FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > benefits
benefits
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I'm going to offend the virtue-signalling regulars again here, but essentially, if you're on Jobseekers for a significant period of time and are able bodied, then yes, you are lazy.
Supermarkets employ people with down syndrome, so I don't buy for one second that you "can't find a job" - What I translate it to is, "I'll only take a job that I'm in no way qualified to do." |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
To be fair I live in a place once where there was simply not enough jobs to go around even if everyone wanted to work. The towns industry had dried up and died. I remember reading in the local press how there were over 100 applicants for one bar job. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I'm going to offend the virtue-signalling regulars again here, but essentially, if you're on Jobseekers for a significant period of time and are able bodied, then yes, you are lazy.
Supermarkets employ people with down syndrome, so I don't buy for one second that you "can't find a job" - What I translate it to is, "I'll only take a job that I'm in no way qualified to do." "
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm on benefits and I'm not lazy, run a home, look after 2 kids and just finished a 3 year college course, ready for me to get back into work. "
Why justify yourself? You know your not, if someone on a sex site thinks people in your position are : really? Why care? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm on benefits and I'm not lazy, run a home, look after 2 kids and just finished a 3 year college course, ready for me to get back into work.
Why justify yourself? You know your not, if someone on a sex site thinks people in your position are : really? Why care?"
I don't really care, just answering a question  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"People on benefits lazy?
Are you seriously asking this? My guess is you've purposely picked a this to create controversy and some attention. "
I very much doubt it...click on his green arrow and you will see a spate of not very interesting threads that have gone before this one  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"People on benefits lazy?"
Some are, I'm sure but people who work can be lazy too - my family motto is:-
et fac sicut minimum credula postero
Which loosely translates to "do as little as possible, and do it tomorrow". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I'm on benefits and I'm not lazy, run a home, look after 2 kids and just finished a 3 year college course, ready for me to get back into work.
Why justify yourself? You know your not, if someone on a sex site thinks people in your position are : really? Why care?
I don't really care, just answering a question "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"People on benefits lazy?
Are you seriously asking this? My guess is you've purposely picked a this to create controversy and some attention.
Bored on a Sunday and seeking attention?!! Nah!!!"
lol I'm off 2 work now actually |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"People on benefits lazy?
Are you seriously asking this? My guess is you've purposely picked a this to create controversy and some attention. "
Its hard to generalise but too many in this country dont want to do jobs that are deemed demeaning, I fully support giving benefits to those that get made redundant etc but they should take the first job they are offered regardless how hard or dirty it is,if they dont then benefits stop,all the immigrants many complain about dont seem to mind doing them,the money saved could then be spent in deprived areas to create jobs. Also disability benefit is a huge drain, many that claim that could be doing jobs, I am sure we all know people that have major disabilities yet work if some can why not all |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm going to offend the virtue-signalling regulars again here, but essentially, if you're on Jobseekers for a significant period of time and are able bodied, then yes, you are lazy.
Supermarkets employ people with down syndrome, so I don't buy for one second that you "can't find a job" - What I translate it to is, "I'll only take a job that I'm in no way qualified to do." "
but not every person with Downs syndrome is capable of working.... some are.. most arent.. but the new bloody pip assessments are damned hard to get through.. not to mention distressing...
Some people have no choice.. do you know how many carers would like to be in work... but cant because there is simply no help for them.. and as they only pay carers just over 60quid a week for 36 hours or more... normally 24/7 care.. they are in no rush to get them to work.... as it costs over 450pw to put the people cared for into suitable accommodation...
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have."
what about those that had a bloody good job.. kids they could afford and suddenly due to no fault of their own left unable to work... ???
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
There are loads of lazy people in and out of work. I know people drawing £30k salaries who do about six hours work a week and spend the rest looking busy. I know people on long term unemployment benefit driven close to nervous breakdowns because nobody will employ them.
There isn't one single answer. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have. what about those that had a bloody good job.. kids they could afford and suddenly due to no fault of their own left unable to work... ???
"
They could have it as they can support them, but it is irresponsible to have kids when you cant afford them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"People on benefits lazy?
Are you seriously asking this? My guess is you've purposely picked a this to create controversy and some attention.
I very much doubt it...click on his green arrow and you will see a spate of not very interesting threads that have gone before this one "
Ahh.........  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm on benefits and I'm not lazy, run a home, look after 2 kids and just finished a 3 year college course, ready for me to get back into work.
Why justify yourself? You know your not, if someone on a sex site thinks people in your position are : really? Why care?
I don't really care, just answering a question "
Great lips.... No truly fantastic lips... quite distracting
Right; what are we talking about? Oh thats right....
Vilifying another random group on fab, who is it this time? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have. what about those that had a bloody good job.. kids they could afford and suddenly due to no fault of their own left unable to work... ???
They could have it as they can support them, but it is irresponsible to have kids when you cant afford them."
I agree that its irresponsible to have children if you can't afford to keep them. How do you propose we stop this Shag? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm going to offend the virtue-signalling regulars again here, but essentially, if you're on Jobseekers for a significant period of time and are able bodied, then yes, you are lazy.
Supermarkets employ people with down syndrome, so I don't buy for one second that you "can't find a job" - What I translate it to is, "I'll only take a job that I'm in no way qualified to do." but not every person with Downs syndrome is capable of working.... some are.. most arent.. but the new bloody pip assessments are damned hard to get through.. not to mention distressing...
Some people have no choice.. do you know how many carers would like to be in work... but cant because there is simply no help for them.. and as they only pay carers just over 60quid a week for 36 hours or more... normally 24/7 care.. they are in no rush to get them to work.... as it costs over 450pw to put the people cared for into suitable accommodation...
"
I don't count carers in to the group I was criticising. As far as I'm concerned, being a carer is a job and should be paid as such. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have. what about those that had a bloody good job.. kids they could afford and suddenly due to no fault of their own left unable to work... ???
They could have it as they can support them, but it is irresponsible to have kids when you cant afford them."
So suddenly one of the parents is tragically struck down with something and passes away and the remaining parent has to not work... what then.
The new caps on benefits are plunging thousands of children into poverty... the caps supposedly to stop people having massive houses and big tvs but the reality its making people homeless... and struggle to even cope.. most people would love to go back to work... but simply its not as easy as that..
At least this time the cap has made allowances for those caring for people. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have. what about those that had a bloody good job.. kids they could afford and suddenly due to no fault of their own left unable to work... ???
They could have it as they can support them, but it is irresponsible to have kids when you cant afford them.
I agree that its irresponsible to have children if you can't afford to keep them. How do you propose we stop this Shag?"
That is right and kinda like chinas, zero tolerance approach where each family can have one kid, but maximum 2. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I've lived in a lot of very different places in the UK.
In some places it's very easy to get work. In other places it's a nightmare, there is literally nothing.
I was out of work for a while in a fairly big city - just finished my PhD and it was straight after Christmas so all the temp Christmas jobs had ended and the people who had been doing those were suddenly scrabbling over the tiny handful of jobs available.
Took me a couple of months just to land a telesales job. Most people looked at my qualifications and references and refused to employ me for bar work, etc as they said I'd leave the second I landed a better job.
And the work I was trained in was rare around there. Eventually I got one, and had to relocate an hour and a half away to get it (which was fine as I was single and renting but married with kids and a mortgage would've been much trickier). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have. what about those that had a bloody good job.. kids they could afford and suddenly due to no fault of their own left unable to work... ???
They could have it as they can support them, but it is irresponsible to have kids when you cant afford them.
I agree that its irresponsible to have children if you can't afford to keep them. How do you propose we stop this Shag?That is right and kinda like chinas, zero tolerance approach where each family can have one kid, but maximum 2."
What if like happened to us they have two and accidentally conceive a third years later?
Would you advocate fining us heavily, forcing abortion or adoption or some other way of controlling it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have. what about those that had a bloody good job.. kids they could afford and suddenly due to no fault of their own left unable to work... ???
They could have it as they can support them, but it is irresponsible to have kids when you cant afford them.
So suddenly one of the parents is tragically struck down with something and passes away and the remaining parent has to not work... what then.
