FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Universal credit
Universal credit
Jump to: Newest in thread
Welfare simply doesn't resonate with a large section of the electorate outside of traditional Labour voters, and even with those that it does resonate with the problems with Universal Credit is less the idea behind it but the current implementation of the idea. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
There are thousands of people who are not registered who just happen to disproportionately represent those on this awful system. Since 2010 the conservatives have penalized and made these types of people poorer and with a lower standard of living. Just almost having survival is a priority for thousands of people, in a culture of abuse from the state that should instead be supportive, an employment and home accommodation system that is fraught with danger, without security. These people should have government and politics working for them but they are largely displaced and currently less likely to vote if the election comes quickly.
This benefit has cost the country dearly and should be a priority for all parties |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"Welfare simply doesn't resonate with a large section of the electorate outside of traditional Labour voters, and even with those that it does resonate with the problems with Universal Credit is less the idea behind it but the current implementation of the idea."
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Universal credit was and is the worst idea ever, we should be getting people to work for local authorities and not just handing out money for people to live with no return.
There are of corse some that for whatever reasons cannot work and that’s just a fact of life.
Paying rent to the claimant instead of the landlord was a real stupid idea from the start and was doomed to fail from the start.
They always start out thinking that there is a cheaper way of doing things but time and time again it just ends up costing more and complicates things even more.
I do think that many who would normally not bother to register and cite would make an effort if they thought labour would actually do this.
And maybe stop private companies being used to run these things assessments because all that does is waste even more money |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Mrs N's son is currently living on a section after fucking his brain up with powerful stuffs that you smoke. He spends all his £500/month on takeaways as he says the food there is so crap and is provided with a nice warm comfy bed for the night. Seems that theuniversal credit system is working OK for him.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *estivalMan
over a year ago
borehamwood |
the people saying it is wrong to pay claiments there rent instead of to the landlord.ever heard of personal responsibility? if you would rather spend the rent on something else instrad of keepin a roif over ya head that ya own fault.know about a dozen peeps on UC and none are bejind on there rent or strugglin any worse than they were on the last system.yra they had few probs wen first switched to it but was all sorted within a month.dont just belive what u see in the press talk to the actual peeps who are on it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"the people saying it is wrong to pay claiments there rent instead of to the landlord.ever heard of personal responsibility? if you would rather spend the rent on something else instrad of keepin a roif over ya head that ya own fault.know about a dozen peeps on UC and none are bejind on there rent or strugglin any worse than they were on the last system.yra they had few probs wen first switched to it but was all sorted within a month.dont just belive what u see in the press talk to the actual peeps who are on it"
Trouble is some people just cannot be trusted to pay the rent and then the tax payer ends up picking up the bill a seccond time.
Just like no matter what there are those scrotes who will not work no matter what they! and will just sponge off everyone else.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *estivalMan
over a year ago
borehamwood |
i agree with you i know a few who wont work and there kids are doing the same.but like i said if they would rather get evicted than pay there rent thats there fault.there the sort of peeps who even if they were working they would still fuck the rent off.we all know peeps like this.being a tax payer why should i be paying for stupid people.heres one for ya one bloke i know not worked for over ten years no skills says he not working unless he earning at least 30 grand a year this is what some peeps are like |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"i agree with you i know a few who wont work and there kids are doing the same.but like i said if they would rather get evicted than pay there rent thats there fault.there the sort of peeps who even if they were working they would still fuck the rent off.we all know peeps like this.being a tax payer why should i be paying for stupid people.heres one for ya one bloke i know not worked for over ten years no skills says he not working unless he earning at least 30 grand a year this is what some peeps are like"
As long as your working and bettering your life and possibly your children's lives- does it really matter if some bone idle people and their children decide to live on benefits?
I mean it's hardly big money and they are the ones who won't achieve much in their lives.
Your only on the Earth a short time and if sitting on your arse and just making ends meat is your ideal life, then great
Most people moaning about benefits can easily give up work and do the same if they want. (Considering you have no savings etc.)
