Benefits culture

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Believe people who are fit and healthy and on job seekers allowance should be given council jobs to work for their benefits

I might not disagree - with them getting paid the max of the minimum wage or their benefits. Though it would have to be recognised that the job could only be 3-4 days a week as the unemployed need time to go to interviews - both with the DWP and potential employers.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Minimum wage traps many people on low wages due to the numbers of overseas people hapy to work for it as its four times what they can earn in their own countries.

Why on earth is this Lad wanting in work benefits if he is taking home £1000 a month?

He's not. Absolutely not. He just tells me of the problems with being on a zero hours contract when you can claim 'in work' benefits if the hours you end up working one week qualify you - but the next week they don't.

I can hardly tell you how pleased he was to have this job - £7.05 an hour - the rate didn't bother him - what he was absolutely ecstatic about was that it was full time contracted hours.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

From another thread but also applies to this one ...

Around 1% of welfare benefits is spent on unemployment benefits. It's a tiny proportion of government spending yet everyone seems to take most exception to this. Of this 1% an even smaller percentage will be people claiming the benefit and not even looking/wanting to work. Of course these people will be receiving other benefits such as housing and child support but the reality is that there are much larger issues at hand. One mainly being tax evasion from the richest in society, yet we chastise the poorest.

Maybe somewhat surprisingly, unclaimed benefits are higher than that of benefit fraud. While there are obviously those that milk the benefit systems, it is probably a much smaller percentage that what you actually think.

Correct. Again - my son have friends on zero hours contracts who could claim but don't as it is too much hassle. And my son's girlfriend is unemployed and could claim JSA - but she doesn't as - again - it is too much hassle and actually she doesn't want to as that is all she's known in her family - and she is trying to reject that culture (though she is still struggling with the idea of getting and holding a job - that's her background).

Instead she and my son struggle along on what he can earn while he encourages and helps her with job applications and getting her head around work...yes - for someone brought up in a culture of dependency it is proving difficult for her to get her head around earning money for herself.

 

[SocketRocket]

No one is saying that, you seem to brushing over the tax dodgers and continuing your attack on the benefit cheats, (look at the language you use to describe them both) both bad as each other, which one is there a crusade against?

I seem to be wasting my time discussing anything with you as you seem to have a preconceived prejudice that over rides anything I post. I made it very clear that I disagree with tax evasion but this thread is about 'Benefit Culture' so that is the main point in discussion. If you want to open another thread on Tax evasion then I would be quite happy to agree with you that tax evasion is a problem.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I seem to be wasting my time discussing anything with you as you seem to have a preconceived prejudice that over rides anything I post. I made it very clear that I disagree with tax evasion but this thread is about 'Benefit Culture' so that is the main point in discussion. If you want to open another thread on Tax evasion then I would be quite happy to agree with you that tax evasion is a problem.

Nice deflection, we've both agreed both benefit fraudsters and tax evaders are wrong, I simply asked why you described both set of scumbags differently.
Not as if you've kept every thread on point is it?

 

[SocketRocket]

Nice deflection, we've both agreed both benefit fraudsters and tax evaders are wrong, I simply asked why you described both set of scumbags differently.
Not as if you've kept every thread on point is it?

What deflection! You really are getting tied in knots here, probably best to just leave it there.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

What deflection! You really are getting tied in knots here, probably best to just leave it there.

So still no answer as to why you didn't give a nasty description of the tax evaders

 

[Deleted member 21258]

There is a big difference between Benefit cheats and tax evasion imho.:mmm:

Benefit cheats take from the tax paying public(government)

Tax evasion(alone) do not take, but do not give to the public(government) but have earnt their own money.

Very small but imho a really important difference.

This is why typically you are more likely to be prosecuted if you are a benefit cheat. Tax evasion in most cases you are not prosecuted but are charged heavy penalties for (notice this is not tax avoidance which is legal and remember the government make the laws, do not confuse the two which the government nowdays like to do on a 'moral' standing but I think it is safe to say if you legally did not have to pay tax under law, then you would probably wish to pay less than you currently do.... )

 

[Hacker Khan]

Call me a libtard but I'm quite happy to live in a society that provides welfare for those that need it. Even of that means some will abuse the system. Whist we should try and reduce the fraud, I'd much rather focus on the good the welfare system does. Even though I know that does not sell many papers that need to keep middle England angry and resentful.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

I overheard a conversation at the club today about Britain and it's benefits culture, seemed to be 2 views on offer.

1) All fit and able bodied people should earn their benefits by working for them doing things such as litter clearance and the various other tasks that local councils don't have the money to fund.

or

2) They should be allowed to sit at home and contribute nothing to society as forcing them to work for benefits amounts to slave labour and infringes on their human rights.


Your views on this?