The new caps on benefits are plunging thousands of children into poverty... the caps supposedly to stop people having massive houses and big tvs but the reality its making people homeless... and struggle to even cope.. most people would love to go back to work... but simply its not as easy as that..
At least this time the cap has made allowances for those caring for people. "
That is right, the new cap is here as well and I reckon the gov should re_iew it as it is too low, especially for families. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *educedWoman
over a year ago
Birmingham |
I work with people who receive benefits and I have been in receipt of benefits.
Life on benefits is not like how they portray on C5.
It's a sad existence for many.
Go get a job you say?
That's fine if you can read, write, have aspirations etc but sadly huge numbers of people (whole communities) don't have the same opportunities as others because of a lack of investment, poor public services, low educational attainment, postcode discrimination etc etc
Society (our society/ recent society) is responsible for this.
It's much more complicated then being lazy!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have. what about those that had a bloody good job.. kids they could afford and suddenly due to no fault of their own left unable to work... ???
They could have it as they can support them, but it is irresponsible to have kids when you cant afford them.
So suddenly one of the parents is tragically struck down with something and passes away and the remaining parent has to not work... what then.
The new caps on benefits are plunging thousands of children into poverty... the caps supposedly to stop people having massive houses and big tvs but the reality its making people homeless... and struggle to even cope.. most people would love to go back to work... but simply its not as easy as that..
At least this time the cap has made allowances for those caring for people. That is right, the new cap is here as well and I reckon the gov should re_iew it as it is too low, especially for families."
Strange how most these family's on the poverty line always find money for fags  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have. what about those that had a bloody good job.. kids they could afford and suddenly due to no fault of their own left unable to work... ???
They could have it as they can support them, but it is irresponsible to have kids when you cant afford them.
I agree that its irresponsible to have children if you can't afford to keep them. How do you propose we stop this Shag?That is right and kinda like chinas, zero tolerance approach where each family can have one kid, but maximum 2.
What if like happened to us they have two and accidentally conceive a third years later?
Would you advocate fining us heavily, forcing abortion or adoption or some other way of controlling it?"
I reckon they could give leeway in circumstances and introduce certain conditions, if such things happens. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm going to offend the virtue-signalling regulars again here, but essentially, if you're on Jobseekers for a significant period of time and are able bodied, then yes, you are lazy.
Supermarkets employ people with down syndrome, so I don't buy for one second that you "can't find a job" - What I translate it to is, "I'll only take a job that I'm in no way qualified to do." "
Actually I disagree basically as if you get offered zero hour contracts or over 16 but under 30 hours you are essentially left to suffer with no help to make up the difference which creates the issue with people scared to come off benefits. Also as I volunteer in my spare time i volunteer with adults with mental illness and have been helping trying to get a few back into work I've noticed the job centre putting them into non paid 6 week work placements recently for companies essentially wanting free Xmas temps and labeling it as work experience for 30hrs a week with obviously no chance for an actual contract post Xmas when companies cut back |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"People on benefits lazy?"
Wow now I'm really going to get on my soapbox here.
Really people on benefits lazy???
Let's start with you cannot tar everyone with the same brush who are on benefits.
People claim these through many many different circumstances.
Yes there are many out there that abuse the system and are too lazy to get a job and go to work.
But there are many who genuinely have to claim benefits because they have lost their job through no fault of their own.
Some claim benefits because they are either too ill or disabled to work.
Single parents bringing up their children and can't afford childcare.
Some have had to give up work to care full time for loved ones, partners, children or family members.
The list is endless.
Or like me I claim benefits because I had to give up a well paid job seven years ago to look after my mother after she had a stoke which has left her disabled and vascular dementia.
It was either out her in a nursing home or give my job up. Which I may add although rewarding as it is looking after her, it is a hundred times more hard work and stressful than actually going to work.
So I wouldn't tar everyone with the same brush as some of us genuine and don't want to claim benefits and would sooner work but because of circumstances.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oddyWoman
over a year ago
between havant and chichester |
Im a care worker on jsa been waiting since September to start my new job as support worker through no fault of mine I was bloody sanctioned as they said I wasnt doing enough even through waiting for police checks and reference s some of us want to work |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"
I very much doubt it...click on his green arrow and you will see a spate of not very interesting threads that have gone before this one "
Maybe not to you, so please just avoid them instead of being nasty |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
My sister is carer for our mum who has primary progressive MS. At one point she was claiming carers allowance and had it topped up with income support. This meant regular appointments at the job centre where they would try to demean her and bully her into applying for full time employment (which would have left no one to care for mum). At one appointment she was asked when she would be in a position to apply for full time work. Having had enough of the bullying and snide remarks my sister responded with "so you're asking me when my mum is expected to die". After this episode my sister made a formal complaint about said advisor who was then removed from dealing with my sister.
Being a full time carer is bloody hard work! My sister was eventually able to find an employer who would give her a few hours work per week and who understands that her commitment to our mum's welfare and care needs is her priority. It has been great for her to get away from the stress of looking after mum for a few hours a week. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have."
If someone becomes dependant on benefits after they've had kids what then? Euphanasia for the last born? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month  , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
There is also the thing that if you're a carer or single parent many employers see it as a negative and that the chances of you having time off is high..
So actually getting a job when you have been caring or are a carer are even harder... as no one wants to employ you..
They should look at it that these people are hard working and can work under stress and pressure.. that organisation skills are great x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What about the millions that carers save the country with the well below hourly rate they get.
Till you're in that position don't believe the hype "
This!! So much this. £62.10 for looking after someone for 35+ hours a week. Less than £2 an hour. Appalling. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
"
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm going to offend the virtue-signalling regulars again here, but essentially, if you're on Jobseekers for a significant period of time and are able bodied, then yes, you are lazy.
Supermarkets employ people with down syndrome, so I don't buy for one second that you "can't find a job" - What I translate it to is, "I'll only take a job that I'm in no way qualified to do." "
And they force people to work for nothing (workfare) or with no sickness or holiday pay or employment rights (zero hour contacts). But yeah let's blame the unemployed for not wanting to be exploited |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Of course some are....I know plenty.
But I'd take a guess that they are in the minority. "
I know a few and hope they are a very small minority but who knows, it's one thread I'm not going to get involved in after I've posted this as it makes me angry and I'm having a cracking afternoon in Blackpool
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What about the millions that carers save the country with the well below hourly rate they get.
Till you're in that position don't believe the hype "
Very true, i'm a carer so know first hand how under supported we are, both financially and emotionally.
To get carers allowance you have to look after someone for a minimum of 35 hours per week. For this the government gives you the princely sum of just over £61 per week which is less than you would get if you were on the dole.
You are allowed to work (if you can find the time in between your caring duties) but you cannot earn more than £110 per week.
But to some people because i am on benefits (carers allowance) I am lazy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What about the millions that carers save the country with the well below hourly rate they get.
Till you're in that position don't believe the hype
This!! So much this. £62.10 for looking after someone for 35+ hours a week. Less than £2 an hour. Appalling."
Yes totally agree with you. I care for mum full time
I still say that cares are worth their weight in gold even before I became one
We should be more recognised for what we do
I mean really £62.10 for working 24/7 with barely any breaks plus all the stress
If I was to put mum into a nursing home it would cost the government s heck of a lot more than £62.10 a week |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm going to offend the virtue-signalling regulars again here, but essentially, if you're on Jobseekers for a significant period of time and are able bodied, then yes, you are lazy.
Supermarkets employ people with down syndrome, so I don't buy for one second that you "can't find a job" - What I translate it to is, "I'll only take a job that I'm in no way qualified to do." "
If only it was that easy to get out of the rut some people find themselves in due to no fault of their own.
But fair play for trying to target everyone with that same brush even the disabled ones who look for work but don't have many companies like sainsburys around them that will give them a job. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What about the millions that carers save the country with the well below hourly rate they get.
Till you're in that position don't believe the hype
This!! So much this. £62.10 for looking after someone for 35+ hours a week. Less than £2 an hour. Appalling."
They can apply for income based job seekers allowance to top the money up iirc. So takes it to over £100 a week. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What about the millions that carers save the country with the well below hourly rate they get.
Till you're in that position don't believe the hype
This!! So much this. £62.10 for looking after someone for 35+ hours a week. Less than £2 an hour. Appalling.
