I don’t know, but that’s the point I am making. We’re not talking about people with jobs, we’re talking about those that only have the benefits to live off.
They won’t get £23k if they work, so how will they be able to stay in London, as the government wants to sell off all council housing. Also, most people that do the menial jobs go through periods of unemployment. What then, force them to move out of London until they find a job?
Benefit cuts are a very real and frightening reality for a lot of families, including an awful lot that are in work. There needs to be some flexibility in the maximum amount, otherwise the poor will be continually moved on.
Building more council houses is a great long term solution, but it doesn’t help right now. This will cause a lot of hardship for very little return.
Just seems a cruelty too far(again).
3 Likes
Yes SoS, but that’s the whole point, you won’t be affected by the benefits limit if you work. So when you asked who will do the menial jobs it was an irrelevant argument to me saying that those who only live off benefits should not live in London. You can have poor people, just not those who purely live off benefits. This is why I wanted to exclude London as it’s a different argument about where someone who doesn’t work should live.
The article is about cuts to the total amount of benefits that can be claimed. So, let’s start this again. With those figures above, can people not afford to live?
I’ll play.
Blair: absolute fucking cunt
Thatcher: absolute fucking cunt
Cameron:absolute cunt
May: absolute cunt
Major: cunt
Brown: cunt
Future PM, J.C. Best not call him a cunt, he’s the second coming(clue in the initials). 
Or should that say he’s coming second?
1 Like
Originally posted by @Chertsey-Saint
Yes SoS, but that’s the whole point, you won’t be affected by the benefits cut if you work. So when you asked who will do the menial jobs it was an irrelevant argument to me saying that those who only live off benefits should not live in London. You can have poor people, just not those who purely live off benefits. This is why I wanted to exclude London as it’s a different argument about where someone who doesn’t work should live.
The article is about cuts to the total amount of benefits that can be claimed. So, let’s start this again. With those figures above, can people not afford to live?
Why do you believe that if someone works they won’t be affected? There are people in work,in London that will be affected by this. Also how long would these people need to be between jobs before they are forced out? If you have no flexibility, they are forced out as soon as they get laid off. For these people, the answer has to be no. How about we have the cuts, but not until there is ample council housing(that’s as good as i can do).
Because, as you said above, if they work then they won’t reach the cap level, so how will they suffer from the benefits cap???
So, as I said above, the problem is not the benefits cap, the problem is the lack of housing in London that means the benefits cap is too low, as you seem to be happy with the amount they get outside the capital.
Did i say that? Thought i asked why you believe that.
Housing is a problem over the whole country and i’m certainly not happy about it. We all seem to agree that more council housing is a necessity, so lets all vote for the party that makes building them a priority 
You said “They won’t get £23k if they work…” about an hour ago.
Happy to agree to that.
Did i, Dam.
No way am i going to bother reading up on the benefits system. Wonder if watching a Loach film counts? I could manage that.
1 Like
it’s is unlikely you will see kids on the streets. although you may see a few 16/17 year olds. They are still kids so should have some form of housing provided.
So you can’t pay your rent (for whatever reason). You get evicted. off you go to housing. They say as you got into debt they have no duty to you. Bye. But you have kids. They may provide 28 days in a B&B, some may offer a deposit scheme… A bit of time to find something. But you have no money, no deposit, no mates or friends who can help. Housing suggest you go to social care. But you worry they’ll take the kids into care. Technically they could do that but unless there are serious risks (like you are living rough with them) it’s unlikely. Sometimes social care may use their money to help. But having had lots of cuts to their budget can’t really do that either. pretty worrying time.
Are there stats showing exactly how many people on benefits are getting 23k? what proportion of people on benefits are getting this amount. I’ve worked with people on benefits and quite frankly they’re not living particularly luxurious lives. Yes they may have a big TV (usually via a extortionate hire purchase) and some of them have been pulled into a Sky package but as most of them have little in their lives that TV package is all their entertainment.
A couple of points.
-
If you can’t provide a house for your kids then they probably should be taken into care until they can sort it out.
-
No idea how many get that much, but if it’s not many then surely having the cap at that level isn’t an issue?
Benefits are not there to pay for big TV’s and Sky packages. They are there to either plug a gap whilst someone finds work, or they are down on their luck. The only people that I have sympathy for are those, like the disabled, that cannot work. Benefits is not a way of life, and should not be a way of life.
So you lose your job. On this occasion no fault of your own. Or maybe that 0 hour contract hasn’t brought you any shifts. You cannot pay rent/mortgage. You have no savings because you’ve just about had enough to pay rent/mortgage and the rest. You cannot get that stop gap benefits asap. It takes a while. You get evicted. Is it fair to take your kids off you. No.
We need to find some details/numbers on this.
2013/apr/06/welfare-britain-facts-myths
A bit old. I’ll keep searching.
Disabled people can and do work with the right support. But that support costs. Do it doesn’t happen as much as it should.
I will clarify. The majority of the families I have encountered who have a TV and maybe have Sky/Virgin etc have at one time or other worked or who are considered unable to work under ESA. Looking at that article worklessness isn’t going on for generations and isn’t a wide spread lifestyle.
3 Likes
Despicable and, more importantly, dangerous behaviour in not condemning the media coverage of the high court ruling. For all his faults I can’t help feeling Cameron wouldn’t have shied away from making the difficult statements that May seems to be shirking on almost weekly basis at the moment.
I always suspected she was a cunt.
2 Likes
Had an old mate ask me for advice this morning. At first, I thought she was just bitching about having to pay money. As I looked into her case more, made a startling discovery.
The area covered by Fareham Borough Council doesn’t have a single educational institution where one can do A levels. My mate’s miffed because travel for her kid is going to be £600 p.a.
I’m not sure (and I’d welcome any input) but I don’t even think this is FBC’s jurisdiction. Doesn’t the county council run education in Hampshire?
Either way, massive bollock dropped there. 116K people that can’t get an academic education for their kid in their own area. In Conservative run areas.
Did a longer piece on Fareham thing.
Are you sure of your facts Pap because I think it’s Hampshire County Council that is responsible for education in Fareham
2 Likes
And a dried up one at that.
I did know that after I checked. However, re-reading that I used Fareham Borough Council when I should have used Borough of Fareham
Fucking hell. Jeremy Hunt and Farage are both on the Andrew Marr Show. This is going to ruin my Sunday.
1 Like
That’s weird man (although that’s coming from someone who travelled 30 minutes by bus to get to College).