This has gone way of track. The question is should fit and able bodied people on benefits be made to earn them. The thread is not about immigration, tax dodging or anything else along those lines.

 

[Liverbirdie]

There should be a crusade against both. The problem with tax dodgers is it is an unseen crime whereas we can all see the scroungers out and about which drives it home more.

We definitely need to get to grips with tax avoidance and it's issues. I have mates that are self employed plumbers and IT contractors etc and they pay a lot less tax than I do while earning a lot more than me, this includes my brother and brother in law and it really annoys me. They have accountants using all sorts of tricks while I have to use PAYE.

But Tax avoidance and Benefit scroungers both need dealing with and are both an issue not issues to use to beat each other over. Certainly the money raised could be used to support the NHS and care for the elderly pretty much immediately. A political party could make themselves very very popular if they could get this issue sorted quickly and efficiently.

Don't get me started on tax-dodging,self-employed plumbers, a particular place in Dante's 9th circle of hell for them......apart from when you have need of their services, of course.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

There is a big difference between Benefit cheats and tax evasion imho.:mmm:

Benefit cheats take from the tax paying public(government)

Tax evasion(alone) do not take, but do not give to the public(government) but have earnt their own money.

Very small but imho a really important difference.

This is why typically you are more likely to be prosecuted if you are a benefit cheat. Tax evasion in most cases you are not prosecuted but are charged heavy penalties for (notice this is not tax avoidance which is legal and remember the government make the laws, do not confuse the two which the government nowdays like to do on a 'moral' standing but I think it is safe to say if you legally did not have to pay tax under law, then you would probably wish to pay less than you currently do.... )

Imho there's no difference, both are defrauding me, you and every other honest person who pays their way.

The HMRC have powers the Benefits Agency doesn't and can impose such fines, also the HRMC have openly admitted it is better to fine than risk prosecution as those cases can and do go on for years costing millions.

The more money the Government gets in, the better it can look after society.

 

[Liverbirdie]

This has gone way of track. The question is should fit and able bodied people on benefits be made to earn them. The thread is not about immigration, tax dodging or anything else along those lines.

Oops ok, can we get them to edge the bunkers and brush the paths on local Munis then?

 

[Deleted member 16999]

This has gone way of track. The question is should fit and able bodied people on benefits be made to earn them. The thread is not about immigration, tax dodging or anything else along those lines.

If only it was that simple :thup:

 

[MegaSteve]

This has gone way of track. The question is should fit and able bodied people on benefits be made to earn them. The thread is not about immigration, tax dodging or anything else along those lines.

I believe the community payback scheme has collapsed...
So, not quite sure how you'd impose it on 'regular' folk...

Ohh... And, tax dodgers first please ...

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Nice deflection, we've both agreed both benefit fraudsters and tax evaders are wrong, I simply asked why you described both set of scumbags differently.
Not as if you've kept every thread on point is it?

Ah paul - @SR is very good at the deflection game...

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Call me a libtard but I'm quite happy to live in a society that provides welfare for those that need it. Even of that means some will abuse the system. Whist we should try and reduce the fraud, I'd much rather focus on the good the welfare system does. Even though I know that does not sell many papers that need to keep middle England angry and resentful.

ah - yer a just a libby snowflake - we should hammer the scroungers - no matter that in doing so there is some collateral damage...(don't you love that term)

 

[SocketRocket]

So still no answer as to why you didn't give a nasty description of the tax evaders

I just don't get your point. I have explained that I believe tax evasion and benefit fraud are both equally wrong. If you must continue to read something else into that then so be it.

 

[GB72]

There is always a problem with any tightening of the benefits system based on the adversarial nature of our party system. If benefits are cut then the immediate response is for the opposing party and the media to go into attack mode and berate any decision as taking money from those in need even if that is not the case. As such, it is rare for any widespread benefit reform.

My opinion, we have developed a society of people who feel that they are 'entitled'. Benefits should apply to the bare essentials in life, housing, heating and food (as well as anything relating to any medical condition). What we have now is a section of society that feels that benefits should cover TVs, Sky, games consoles, Ipads and my pet hate, booze and fags. There is an argument that very little, if anything, in the way of benefits should be paid direct to the recipients. If the money was paid direct to the landlord, utility companies and the rest paid in food vouchers then the extravagancies that it currently funds would disappear. That may sound harsh but I look at how I spend my wages and if there was nothing left after paying the mortgage, bills and food costs then all of the other things go out the window. I quite smoking when I was made redundant during the recession and stopped going out because I could not afford it. Hell, I have no idea how most people can afford to smoke £10 a pack.

 

[SocketRocket]

Ah paul - @SR is very good at the deflection game...

Am I really. Maybe you would like to back up that accusation or take it back. I wait for your detailed reply.