Yes totally agree with you. I care for mum full time
I still say that cares are worth their weight in gold even before I became one
We should be more recognised for what we do
I mean really £62.10 for working 24/7 with barely any breaks plus all the stress
If I was to put mum into a nursing home it would cost the government s heck of a lot more than £62.10 a week"
whats worse is all the help is disappearing... there is no respite for so many carers now... just imagine the bill of all these carers decided to use proper care services funded by the government instead.. the bill would be huge. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What about the millions that carers save the country with the well below hourly rate they get.
Till you're in that position don't believe the hype
Very true, i'm a carer so know first hand how under supported we are, both financially and emotionally.
To get carers allowance you have to look after someone for a minimum of 35 hours per week. For this the government gives you the princely sum of just over £61 per week which is less than you would get if you were on the dole.
You are allowed to work (if you can find the time in between your caring duties) but you cannot earn more than £110 per week.
But to some people because i am on benefits (carers allowance) I am lazy."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What about the millions that carers save the country with the well below hourly rate they get.
Till you're in that position don't believe the hype
This!! So much this. £62.10 for looking after someone for 35+ hours a week. Less than £2 an hour. Appalling.
They can apply for income based job seekers allowance to top the money up iirc. So takes it to over £100 a week."
Still saving the country millions if not billions. Hardly the life of Riley some people think |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What about the millions that carers save the country with the well below hourly rate they get.
Till you're in that position don't believe the hype
This!! So much this. £62.10 for looking after someone for 35+ hours a week. Less than £2 an hour. Appalling.
They can apply for income based job seekers allowance to top the money up iirc. So takes it to over £100 a week."
Yes, but even £100 a week is fuck all if you're working at least 35 hours (that's the min amount you have to care for the person).
Also if the person you care for is your child, you don't get the carers reduction in council tax |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What about the millions that carers save the country with the well below hourly rate they get.
Till you're in that position don't believe the hype
This!! So much this. £62.10 for looking after someone for 35+ hours a week. Less than £2 an hour. Appalling.
They can apply for income based job seekers allowance to top the money up iirc. So takes it to over £100 a week.
Still saving the country millions if not billions. Hardly the life of Riley some people think "
Spot on. My child has cerebral palsy and it would cost much more if he was cared for by an outside company! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What about the millions that carers save the country with the well below hourly rate they get.
Till you're in that position don't believe the hype
This!! So much this. £62.10 for looking after someone for 35+ hours a week. Less than £2 an hour. Appalling.
They can apply for income based job seekers allowance to top the money up iirc. So takes it to over £100 a week.
Yes, but even £100 a week is fuck all if you're working at least 35 hours (that's the min amount you have to care for the person).
Also if the person you care for is your child, you don't get the carers reduction in council tax "
you should do actually... but it gets way more complicated once they are over 16 x
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What about the millions that carers save the country with the well below hourly rate they get.
Till you're in that position don't believe the hype
This!! So much this. £62.10 for looking after someone for 35+ hours a week. Less than £2 an hour. Appalling.
They can apply for income based job seekers allowance to top the money up iirc. So takes it to over £100 a week."
You actually get approx £105 per week if you are entitled to a top up of income support.
Would you do a full time job for £105 per week? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties."
I certainly don't intend to fuel any fires but the person I've discussed gets the rent paid £500 per month , pays a token payment of £3 per week council tax , yet has a £105 sky bill each month....and from other benefits the person receives has more disposable income ( the person in question calls it Their "spending money " ) than I do after paying my rent / council tax etc etc after I've worked 60 hours a week .
You may be correct about possibly fiddling somewhere but how can that persons lifestyle go unchecked for TEN years.....even charges the son rent who goes to university and due to his home welfare situation gets more student grant money.. and the lad gets charged rent by his parents......Surely this is NOT what the idea of benefits is meant for .
I found out yesterday the person I'm on about has spent £210 on a tattoo .....hardly the same as buying new shoes or putting some gas on the meter. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What about the millions that carers save the country with the well below hourly rate they get.
Till you're in that position don't believe the hype
This!! So much this. £62.10 for looking after someone for 35+ hours a week. Less than £2 an hour. Appalling.
They can apply for income based job seekers allowance to top the money up iirc. So takes it to over £100 a week.
Yes, but even £100 a week is fuck all if you're working at least 35 hours (that's the min amount you have to care for the person).
Also if the person you care for is your child, you don't get the carers reduction in council tax you should do actually... but it gets way more complicated once they are over 16 x
"
Not in my local authority  they used to. Then I went back to work, so stopped claiming CA. Now I have a new claim, they won't. Only honouring those long term claims. Blah! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What about the millions that carers save the country with the well below hourly rate they get.
Till you're in that position don't believe the hype
This!! So much this. £62.10 for looking after someone for 35+ hours a week. Less than £2 an hour. Appalling.
They can apply for income based job seekers allowance to top the money up iirc. So takes it to over £100 a week.
You actually get approx £105 per week if you are entitled to a top up of income support.
Would you do a full time job for £105 per week?"
With no holiday pay. Time off. But hey at least we get the £10 Xmas bonus  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What about the millions that carers save the country with the well below hourly rate they get.
Till you're in that position don't believe the hype
This!! So much this. £62.10 for looking after someone for 35+ hours a week. Less than £2 an hour. Appalling.
They can apply for income based job seekers allowance to top the money up iirc. So takes it to over £100 a week.
Still saving the country millions if not billions. Hardly the life of Riley some people think "
Oh I agree. And here we have politicians getting expenses for 2nd houses and £39 breakfasts and yet we still have people bashing those on benefits getting a measly sum of money that won't even cover a gas/electric bill in some rich twats mansion. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties.
I certainly don't intend to fuel any fires but the person I've discussed gets the rent paid £500 per month , pays a token payment of £3 per week council tax , yet has a £105 sky bill each month....and from other benefits the person receives has more disposable income ( the person in question calls it Their "spending money " ) than I do after paying my rent / council tax etc etc after I've worked 60 hours a week .
You may be correct about possibly fiddling somewhere but how can that persons lifestyle go unchecked for TEN years.....even charges the son rent who goes to university and due to his home welfare situation gets more student grant money.. and the lad gets charged rent by his parents......Surely this is NOT what the idea of benefits is meant for .
I found out yesterday the person I'm on about has spent £210 on a tattoo .....hardly the same as buying new shoes or putting some gas on the meter. "
If it's that good a life why don't you join them |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *estivalMan
over a year ago
borehamwood |
No not everyone on benefits is lazy.been there a few times myself.but i do know quiet a few ppl who have been on benefits for so long the yobcentre dont even get on there case anymore. These are people with no skills who say they wont work for less than 25 grand a year. I meen really who the fuck is gona pay someone that much if they have no skills and have been on the dole for the last 10 yrs |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties.
I certainly don't intend to fuel any fires but the person I've discussed gets the rent paid £500 per month , pays a token payment of £3 per week council tax , yet has a £105 sky bill each month....and from other benefits the person receives has more disposable income ( the person in question calls it Their "spending money " ) than I do after paying my rent / council tax etc etc after I've worked 60 hours a week .
You may be correct about possibly fiddling somewhere but how can that persons lifestyle go unchecked for TEN years.....even charges the son rent who goes to university and due to his home welfare situation gets more student grant money.. and the lad gets charged rent by his parents......Surely this is NOT what the idea of benefits is meant for .
I found out yesterday the person I'm on about has spent £210 on a tattoo .....hardly the same as buying new shoes or putting some gas on the meter. "
there must be a big fiddle somewhere as you have to pay a percentage of your council tax regardless now and on 500pm rent I would imagine its more than 3quid per week...
These last few weeks has seen a big increase in people contacting the support agencies... the cap is now set at 250... anything above that and your housing benefit is reduced... so it is impossible by legitimate means to be living like that and not working. Perhaps there is money involved your not aware of..
There are families ringing helplines in tears since the cap... they are now being forced to take any work as work 16 hours or more and they give you back that money they took in the cap...
But the reality is so many families have now got to relocate as they simply cant afford even low rent..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm going to offend the virtue-signalling regulars again here, but essentially, if you're on Jobseekers for a significant period of time and are able bodied, then yes, you are lazy.