I much prefer to work and enjoy my luxuries and promote a good work ethic to my children. I really don't care if my tax goes on the above. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"i agree with you i know a few who wont work and there kids are doing the same.but like i said if they would rather get evicted than pay there rent thats there fault.there the sort of peeps who even if they were working they would still fuck the rent off.we all know peeps like this.being a tax payer why should i be paying for stupid people.heres one for ya one bloke i know not worked for over ten years no skills says he not working unless he earning at least 30 grand a year this is what some peeps are like
As long as your working and bettering your life and possibly your children's lives- does it really matter if some bone idle people and their children decide to live on benefits?
I mean it's hardly big money and they are the ones who won't achieve much in their lives.
Your only on the Earth a short time and if sitting on your arse and just making ends meat is your ideal life, then great
Most people moaning about benefits can easily give up work and do the same if they want. (Considering you have no savings etc.)
I much prefer to work and enjoy my luxuries and promote a good work ethic to my children. I really don't care if my tax goes on the above. "
But the bone idle people that choose not to work are the reason that places like the police and the NHS don't have enough money. Absolutely there should be a safety net for those who fall on hard times are need help to get back on their feet, but when a cancer patient dies cause the money for their treatment was spent on some feckless layabout who wanted another pizza, that kinda gets my back up! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"i agree with you i know a few who wont work and there kids are doing the same.but like i said if they would rather get evicted than pay there rent thats there fault.there the sort of peeps who even if they were working they would still fuck the rent off.we all know peeps like this.being a tax payer why should i be paying for stupid people.heres one for ya one bloke i know not worked for over ten years no skills says he not working unless he earning at least 30 grand a year this is what some peeps are like
As long as your working and bettering your life and possibly your children's lives- does it really matter if some bone idle people and their children decide to live on benefits?
I mean it's hardly big money and they are the ones who won't achieve much in their lives.
Your only on the Earth a short time and if sitting on your arse and just making ends meat is your ideal life, then great
Most people moaning about benefits can easily give up work and do the same if they want. (Considering you have no savings etc.)
I much prefer to work and enjoy my luxuries and promote a good work ethic to my children. I really don't care if my tax goes on the above.
But the bone idle people that choose not to work are the reason that places like the police and the NHS don't have enough money. Absolutely there should be a safety net for those who fall on hard times are need help to get back on their feet, but when a cancer patient dies cause the money for their treatment was spent on some feckless layabout who wanted another pizza, that kinda gets my back up!"
We spent £129 billion last year on the NHS (don't get me wrong I love the NHS) if you think kicking a few bone idle people off benefits is going to help, your delusional.
If they actually ran it like a private company without so much waste it wouldn't be in such a mess. Look at the wages of the "bosses".
The carparks sold off to private companies and taking in all the profit- when the NHS could be benefiting from the extortionate prices charged.
Or all the private contracts in the NHS that use their equipment and then charge the NHS as a thank you.
I could go on all night and I've not even started on the police and their wastage!
High performance cars they smash up and the helicopters they use to chase criminals for something stupid and in the end they are given a slap on the wrist... even though its cost us hundreds of thousands of pounds to catch them.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"i agree with you i know a few who wont work and there kids are doing the same.but like i said if they would rather get evicted than pay there rent thats there fault.there the sort of peeps who even if they were working they would still fuck the rent off.we all know peeps like this.being a tax payer why should i be paying for stupid people.heres one for ya one bloke i know not worked for over ten years no skills says he not working unless he earning at least 30 grand a year this is what some peeps are like
As long as your working and bettering your life and possibly your children's lives- does it really matter if some bone idle people and their children decide to live on benefits?
I mean it's hardly big money and they are the ones who won't achieve much in their lives.
Your only on the Earth a short time and if sitting on your arse and just making ends meat is your ideal life, then great
Most people moaning about benefits can easily give up work and do the same if they want. (Considering you have no savings etc.)
I much prefer to work and enjoy my luxuries and promote a good work ethic to my children. I really don't care if my tax goes on the above.
