It doesn't matter how many people sign up it will never happen. Not in the party's interest to conduct the experiement and nor will it do his image any good
Online petition for IDS
- Thread starter sydney greenstreet
- Start date
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
I think we all know the people that deserve the state to look after them and the ones that are just on the take, unfortunately there are just too many of the later.
A problem I see is that so many people have been given benefits they should never of had in the first place and now it's almost impossible to take them back. The massive increases in tax credits that pushed the welfare bill up by 60% in a time of relative prosperity has created this malaise of an entitlement culture.
The idea of a safety net to help the genuinely disabled and those that fall temporarily on hard times is exactly what the system was designed for but how people earning good wages can expect state handouts is slightly bizarre. There are so many that have no intention of working and make a career of creating children as a safety shield to deliver money they would never be capable of earning.
Lets face it, the welfare system is no longer fit for purpose.
A problem I see is that so many people have been given benefits they should never of had in the first place and now it's almost impossible to take them back. The massive increases in tax credits that pushed the welfare bill up by 60% in a time of relative prosperity has created this malaise of an entitlement culture.
The idea of a safety net to help the genuinely disabled and those that fall temporarily on hard times is exactly what the system was designed for but how people earning good wages can expect state handouts is slightly bizarre. There are so many that have no intention of working and make a career of creating children as a safety shield to deliver money they would never be capable of earning.
Lets face it, the welfare system is no longer fit for purpose.
stevek1969
Money List Winner
Good post, correct the welfare system needs a massive reform, The Disability Living AlLowance (DLA) is a joke, you hear various people who get it and top whack as its split into 3 levels of payment, and what they get it for is shocking, there are people who generally need this allowance but don't get it as they are not good at playing the system
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
They are making new health checks for people claiming this allowance. 800,000 have not reclaimed it as they know they wont pass the check.
stevek1969
Money List Winner
About time to,just shows how many scroungers there are out there,its a pet hate of mine ,we tried unsuccessfully to get it for my son who has a heart condition and were knocked back at a tribunal and yet someone got it for back problems.
If IDS was to rise to the challenge, he'd probably just pay a pleb to do it for him.
viscount17
Money List Winner
The difference here is that this will be one of those necessary but deeply unpopular actions (in some sectors) that are almost guaranteed to lose you an election. Michael Heseltine got it right today when he said in effect that Labour were blowing smoke but, no matter what they say now, whoever got in will not change the policy.
This is unusally, a case of a government having the spheroids to make an unpopular decision. Doubtless there could be improvements, and penalties only coming in if you turn down a reasonable offer is one, but limiting state aid to £26K doesn't go far enough.
Colin L
Tour Winner
It is a fallacy to say, as I think is being suggested in places in this thread, that a benefit reform such as the "bedroom tax" is justified because the country is vastly in debt. It is fair to say that the financial situation justifies measures to reduce the deficit, but within that justification one measure might be entirely reasonable and another grossly unjust.
I remain puzzled as to what an individual in social housing is supposed to do about it if he/she has a spare bedroom. Move elsewhere? Why should the individual be penalised if there isn't anywhere else to go? Take in a lodger? I suspect you aren't allowed to. Have someone imposed on you by the local authority to share?
The injustice that hits me most of all, is the way in which everyone in genuine need is affected by measures which are taken because of a wish, which is no doubt admirable, to deal with skivers, shirkers, chancers, cheats and the like. It simply reminds me of the old classroom injustice of issuing a punishment to an entire class because some were misbehaving. For the honest to be penalised because of the dishonesty of others simply stinks of injustice.
I remain puzzled as to what an individual in social housing is supposed to do about it if he/she has a spare bedroom. Move elsewhere? Why should the individual be penalised if there isn't anywhere else to go? Take in a lodger? I suspect you aren't allowed to. Have someone imposed on you by the local authority to share?