Supermarkets employ people with down syndrome, so I don't buy for one second that you "can't find a job" - What I translate it to is, "I'll only take a job that I'm in no way qualified to do." "
How fucking insensitive you are! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties.
I certainly don't intend to fuel any fires but the person I've discussed gets the rent paid £500 per month , pays a token payment of £3 per week council tax , yet has a £105 sky bill each month....and from other benefits the person receives has more disposable income ( the person in question calls it Their "spending money " ) than I do after paying my rent / council tax etc etc after I've worked 60 hours a week .
You may be correct about possibly fiddling somewhere but how can that persons lifestyle go unchecked for TEN years.....even charges the son rent who goes to university and due to his home welfare situation gets more student grant money.. and the lad gets charged rent by his parents......Surely this is NOT what the idea of benefits is meant for .
I found out yesterday the person I'm on about has spent £210 on a tattoo .....hardly the same as buying new shoes or putting some gas on the meter.
If it's that good a life why don't you join them "
I have morals that's why. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties.
I certainly don't intend to fuel any fires but the person I've discussed gets the rent paid £500 per month , pays a token payment of £3 per week council tax , yet has a £105 sky bill each month....and from other benefits the person receives has more disposable income ( the person in question calls it Their "spending money " ) than I do after paying my rent / council tax etc etc after I've worked 60 hours a week .
You may be correct about possibly fiddling somewhere but how can that persons lifestyle go unchecked for TEN years.....even charges the son rent who goes to university and due to his home welfare situation gets more student grant money.. and the lad gets charged rent by his parents......Surely this is NOT what the idea of benefits is meant for .
I found out yesterday the person I'm on about has spent £210 on a tattoo .....hardly the same as buying new shoes or putting some gas on the meter.
If it's that good a life why don't you join them
I have morals that's why. "
And people on benefits don't? You must be obsessed with the person to know all you do about them |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I've been unemployed twice. It was fucking horrible both times and in each time I was paid off by previous employers with a months pay so wasn't totally skin. I had my rent and council tax paid and £60 a week to live on. Job hunting was all consuming. Recruitment consultants tend to put their ads online on an afternoon so most evenings were spent app lingerie for work. I'd be up around 8 in case I hot an early call. I lived in London at the time and caught the bus to almost every inter_iew as although longer it was subsidised (unlike catching the tube) and I'd often walk home to save even that. A mobile is essential. The Internet is essential. My social life was non existent.
The first time I was lucky and back in work after a couple of months. The second dragged on so I took a job in a call centre paying a little above minimum wage. For 40 hours a week I was less than a fiver better off. On a good week I could earn £25 (before tax) in bonuses. Job hunting when you aren't available to answer phone calls or attend inter_iews is fucking horrendous. The decision of missing a shift to go to an inter_iew is a no win situation.
People need to stop believing the bills hit peddled by channel 5 with their countless variations of benefits street or the lies in the tabloids and actually speak to people in that situation. Being unemployed is way beyond shut. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties.
I certainly don't intend to fuel any fires but the person I've discussed gets the rent paid £500 per month , pays a token payment of £3 per week council tax , yet has a £105 sky bill each month....and from other benefits the person receives has more disposable income ( the person in question calls it Their "spending money " ) than I do after paying my rent / council tax etc etc after I've worked 60 hours a week .
You may be correct about possibly fiddling somewhere but how can that persons lifestyle go unchecked for TEN years.....even charges the son rent who goes to university and due to his home welfare situation gets more student grant money.. and the lad gets charged rent by his parents......Surely this is NOT what the idea of benefits is meant for .
I found out yesterday the person I'm on about has spent £210 on a tattoo .....hardly the same as buying new shoes or putting some gas on the meter.
If it's that good a life why don't you join them
I have morals that's why.
And people on benefits don't? You must be obsessed with the person to know all you do about them "
You see you are putting words into other people's mouths....I didn't say people on benefits don't have morals ( read the full context of my posts)....you said " if it's that good a life why don't you join them " and so hence I reply I have morals where the ONE person I've discussed in my opinion doesn't.
Not obsessed , just a neighbour . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties.
I certainly don't intend to fuel any fires but the person I've discussed gets the rent paid £500 per month , pays a token payment of £3 per week council tax , yet has a £105 sky bill each month....and from other benefits the person receives has more disposable income ( the person in question calls it Their "spending money " ) than I do after paying my rent / council tax etc etc after I've worked 60 hours a week .
You may be correct about possibly fiddling somewhere but how can that persons lifestyle go unchecked for TEN years.....even charges the son rent who goes to university and due to his home welfare situation gets more student grant money.. and the lad gets charged rent by his parents......Surely this is NOT what the idea of benefits is meant for .
I found out yesterday the person I'm on about has spent £210 on a tattoo .....hardly the same as buying new shoes or putting some gas on the meter. "
Have you considered a better paid job? Or prioritising your outgoings? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties.
I certainly don't intend to fuel any fires but the person I've discussed gets the rent paid £500 per month , pays a token payment of £3 per week council tax , yet has a £105 sky bill each month....and from other benefits the person receives has more disposable income ( the person in question calls it Their "spending money " ) than I do after paying my rent / council tax etc etc after I've worked 60 hours a week .
You may be correct about possibly fiddling somewhere but how can that persons lifestyle go unchecked for TEN years.....even charges the son rent who goes to university and due to his home welfare situation gets more student grant money.. and the lad gets charged rent by his parents......Surely this is NOT what the idea of benefits is meant for .
I found out yesterday the person I'm on about has spent £210 on a tattoo .....hardly the same as buying new shoes or putting some gas on the meter.
If it's that good a life why don't you join them
I have morals that's why.
And people on benefits don't? You must be obsessed with the person to know all you do about them
You see you are putting words into other people's mouths....I didn't say people on benefits don't have morals ( read the full context of my posts)....you said " if it's that good a life why don't you join them " and so hence I reply I have morals where the ONE person I've discussed in my opinion doesn't.
Not obsessed , just a neighbour . "
Thank fuck I'm not you're neighbour |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties.
I certainly don't intend to fuel any fires but the person I've discussed gets the rent paid £500 per month , pays a token payment of £3 per week council tax , yet has a £105 sky bill each month....and from other benefits the person receives has more disposable income ( the person in question calls it Their "spending money " ) than I do after paying my rent / council tax etc etc after I've worked 60 hours a week .
You may be correct about possibly fiddling somewhere but how can that persons lifestyle go unchecked for TEN years.....even charges the son rent who goes to university and due to his home welfare situation gets more student grant money.. and the lad gets charged rent by his parents......Surely this is NOT what the idea of benefits is meant for .
I found out yesterday the person I'm on about has spent £210 on a tattoo .....hardly the same as buying new shoes or putting some gas on the meter.
If it's that good a life why don't you join them
I have morals that's why.
And people on benefits don't? You must be obsessed with the person to know all you do about them
You see you are putting words into other people's mouths....I didn't say people on benefits don't have morals ( read the full context of my posts)....you said " if it's that good a life why don't you join them " and so hence I reply I have morals where the ONE person I've discussed in my opinion doesn't.
Not obsessed , just a neighbour .
Thank fuck I'm not you're neighbour "
Nor mine.
My neighbours don't even know my name let one the ins and outs of my finances and spending |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties.
I certainly don't intend to fuel any fires but the person I've discussed gets the rent paid £500 per month , pays a token payment of £3 per week council tax , yet has a £105 sky bill each month....and from other benefits the person receives has more disposable income ( the person in question calls it Their "spending money " ) than I do after paying my rent / council tax etc etc after I've worked 60 hours a week .
You may be correct about possibly fiddling somewhere but how can that persons lifestyle go unchecked for TEN years.....even charges the son rent who goes to university and due to his home welfare situation gets more student grant money.. and the lad gets charged rent by his parents......Surely this is NOT what the idea of benefits is meant for .
I found out yesterday the person I'm on about has spent £210 on a tattoo .....hardly the same as buying new shoes or putting some gas on the meter.