But the bone idle people that choose not to work are the reason that places like the police and the NHS don't have enough money. Absolutely there should be a safety net for those who fall on hard times are need help to get back on their feet, but when a cancer patient dies cause the money for their treatment was spent on some feckless layabout who wanted another pizza, that kinda gets my back up!
We spent £129 billion last year on the NHS (don't get me wrong I love the NHS) if you think kicking a few bone idle people off benefits is going to help, your delusional.
If they actually ran it like a private company without so much waste it wouldn't be in such a mess. Look at the wages of the "bosses".
The carparks sold off to private companies and taking in all the profit- when the NHS could be benefiting from the extortionate prices charged.
Or all the private contracts in the NHS that use their equipment and then charge the NHS as a thank you.
I could go on all night and I've not even started on the police and their wastage!
High performance cars they smash up and the helicopters they use to chase criminals for something stupid and in the end they are given a slap on the wrist... even though its cost us hundreds of thousands of pounds to catch them.
"
Not pretending the NHS and police are perfect, but the 94 billion spent on welfare last year (excluding pensions) gives a pretty big chunk to play with. I think you'll find there is more than a "few" that are scamming the system. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
So you kick those people into minimum wage jobs, they are still entitled to UC since they wont be earning enough? Now you can sleep easy?
If you sit and read the statistics on things like personal independence payments (obviously I'm not stating there is a connection between bums and this!) They overhauled this system due to 0.02% fraud and now its costs billions more than expected due to appeals and contracting out, it's such a big money making exercise for the people in Whitehall's mates.
Blaming the poorest in society is funny. Maybe some people have very low IQs if they want to live that way. But like them you have a choice to live like that... why dont you if your so envious?
I prefer working for a good wage and dont envy those who want to live on the bread line. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
94 billion welfare bill includes all those working on minimum wage doesn't it?
How can you distinguish from that fact that those people aren't working?
Or if that 94 billion includes PIP and child benefit which anyone of any income can claim?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
How much do we spend on working age people?
Over £46 billion goes on family benefits, income support and tax credits. This includes benefits such as Child Benefit and support for people on low income. Around £2.2 billion goes to the unemployed.
Here we go I found it, we spend 2.2 billion on the unemployed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Last point to make 
The 2015 general election cost us over 114 million.
Theres so much waste of money it's a joke! I dont even want to Google what the last 3 years has cost us due to all the game playing in government.
Rant over I'm off |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
We need to stick to the facts
Universal Credit was designed to solve a problem, how do you reduce administrative costs associated with multiple benefits with the ability to reduce benefit fraud?
Rolling them into one could do that. It saves billions.
Problem is that such a massive program costs money and time, something that is still in short supply.
The program was rushed, corners cuts, and the payouts were not reflective of the situation people are in, as a result the phased rollout even after 8 years is still not fixed fully.
Its only logical that that it will take many more years before universal credit is fixed.
Many people forget that administration of the welfare system was large and complex, is it wrong to fix it?
I am very sure that if labour won the GE, they would keep it, and probably increase the welfare payout only.
Remember and policy both left and right is just a promise of what government want to do, it still has to go through parliamentary process and scrutiny.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The concept of taking six forms of benefit and rolling it into one universal system sounds great doesn’t it! The trouble is that the only real benefit to the government will be having less staff employed to sort out the awarding of benefits which will decrease the civil service pensions liabilities. Outsourcing this to independent assessors enables the liability for incorrect refusal of claims to be denied and the buck can then be passed back to these companies. This simple system is designed to allow the government to save money by preying on the disadvantaged and lining the pockets of all their public school chums who run these supposedly efficient businesses. It would be interesting to know how much universal credit has cost the country compared to the previous system? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The concept of taking six forms of benefit and rolling it into one universal system sounds great doesn’t it! The trouble is that the only real benefit to the government will be having less staff employed to sort out the awarding of benefits which will decrease the civil service pensions liabilities. Outsourcing this to independent assessors enables the liability for incorrect refusal of claims to be denied and the buck can then be passed back to these companies. This simple system is designed to allow the government to save money by preying on the disadvantaged and lining the pockets of all their public school chums who run these supposedly efficient businesses. It would be interesting to know how much universal credit has cost the country compared to the previous system? "
Some on here have never been on universal credit, if they were i think their perspective would be different |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
"Universal credit was and is the worst idea ever, we should be getting people to work for local authorities and not just handing out money for people to live with no return.
