Benefits. for or against a cap?

[The Mighty Elvi]

From Today's papers:

1. Couple who won £10 Million, still claiming £500 a month in benefits. Perfectly legally.
2. Couples who both claim carers allowance for looking after each other.

 

[Gti_Jamo]

Were dealing with a system that was always going to fail.....and it will continue to fail regardless of wether or not benifit caps are implimented.

[The Mighty Elvi]

We can all blame Labour for increasing the number and value of benefits when they were in government.

But can you really blame people for remaining on benefits when getting a job means they are financially worse off?

Rather than self respect, betterment, contributing to society, etc...they only think of "is it more money?"

Perhaps its not the benefits system that needs an overhaul, but more so the psyche of the "shameless" generation.

[dTEA]

Oi leave Openshaw out of it 

[AudiA8Quattro]

We can all blame Labour for increasing the number and value of benefits when they were in government.

Unemployment is generally higher under the Tories, and by quite a bit.
Interesting point that..

[VW BUSH]

I believe in the welfare state but its fooked.
With massive swell in population the only way to make it work is with higher taxes :sick:and more careful spending.
It does not help with all the other scandalous ways we piss our state funds up the wall, thanks in part to the buy now pay later attitude of the last 15 years, various wars and Public spectacles.
I am all for not spending anything we do not have to, as this is how I am having to live right now.

We need to create more jobs and put people in them, the proposed euro strategy is to limit the working week to 35 hours max effectively making overtime illegal, not sure myself but its an idea

[Jack3559]

We can all blame Labour for increasing the number and value of benefits when they were in government.

But can you really blame people for remaining on benefits when getting a job means they are financially worse off?

Rather than self respect, betterment, contributing to society, etc...they only think of "is it more money?"

Perhaps its not the benefits system that needs an overhaul, but more so the psyche of the "shameless" generation.

Well said, you're spot on.

I used to work in the job centre as the under 18s advisor.

Some people were out of luck and needed it to get back into work and were grateful and humble.

Some saw it as a career move and a god given right and were arrogant and expectant.

[VW BUSH]

We can all blame Labour for increasing the number and value of benefits when they were in government.

Unemployment is generally higher under the Tories, and by quite a bit.
Interesting point that..

Not a Tory but, in my lifetime they have always taken over from a failed labour government, 79 winter of discontent, 2010.....
Granted they took us into the 89 crash but managed to pull us round into the right direction with Tony Blair making the most of it.
Labour always up public spending and the civil service, its what they stand for.
Tories cut back spending and promote big business and trade at the expense of the civil service and level of state funding, the ethos is if pays for itself then it can stay.

[golf-sib]

We can all blame Labour for increasing the number and value of benefits when they were in government.

Unemployment is generally higher under the Tories, and by quite a bit.
Interesting point that..

Not a Tory but, in my lifetime they have always taken over from a failed labour government, 79 winter of discontent, 2010.....
Granted they took us into the 89 crash but managed to pull us round into the right direction with Tony Blair making the most of it.
Labour always up public spending and the civil service, its what they stand for.
Tories cut back spending and promote big business and trade at the expense of the civil service and level of state funding, the ethos is if pays for itself then it can stay.

By spending money on the civil service they where creating jobs and that what labor was always saying, "splash the cash on this and this project" in turn by starting all these additional projects, the project itself would a: create jobs and b: the project would be complete and benefit for its intended purpose.

Plus say you create one job, one person earns £1000 from that new job created, he goes and spends £20 in a shop, that £20 contributes that shop in paying and maintaining staff, so lets say someone in that shop earn £15 of the £20, they go and spend that etc... what you end up is a cycle of money being circulated in trade that benefits a line of people, keeps trade up and people in work and business.  Plus the £20, by creating the trade you are letting that money also be deducted into taxes that the government taxes via means of VAT, NI etc... so technically its helping pay the government more by creating that job.I think going around slashing services and stopping money is completely retarded due to the economical downfall it creates.

Plus civil servant earn rubbish money, where this myth comes from baffles me, they could earn more in the private sector doing similar jobs, instead the only real reward they get is the pension, which makes dealing with all the nonsense somewhat worthwhile at a poor rate. I do agree some of the public sector jobs pay to well, such as the police force, with the salary associated with the risk, the crazy pension and early retirement option... but sadly thats funded by multiple services such as homeoffice and council tax.

[dTEA]

^wish everyone saw it like that. People need to watch the social work programme on BBC protecting our children. That case was mild. Lots of gang culture etc, sexual abuse, exploitation, beatings and real neglect dealt with daily. Yet still paid less than teachers and still never geb the pay rises those funkers got under labour. Yet ultimately it's those in the social work profession expected to hold the fabric of society together....