Have you considered a better paid job? Or prioritising your outgoings? "
Fair point on the job . . But the point I was trying to make was the person I'm on about has taken it to the point of " working" at not being employed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties.
I certainly don't intend to fuel any fires but the person I've discussed gets the rent paid £500 per month , pays a token payment of £3 per week council tax , yet has a £105 sky bill each month....and from other benefits the person receives has more disposable income ( the person in question calls it Their "spending money " ) than I do after paying my rent / council tax etc etc after I've worked 60 hours a week .
You may be correct about possibly fiddling somewhere but how can that persons lifestyle go unchecked for TEN years.....even charges the son rent who goes to university and due to his home welfare situation gets more student grant money.. and the lad gets charged rent by his parents......Surely this is NOT what the idea of benefits is meant for .
I found out yesterday the person I'm on about has spent £210 on a tattoo .....hardly the same as buying new shoes or putting some gas on the meter.
If it's that good a life why don't you join them
I have morals that's why.
And people on benefits don't? You must be obsessed with the person to know all you do about them
You see you are putting words into other people's mouths....I didn't say people on benefits don't have morals ( read the full context of my posts)....you said " if it's that good a life why don't you join them " and so hence I reply I have morals where the ONE person I've discussed in my opinion doesn't.
Not obsessed , just a neighbour .
Thank fuck I'm not you're neighbour
Nor mine.
My neighbours don't even know my name let one the ins and outs of my finances and spending "
LOL. The said person I've discussed happily even gloating tells their life story over the garden fence when asking if I could lend them money. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I've not read the whole thread, but I'm sure the post was just for the OP's amusement. Light touch paper and stand back style
Or his research, see green arrow....
In a previous life of mine I worked for the Employment Service. I realise that things may have changed since but this is what I know.
The unemployment figures are just a snapshot in time. Most claimants leave within 3 months as they find another job. Another batch leave within 6 months, these tending to be the people who needed a bit of a helping hand to get a job. CV writing, personal hygiene advice etc.
Then there are the long term unemployed. These are in the monitory. A proportion of these will be benefit cheats who are working, claiming and covering their tracks.
Another chunk of these people will be the very sad ones who are desperate for work but won't stand a chance at inter_iew. It sounds cruel but your 'odd' type of people. Certainly far from lazy. There are schemes to help here too though.
Then there are the lazy, benefit scrounging tiny minority who work the system for themselves.
I don't know the proportions, but from my experience, I'd say most disabled people would like to work and not be on benefits.
And there will be a large chunk of people actually unable to work through no fault of their own.
Of course there are other benefits but all sorts of things have been put in place to try and out the scroungers over the years |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Most people are on some form of benefits or tax credits to top up income surely by increasing wages so people can make ends meet is the answer instead of barely surviving from one week to the next x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm on benefits and I'm not lazy, run a home, look after 2 kids and just finished a 3 year college course, ready for me to get back into work. "
well done, you should be proud of yourself and your children will be |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties.
I certainly don't intend to fuel any fires but the person I've discussed gets the rent paid £500 per month , pays a token payment of £3 per week council tax , yet has a £105 sky bill each month....and from other benefits the person receives has more disposable income ( the person in question calls it Their "spending money " ) than I do after paying my rent / council tax etc etc after I've worked 60 hours a week .
You may be correct about possibly fiddling somewhere but how can that persons lifestyle go unchecked for TEN years.....even charges the son rent who goes to university and due to his home welfare situation gets more student grant money.. and the lad gets charged rent by his parents......Surely this is NOT what the idea of benefits is meant for .
I found out yesterday the person I'm on about has spent £210 on a tattoo .....hardly the same as buying new shoes or putting some gas on the meter.
If it's that good a life why don't you join them
I have morals that's why.
And people on benefits don't? You must be obsessed with the person to know all you do about them
You see you are putting words into other people's mouths....I didn't say people on benefits don't have morals ( read the full context of my posts)....you said " if it's that good a life why don't you join them " and so hence I reply I have morals where the ONE person I've discussed in my opinion doesn't.
Not obsessed , just a neighbour .
Thank fuck I'm not you're neighbour
Nor mine.
My neighbours don't even know my name let one the ins and outs of my finances and spending
LOL. The said person I've discussed happily even gloating tells their life story over the garden fence when asking if I could lend them money. "
Out if interest do you normally realise when people are bullshitting? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
the ones with 11 kids are, i imagine those kids bring themselves up too. not sure how they didn't die at birth coz their parents are so fucking lazy. dunno how they have so many kids coz they cba to have sex to make them, maybe they lie with their legs open and let someone else use a baster?
lol. if you can't actually look outside of your own life and observe what is happening and come to your own conclusions then who is really lazy here? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Right. I usually try to be nice and open minded in the forums and appreciate everybodys point of _iew. But you make the most ridiculous comments on every thread you post on.
I work and have mostly done since leaving school. Last year I got made redundant and a week later my mum passed away. I decided to have a few months out of work to help my Dad and look after him. I then signed on. I have a very good work history and a variety of skills. Still took me 5 months to get another job. So stick your righteous opinions up your arse. Jack."
Signed on after being made redundant? What did you do with the redundancy pay-out? Or when you say "made redundant", do you mean "sacked"? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have."
You now only get benefits 2 children unless they were born in 2015 or b4. But even then there is a benefit cap off 500 a week I think it is. You still got child benefit, tax credit and income support and a certain amount of housing benefit. But would have normally kicked in if you had 4 or more kids under 10 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"People on benefits lazy?"
We live in a G4 country.
Employment opportunities is NOT the problem.
The government cannot control who companies should employ.
These 2 things are not the same problem.
It's not always because that person is lazy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Right. I usually try to be nice and open minded in the forums and appreciate everybodys point of _iew. But you make the most ridiculous comments on every thread you post on.
I work and have mostly done since leaving school. Last year I got made redundant and a week later my mum passed away. I decided to have a few months out of work to help my Dad and look after him. I then signed on. I have a very good work history and a variety of skills. Still took me 5 months to get another job. So stick your righteous opinions up your arse. Jack.
Signed on after being made redundant? What did you do with the redundancy pay-out? Or when you say "made redundant", do you mean "sacked"? "
OK I'm third party but there's a few things he may not of been with that company long enough to gain a redundancy payout or he used it to fund his few months helping his dad out before he signed on |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Right. I usually try to be nice and open minded in the forums and appreciate everybodys point of _iew. But you make the most ridiculous comments on every thread you post on.
I work and have mostly done since leaving school. Last year I got made redundant and a week later my mum passed away. I decided to have a few months out of work to help my Dad and look after him. I then signed on. I have a very good work history and a variety of skills. Still took me 5 months to get another job. So stick your righteous opinions up your arse. Jack.
Signed on after being made redundant? What did you do with the redundancy pay-out? Or when you say "made redundant", do you mean "sacked"? "
Why do you always make such shitty comments....on most threads you post in. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have.
You now only get benefits 2 children unless they were born in 2015 or b4. But even then there is a benefit cap off 500 a week I think it is. You still got child benefit, tax credit and income support and a certain amount of housing benefit. But would have normally kicked in if you had 4 or more kids under 10 "
the cap is 250 now x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties.
I certainly don't intend to fuel any fires but the person I've discussed gets the rent paid £500 per month , pays a token payment of £3 per week council tax , yet has a £105 sky bill each month....and from other benefits the person receives has more disposable income ( the person in question calls it Their "spending money " ) than I do after paying my rent / council tax etc etc after I've worked 60 hours a week .
You may be correct about possibly fiddling somewhere but how can that persons lifestyle go unchecked for TEN years.....even charges the son rent who goes to university and due to his home welfare situation gets more student grant money.. and the lad gets charged rent by his parents......Surely this is NOT what the idea of benefits is meant for .
I found out yesterday the person I'm on about has spent £210 on a tattoo .....hardly the same as buying new shoes or putting some gas on the meter. "
how the hell could you possibly know all that stuff about someone. You havent said what they get the benefits for and if someone of 18(or whatever age you go to uni) has been given a higher grant im guessing its not because the parents just dont want to work so as you know so much about their finances, why not tell us in as much detail about the reasons they get benefits. Im suprised you wasnt actually sat in on the accessment you know so much |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Right. I usually try to be nice and open minded in the forums and appreciate everybodys point of _iew. But you make the most ridiculous comments on every thread you post on.
