to have fast bikes and cars – that’s my lifestyle choice. Maybe I should be entitled to vehicle credits?

 

We could learn a lot from the Chinese about reducing birth rates – they at least have taken sensible measures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed it is, but why should it be? Why should one person pay for another to have kids?

 

My parents, and those of their generation, planned for a family. They would save, do without luxuries, and plan for when they had the resources in place to settle down and have children.

 

They didn’t go around irresponsibly getting each other up the duff and expecting the taxpayer to foot the bill for their hordes of illegitimate, mal-adjusted tearaways. Our underclasses are growing because we encourage them to breed through our ridiculously lax and generous benefits system.

 

It is ridiculous that people who choose to have a family are given extra money for it through child benefit, family tax credits or whatever it’s called now. I choose to have fast bikes and cars – that’s my lifestyle choice. Maybe I should be entitled to vehicle credits?

 

We could learn a lot from the Chinese about reducing birth rates – they at least have taken sensible measures.

 

 

I cant agree with this post Dungbeetle, family tax credits are there to replace the money lost due to loss of a wage earner due to bringing up the children and child benefit is there for anyone who has children not a bad idea when you consider the possible future population problems due to couples decided not to have children etc plus the children brought up correctly will go into work and pay that money back through tax and national insurance and the cycle goes on. Those two benefits are ones I don't see a problem with to be honest we need couples to have children and that right should not just be mutually exclusive to the well off although I would go as far to say that maybe they ought to be based on NI contributions so as to stop the never have worked never will work mass producing feral children all of which will probably be a future burden on the state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.