"
That was the original concept.
The Beveridge Report of 1942 concluded social security was affordable only if it was claimed by those genuinely unable to work.
For those who could work, nationalised industry meant there was a job for everyone.
Anyone who could work was paid to work. A guaranteed job.
The Beveridge Report was a superb holistic piece of work that reformed society and ensured post-war Britain did not return to the squalor, ignorance, disease and destitution of pre-war Britain.
Both Conservative and Labour parties adhered to its principles for 30 years.
The Thatcher administration dismantled these principles when it removed nationalised industry from the equation.
Since then, society has been paying people NOT to work.
Social security without nationalised industry was considered unaffordable in the 1940s.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *os19Man
over a year ago
Edmonton |
"The concept of taking six forms of benefit and rolling it into one universal system sounds great doesn’t it! The trouble is that the only real benefit to the government will be having less staff employed to sort out the awarding of benefits which will decrease the civil service pensions liabilities. Outsourcing this to independent assessors enables the liability for incorrect refusal of claims to be denied and the buck can then be passed back to these companies. This simple system is designed to allow the government to save money by preying on the disadvantaged and lining the pockets of all their public school chums who run these supposedly efficient businesses. It would be interesting to know how much universal credit has cost the country compared to the previous system? "
. The concept of 6 benefits rolled into one does sound great however the reality is it’s not a one cap fits all.My own personal thoughts one of the 6 benefits that moved over to Universal Credit was Housing Benefits should not have moved over as there are some claimants that would spend that money on other things then before you know it they find themselves evicted.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Universal credit was and is the worst idea ever, we should be getting people to work for local authorities and not just handing out money for people to live with no return.
That was the original concept.
The Beveridge Report of 1942 concluded social security was affordable only if it was claimed by those genuinely unable to work.
For those who could work, nationalised industry meant there was a job for everyone.
Anyone who could work was paid to work. A guaranteed job.
The Beveridge Report was a superb holistic piece of work that reformed society and ensured post-war Britain did not return to the squalor, ignorance, disease and destitution of pre-war Britain.
Both Conservative and Labour parties adhered to its principles for 30 years.
The Thatcher administration dismantled these principles when it removed nationalised industry from the equation.
Since then, society has been paying people NOT to work.
Social security without nationalised industry was considered unaffordable in the 1940s.
"
.
Even most conservatives like myself are for the nationalising of utilities, trains, buses etc etc.
However I wouldn't want any of the reprobates who skive off doing a job anywhere near them.
They only thing there even remotely capable of doing is litter picking and even that would be a challenge to them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The problems I have with universal credit are if I get any extra money paid into my account from nothing to do with employment. I won’t recieve any jobseekers or be signed off. Under the old way, you could put up to £6000.00 into to your account before being penalised. The minute any extra money touches your account under universal credit and you are penalised straight away. One payment a month is ridiculous. Generally people don’t care about anyone on benefits. I came off juror service not too long ago with jobs due to start, which I lost out on due to juror service hanging over my head. No one would entertain me until juror service was completed. Looking to start back working in the new year. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The problems I have with universal credit are if I get any extra money paid into my account from nothing to do with employment. I won’t recieve any jobseekers or be signed off. Under the old way, you could put up to £6000.00 into to your account before being penalised. The minute any extra money touches your account under universal credit and you are penalised straight away. One payment a month is ridiculous. Generally people don’t care about anyone on benefits. I came off juror service not too long ago with jobs due to start, which I lost out on due to juror service hanging over my head. No one would entertain me until juror service was completed. Looking to start back working in the new year."
Didn't know that! I used to be on jsa2 a few years ago. I remember if you had over 6k , £1 taken off for every £250 over. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