I work and have mostly done since leaving school. Last year I got made redundant and a week later my mum passed away. I decided to have a few months out of work to help my Dad and look after him. I then signed on. I have a very good work history and a variety of skills. Still took me 5 months to get another job. So stick your righteous opinions up your arse. Jack.
Signed on after being made redundant? What did you do with the redundancy pay-out? Or when you say "made redundant", do you mean "sacked"? "
So he was made redundant, are you presuming there is a set payout? My friend was made redundant, she got 3K, hardly enough to support a family for months, whilst waiting for a new job opportunity. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have."
They kind of already have. Started last week I believe. They've capped the total amount of benefits a family can receive. If they've got more kids then the maximum capping system caters for...tough....they have to pay the extra needed themselves.
View is to deter people from having multiple kids whilst on benefits so not to receive more money for each child. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have.
They kind of already have. Started last week I believe. They've capped the total amount of benefits a family can receive. If they've got more kids then the maximum capping system caters for...tough....they have to pay the extra needed themselves.
View is to deter people from having multiple kids whilst on benefits so not to receive more money for each child."
To be honest as much as this sounds harsh we do need to do something against the rising population in the world in general people are living longer more are being born each year and this is the true reason that more and more are suffering with unemployment, homelessness and hunger not.whether we are in or out of Europe. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have.
They kind of already have. Started last week I believe. They've capped the total amount of benefits a family can receive. If they've got more kids then the maximum capping system caters for...tough....they have to pay the extra needed themselves.
View is to deter people from having multiple kids whilst on benefits so not to receive more money for each child.
To be honest as much as this sounds harsh we do need to do something against the rising population in the world in general people are living longer more are being born each year and this is the true reason that more and more are suffering with unemployment, homelessness and hunger not.whether we are in or out of Europe."
to be honest in this country i think families are getting smaller. 60 years ago it was quite the norm to havd 8 kids. I know very few families with more than 4 and many more with just one child.
My greatgrandad had 23 children and when his second wife died the 4 youngest had to go to barnadod and 2 died in there as children |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties."
This is my situation at the moment. I often go without hot dinners so my kids have enough food for them all. I currently have no heating due to having zero cash to top up the gas meter, being evicted through no fault of our own due to landlord wanting to sell. Can't find a similar property due the new capping system, meaning we can't afford it. I do pay most of my rent but admittedly not all of it due to my low income. Finding a home i can afford to rent means I've now got to share a bedroom with my teenage daughter. I've even been told I'm not entitled to a council house even though we're being evicted.
I've got university qualifications and applied for over a 100 jobs. Was only offered 3 inter_iews which resulted in being turned down by all three due to lack of practical experience. I can't afford to work for free in order to get the experience. Have been offered a good well paid job but that doesn't start until next October. So basically I'm stuck on a low income and claiming tax credits. Which as described above, isn't allowing me and my kids to live in luxury. I wish people didn't tar as all the same. Every person working or not that has kids, is entitled to tax credits.
Those benefit programmes don't always show the real life of every low income families. I wish they would so the real truth of it would be shown.
By the way, I'm not seeking sympathy just relaying to people like the OP the truth of it and thats....one size doesn't fit all! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have.
They kind of already have. Started last week I believe. They've capped the total amount of benefits a family can receive. If they've got more kids then the maximum capping system caters for...tough....they have to pay the extra needed themselves.
View is to deter people from having multiple kids whilst on benefits so not to receive more money for each child.
To be honest as much as this sounds harsh we do need to do something against the rising population in the world in general people are living longer more are being born each year and this is the true reason that more and more are suffering with unemployment, homelessness and hunger not.whether we are in or out of Europe."
I agree. Also There's simply not enough affordable housing available. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"To be fair I live in a place once where there was simply not enough jobs to go around even if everyone wanted to work. The towns industry had dried up and died. I remember reading in the local press how there were over 100 applicants for one bar job."
I have a seasonal job in a popular retail store. Over 700 applicants - 30 were taken on - and the majority (if not all) of us will be jobless again come January!
Fun fun fun!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have.
They kind of already have. Started last week I believe. They've capped the total amount of benefits a family can receive. If they've got more kids then the maximum capping system caters for...tough....they have to pay the extra needed themselves.
View is to deter people from having multiple kids whilst on benefits so not to receive more money for each child.
To be honest as much as this sounds harsh we do need to do something against the rising population in the world in general people are living longer more are being born each year and this is the true reason that more and more are suffering with unemployment, homelessness and hunger not.whether we are in or out of Europe.
I agree. Also There's simply not enough affordable housing available. "
But there are thousands of properties that are currently unoccupied, due to people not wanting to move to that said location. People now have the choice to be able to live wherever they wish, with income taken into consideration, but people don't want to move to areas that are seen as "not nice" so the supply and demand factor means more houses being built unnecessarily so people can live where they desire. But then those who are in need of affordable living (houses from the LA) cannot just move anywhere, they have to meet certain requirements to be homed there.
The fact that the UK is over populated and cannot accommodate more and that those on benefits are just lazy scrounges are all things the media show to hide something that's really going on, they're scaremongering. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have.
They kind of already have. Started last week I believe. They've capped the total amount of benefits a family can receive. If they've got more kids then the maximum capping system caters for...tough....they have to pay the extra needed themselves.
View is to deter people from having multiple kids whilst on benefits so not to receive more money for each child.
To be honest as much as this sounds harsh we do need to do something against the rising population in the world in general people are living longer more are being born each year and this is the true reason that more and more are suffering with unemployment, homelessness and hunger not.whether we are in or out of Europe.
I agree. Also There's simply not enough affordable housing available. "
And there ate landlords making hundreds of thousands pounds a year renting shot property at extortionate prices to people on benefits.
People forget where housing benefit actually goes |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have.
They kind of already have. Started last week I believe. They've capped the total amount of benefits a family can receive. If they've got more kids then the maximum capping system caters for...tough....they have to pay the extra needed themselves.
View is to deter people from having multiple kids whilst on benefits so not to receive more money for each child.
To be honest as much as this sounds harsh we do need to do something against the rising population in the world in general people are living longer more are being born each year and this is the true reason that more and more are suffering with unemployment, homelessness and hunger not.whether we are in or out of Europe.
I agree. Also There's simply not enough affordable housing available.
But there are thousands of properties that are currently unoccupied, due to people not wanting to move to that said location. People now have the choice to be able to live wherever they wish, with income taken into consideration, but people don't want to move to areas that are seen as "not nice" so the supply and demand factor means more houses being built unnecessarily so people can live where they desire. But then those who are in need of affordable living (houses from the LA) cannot just move anywhere, they have to meet certain requirements to be homed there.
The fact that the UK is over populated and cannot accommodate more and that those on benefits are just lazy scrounges are all things the media show to hide something that's really going on, they're scaremongering."
Sorry have to kindly disagree with the first part of your comment.
I wasn't being fussy in looking for a well known nice area within my home town or nearby to it. I would of moved into any available property of the size we need. There really aren't that many available properties where I'm from and little amount in nearby towns either. I've been checking since i recieved my eviction order in September just gone. I even begged my local council for a home in even the worst council estate within my home town...we got told no! There's nothing available. The council lady herself said there are no social houses available..none. so I've had to rent an overpriced (but aren't they all) private house that's too small, just so we can afford a roof over our heads. I'm not too overly pissed about it because at least we've got a roof over our heads to go to. Many don't even get that. They're forced into B&B's or shared accommodation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oddyWoman
over a year ago
between havant and chichester |
I was made redundant in june after being there for 12 yrs and still waiting for my redundancy as the building i worked in hasnt been sold yet acas are trying to chase it up but there getting nowhere |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"To be fair I live in a place once where there was simply not enough jobs to go around even if everyone wanted to work. The towns industry had dried up and died. I remember reading in the local press how there were over 100 applicants for one bar job.
I have a seasonal job in a popular retail store. Over 700 applicants - 30 were taken on - and the majority (if not all) of us will be jobless again come January!
Fun fun fun! "
I used to work in the recruitment department for boots. They recruit heavily for seasonal vacancies, most of which start Oct and end in Jan. My job was to shortlist applicants for these vacancies. We would often have in excess of 200 applicants for each job that was advertised, in London it could be as many as 500 per vacancy.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have.
They kind of already have. Started last week I believe. They've capped the total amount of benefits a family can receive. If they've got more kids then the maximum capping system caters for...tough....they have to pay the extra needed themselves.
View is to deter people from having multiple kids whilst on benefits so not to receive more money for each child.
To be honest as much as this sounds harsh we do need to do something against the rising population in the world in general people are living longer more are being born each year and this is the true reason that more and more are suffering with unemployment, homelessness and hunger not.whether we are in or out of Europe.
I agree. Also There's simply not enough affordable housing available.
But there are thousands of properties that are currently unoccupied, due to people not wanting to move to that said location. People now have the choice to be able to live wherever they wish, with income taken into consideration, but people don't want to move to areas that are seen as "not nice" so the supply and demand factor means more houses being built unnecessarily so people can live where they desire. But then those who are in need of affordable living (houses from the LA) cannot just move anywhere, they have to meet certain requirements to be homed there.
The fact that the UK is over populated and cannot accommodate more and that those on benefits are just lazy scrounges are all things the media show to hide something that's really going on, they're scaremongering.
Sorry have to kindly disagree with the first part of your comment.
I wasn't being fussy in looking for a well known nice area within my home town or nearby to it. I would of moved into any available property of the size we need. There really aren't that many available properties where I'm from and little amount in nearby towns either. I've been checking since i recieved my eviction order in September just gone. I even begged my local council for a home in even the worst council estate within my home town...we got told no! There's nothing available. The council lady herself said there are no social houses available..none. so I've had to rent an overpriced (but aren't they all) private house that's too small, just so we can afford a roof over our heads. I'm not too overly pissed about it because at least we've got a roof over our heads to go to. Many don't even get that. They're forced into B&B's or shared accommodation."
Sorry I didn mean for this to appear targeted at you, I was merely pointing out that all over the country there are unoccupied houses due to people not wanting to live there. I should know the exact figure, but my mind had gone blank, but I can find it out tomorrow. With no one wanting to move to these houses they become run down and then eventually inhabitable.
With your eviction notice you should have qualified for LA housing, even if they say there are none you should be put on a list or added to their system depending on how they do their hoising, whether it's list based or choice based lettings, you still should have got on to it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have.
They kind of already have. Started last week I believe. They've capped the total amount of benefits a family can receive. If they've got more kids then the maximum capping system caters for...tough....they have to pay the extra needed themselves.
View is to deter people from having multiple kids whilst on benefits so not to receive more money for each child.
To be honest as much as this sounds harsh we do need to do something against the rising population in the world in general people are living longer more are being born each year and this is the true reason that more and more are suffering with unemployment, homelessness and hunger not.whether we are in or out of Europe.
I agree. Also There's simply not enough affordable housing available.
But there are thousands of properties that are currently unoccupied, due to people not wanting to move to that said location. People now have the choice to be able to live wherever they wish, with income taken into consideration, but people don't want to move to areas that are seen as "not nice" so the supply and demand factor means more houses being built unnecessarily so people can live where they desire. But then those who are in need of affordable living (houses from the LA) cannot just move anywhere, they have to meet certain requirements to be homed there.
The fact that the UK is over populated and cannot accommodate more and that those on benefits are just lazy scrounges are all things the media show to hide something that's really going on, they're scaremongering.
Sorry have to kindly disagree with the first part of your comment.
I wasn't being fussy in looking for a well known nice area within my home town or nearby to it. I would of moved into any available property of the size we need. There really aren't that many available properties where I'm from and little amount in nearby towns either. I've been checking since i recieved my eviction order in September just gone. I even begged my local council for a home in even the worst council estate within my home town...we got told no! There's nothing available. The council lady herself said there are no social houses available..none. so I've had to rent an overpriced (but aren't they all) private house that's too small, just so we can afford a roof over our heads. I'm not too overly pissed about it because at least we've got a roof over our heads to go to. Many don't even get that. They're forced into B&B's or shared accommodation.
Sorry I didn mean for this to appear targeted at you, I was merely pointing out that all over the country there are unoccupied houses due to people not wanting to live there. I should know the exact figure, but my mind had gone blank, but I can find it out tomorrow. With no one wanting to move to these houses they become run down and then eventually inhabitable.
With your eviction notice you should have qualified for LA housing, even if they say there are none you should be put on a list or added to their system depending on how they do their hoising, whether it's list based or choice based lettings, you still should have got on to it."
Oh no sorry didn't mean to sound as if you were aiming at me.
No unfortunately not. All the council lady offered me was a loan for house deposit and rent in advance. I politely said no because I'm using the deposit from this house to go towards the other house I found.
I'd love a council house because they are so cheap to rent. Just unfortunate I'm not allowed one and there's none available anyway. I think it would greatly help if the government put a cap on the rental charges of private rented houses. Stop all those private landlords from cashing in with their outrageous rents. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Not everyone, but they should limit of how many kids they could have.
They kind of already have. Started last week I believe. They've capped the total amount of benefits a family can receive. If they've got more kids then the maximum capping system caters for...tough....they have to pay the extra needed themselves.
View is to deter people from having multiple kids whilst on benefits so not to receive more money for each child.
To be honest as much as this sounds harsh we do need to do something against the rising population in the world in general people are living longer more are being born each year and this is the true reason that more and more are suffering with unemployment, homelessness and hunger not.whether we are in or out of Europe.
I agree. Also There's simply not enough affordable housing available.
But there are thousands of properties that are currently unoccupied, due to people not wanting to move to that said location. People now have the choice to be able to live wherever they wish, with income taken into consideration, but people don't want to move to areas that are seen as "not nice" so the supply and demand factor means more houses being built unnecessarily so people can live where they desire. But then those who are in need of affordable living (houses from the LA) cannot just move anywhere, they have to meet certain requirements to be homed there.
The fact that the UK is over populated and cannot accommodate more and that those on benefits are just lazy scrounges are all things the media show to hide something that's really going on, they're scaremongering.
Sorry have to kindly disagree with the first part of your comment.
I wasn't being fussy in looking for a well known nice area within my home town or nearby to it. I would of moved into any available property of the size we need. There really aren't that many available properties where I'm from and little amount in nearby towns either. I've been checking since i recieved my eviction order in September just gone. I even begged my local council for a home in even the worst council estate within my home town...we got told no! There's nothing available. The council lady herself said there are no social houses available..none. so I've had to rent an overpriced (but aren't they all) private house that's too small, just so we can afford a roof over our heads. I'm not too overly pissed about it because at least we've got a roof over our heads to go to. Many don't even get that. They're forced into B&B's or shared accommodation.
Sorry I didn mean for this to appear targeted at you, I was merely pointing out that all over the country there are unoccupied houses due to people not wanting to live there. I should know the exact figure, but my mind had gone blank, but I can find it out tomorrow. With no one wanting to move to these houses they become run down and then eventually inhabitable.
With your eviction notice you should have qualified for LA housing, even if they say there are none you should be put on a list or added to their system depending on how they do their hoising, whether it's list based or choice based lettings, you still should have got on to it.
Oh no sorry didn't mean to sound as if you were aiming at me.
No unfortunately not. All the council lady offered me was a loan for house deposit and rent in advance. I politely said no because I'm using the deposit from this house to go towards the other house I found.
I'd love a council house because they are so cheap to rent. Just unfortunate I'm not allowed one and there's none available anyway. I think it would greatly help if the government put a cap on the rental charges of private rented houses. Stop all those private landlords from cashing in with their outrageous rents."
Yes they have a duty to offer assistance with a deposit, but many fail to inform people of this. But can completely understand your reason not to take it.
I'm really baffled as to why they say you didn't qualify for LA housing, especially as the eviction was not from your own doing.
I recently moved into a council property and yes they are cheap, but that wasn't my main reason for moving into one. Since 16 I have been in private rented and the landlords eventually want the house back for whatever reason and I was fed up of not being able to settle; I wanted stability for my kids. The council offered me a deposit scheme to go into private rented and I refused, I knew the housing was limited where I lived but I also knew they had a duty to rehome me. It may appear my actions were selfish and I will admit they were, but for 12 years of no stability, it got enough.
I completely agree that the government should put a cap on what landlords can charge and they did in fact do this many years ago, but then it all became market based so competition increased and because of people needing it and wanting it in certain areas the landlords can charge what they wish, in higher demand areas the rent will be a lot more than a poverty stricken area. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I'm in agony every day , but ESA assessment people have been told to fail as many people as they can. Am on higher rate JSA because I'm classed as disabled because of pain and other symptoms, but ESA said I was lying, my doctor is fuming. I'm Defo not lazy, depression over lack of things I'm able to manage even though some burocrat who does not know my condition, or is not qualified says I'm not. Been trying to find things that I may be able to manage, but there are a lot of employers out there that do discriminate too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
No. Before we got married I unfortunately (due to many corcumstances) found myself having to claim income support, council tax and housing benefit through no fault of my own. As soon as we married and started living together (we couldn't and didn't before we married) I stopped.
I am not a person who wanted to claim benefits, and I feel bad for do i g so, but the circumstances I was in I had little choice
I have friends in similar situations and I think each one don't wish to claim but feel they have little choice in the matter and are aiming to the point they no longer have to.
If course you will get those who just want to claim and not give back but they are the minority not the majority |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties.
This is my situation at the moment. I often go without hot dinners so my kids have enough food for them all. I currently have no heating due to having zero cash to top up the gas meter, being evicted through no fault of our own due to landlord wanting to sell. Can't find a similar property due the new capping system, meaning we can't afford it. I do pay most of my rent but admittedly not all of it due to my low income. Finding a home i can afford to rent means I've now got to share a bedroom with my teenage daughter. I've even been told I'm not entitled to a council house even though we're being evicted.
I've got university qualifications and applied for over a 100 jobs. Was only offered 3 inter_iews which resulted in being turned down by all three due to lack of practical experience. I can't afford to work for free in order to get the experience. Have been offered a good well paid job but that doesn't start until next October. So basically I'm stuck on a low income and claiming tax credits. Which as described above, isn't allowing me and my kids to live in luxury. I wish people didn't tar as all the same. Every person working or not that has kids, is entitled to tax credits.
Those benefit programmes don't always show the real life of every low income families. I wish they would so the real truth of it would be shown.
By the way, I'm not seeking sympathy just relaying to people like the OP the truth of it and thats....one size doesn't fit all! "
This is really really sad and I feel for you and your kids. On the otherhand I said to myself how come you have Internet connection and no heating but that's for another day. Feel free to say hi as I'm quite touched by your story. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"People on benefits lazy?"
Of course they are we should do a Kenny Everret on them round em up into a field and bomb the bastards .
But no wait I'm sure the majority have very valid reasons to be on them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties.
This is my situation at the moment. I often go without hot dinners so my kids have enough food for them all. I currently have no heating due to having zero cash to top up the gas meter, being evicted through no fault of our own due to landlord wanting to sell. Can't find a similar property due the new capping system, meaning we can't afford it. I do pay most of my rent but admittedly not all of it due to my low income. Finding a home i can afford to rent means I've now got to share a bedroom with my teenage daughter. I've even been told I'm not entitled to a council house even though we're being evicted.
I've got university qualifications and applied for over a 100 jobs. Was only offered 3 inter_iews which resulted in being turned down by all three due to lack of practical experience. I can't afford to work for free in order to get the experience. Have been offered a good well paid job but that doesn't start until next October. So basically I'm stuck on a low income and claiming tax credits. Which as described above, isn't allowing me and my kids to live in luxury. I wish people didn't tar as all the same. Every person working or not that has kids, is entitled to tax credits.
Those benefit programmes don't always show the real life of every low income families. I wish they would so the real truth of it would be shown.
By the way, I'm not seeking sympathy just relaying to people like the OP the truth of it and thats....one size doesn't fit all!
This is really really sad and I feel for you and your kids. On the otherhand I said to myself how come you have Internet connection and no heating but that's for another day. Feel free to say hi as I'm quite touched by your story."
Possibly because they can't afford a home phone and every mobile phone package I have come across offers a certain amount of days allowance for it. Or in the case of many schools, homework, especially maths, is internet based so the poster is trying to get her children a good education. Who knows, or she's a a friends house using theirs |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm going to offend the virtue-signalling regulars again here, but essentially, if you're on Jobseekers for a significant period of time and are able bodied, then yes, you are lazy.
Supermarkets employ people with down syndrome, so I don't buy for one second that you "can't find a job" - What I translate it to is, "I'll only take a job that I'm in no way qualified to do." "
this is a very singular way of thinking. We do not have full employment in this country . so it must follow that someone somewhere must be unemployed . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Read all the opinions/ comments on this thread and it's definitely enlightened me more about the whole benefit/ food stamp thing but there're some things I'll like to add:
1. I understand people on here who look after loved ones with disabilities and from what I see people say the pay is, it's no pay in my opinion but on the otherhand, remember that there're people in your shoes all over the world who don't get a penny from their government.
2. People need to educate their relatives on the downside of unprotected inter course with their partner as there's way too many 16-20 and pregnant in the UK. This is why many young girls with kids don't land a job/ end up on long term benefits as many companies would rather employ someone who doesn't have much commitments and I don't blame them for doing so.
3. Get a mortgage on a house/ flat when you can. It's much better than paying the same amount just to live in town and end up in a very tight situation if you were to lose your job for instance.
4. Stop living a hand to mouth lifestyle (do have some savings and cut down on your twice a year holiday if you'll have to work to provide the next meal for your family).
5. Don't be in a hurry to leave your partner unless that was the only option. Two heads are better than one when it comes to ideas and providing for an average household. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm all for helping people who genuinely need support from example being made redundant or due to genuine ill health , after all this was the core reason benefits were created....
But what really makes me mad are the people who abuse the system ...who know every loophole to get more from the system ,
I know someone who has been unemployed for 10 years and has just gone through 2 years of triage and still not "found" a job, in fact I'd go as far as saying... this person "works" at not being employed ....yet has a lot of luxury items such as sky TV at £105 per month , has a greater income than myself after paying my living expenses etc....and I generally work 60 hours per week.....how can that be "right or just"?
that doesn't happen now
The cap outside london is 250pw including housing benefit.... so most likely fiddling somewhere and its stories like this that spawn all this hate.. the reality of living on benefits is shall i buy food and heating or the new shoes as have holes in.. and with the new lower cap... more and more families are going to be struggling and many forced to move.to cheaper properties.
This is my situation at the moment. I often go without hot dinners so my kids have enough food for them all. I currently have no heating due to having zero cash to top up the gas meter, being evicted through no fault of our own due to landlord wanting to sell. Can't find a similar property due the new capping system, meaning we can't afford it. I do pay most of my rent but admittedly not all of it due to my low income. Finding a home i can afford to rent means I've now got to share a bedroom with my teenage daughter. I've even been told I'm not entitled to a council house even though we're being evicted.
I've got university qualifications and applied for over a 100 jobs. Was only offered 3 inter_iews which resulted in being turned down by all three due to lack of practical experience. I can't afford to work for free in order to get the experience. Have been offered a good well paid job but that doesn't start until next October. So basically I'm stuck on a low income and claiming tax credits. Which as described above, isn't allowing me and my kids to live in luxury. I wish people didn't tar as all the same. Every person working or not that has kids, is entitled to tax credits.
Those benefit programmes don't always show the real life of every low income families. I wish they would so the real truth of it would be shown.
By the way, I'm not seeking sympathy just relaying to people like the OP the truth of it and thats....one size doesn't fit all!
This is really really sad and I feel for you and your kids. On the otherhand I said to myself how come you have Internet connection and no heating but that's for another day. Feel free to say hi as I'm quite touched by your story.
Possibly because they can't afford a home phone and every mobile phone package I have come across offers a certain amount of days allowance for it. Or in the case of many schools, homework, especially maths, is internet based so the poster is trying to get her children a good education. Who knows, or she's a a friends house using theirs "
Very valid points and some of these were why I said we'll leave it for another day |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