The injustice that hits me most of all, is the way in which everyone in genuine need is affected by measures which are taken because of a wish, which is no doubt admirable, to deal with skivers, shirkers, chancers, cheats and the like. It simply reminds me of the old classroom injustice of issuing a punishment to an entire class because some were misbehaving. For the honest to be penalised because of the dishonesty of others simply stinks of injustice.
Last edited:
Tommo21
Tour Winner
I’ll tell you what tax should come in, SKY tax. I know a few people who are on benefits and they have their rent paid, motobility car..not just any car but a 27 grand Volvo, full sky package multi room, two dogs and the car very rarely leaves the house, because they don’t have any money left to put fuel in it. Oh, I phone’s as well, not just the parents but the kids as well.
SKY tax...anyone on benefits that have sky should have the appropriate reduction in their benefits. That would be a popular start in the right direction.
Years ago if you struggle you made do without.............today its get in the mire, we can’t pay for it anyway, who cares. Lets have another kid.
SKY tax...anyone on benefits that have sky should have the appropriate reduction in their benefits. That would be a popular start in the right direction.
Years ago if you struggle you made do without.............today its get in the mire, we can’t pay for it anyway, who cares. Lets have another kid.
Shaunmg
Head Pro
I am 61 and never received a penny unemployment pay or benefit of any kind other than the universal child benefit everyone got with kids. I bought my own house. My next benefit, god willing, will be my retirement pension at 65. I’ve worked paid in for it and I still doing so
But we have got it all wrong
The government have got it wrong because the posh boys in charge are so out of touch with reality
The so called bedroom tax is supposed to be designed to encourage people to move into smaller properties. The smaller properties are a figment of the posh boys imagination, they don’t exist.
Almost all councils and social housing associations have a chronic shortage of 1 and 2 bed properties. Even if they wanted to move, there are no smaller houses for them, that’s a fact. Fact 2, the biggest section of housing benefit claimants are in work
Reductions in benefits are to encourage people into work. What work?
Fact 3; most people in receipt of benefit are in work. The UK currently has 3 million under employed, that is; people trapped in part time employment and unable to get full time work. Then 2.5 million unemployed and receipt of benefit. along with 0.5 million unemployed and not geting benefit
A total of 6 million unable to earn a living wage, and that doesn’t include those not working and on DLA. So why are we surprised at our benefits bill?
As far the government is concerned 15 hours a week on minimum wage is a job, not in my book its not.
How do we get out of debt and reduce deficit? By following the Iceland example. Punish those who caused the crisis and not the victims. The Iceland crash a few years ago was spectacular. They jailed the bankers who caused it and bailed out the people who were the victims, not the other way round
The measures Iceland put in place has seen a dramatic reduction in personal debt and huge rise in employment. They are currently enjoying a growth rate of 2.5%. They did not take the austerity root.
But we have got it all wrong
The government have got it wrong because the posh boys in charge are so out of touch with reality
The so called bedroom tax is supposed to be designed to encourage people to move into smaller properties. The smaller properties are a figment of the posh boys imagination, they don’t exist.
Almost all councils and social housing associations have a chronic shortage of 1 and 2 bed properties. Even if they wanted to move, there are no smaller houses for them, that’s a fact. Fact 2, the biggest section of housing benefit claimants are in work
Reductions in benefits are to encourage people into work. What work?
Fact 3; most people in receipt of benefit are in work. The UK currently has 3 million under employed, that is; people trapped in part time employment and unable to get full time work. Then 2.5 million unemployed and receipt of benefit. along with 0.5 million unemployed and not geting benefit
A total of 6 million unable to earn a living wage, and that doesn’t include those not working and on DLA. So why are we surprised at our benefits bill?
As far the government is concerned 15 hours a week on minimum wage is a job, not in my book its not.
How do we get out of debt and reduce deficit? By following the Iceland example. Punish those who caused the crisis and not the victims. The Iceland crash a few years ago was spectacular. They jailed the bankers who caused it and bailed out the people who were the victims, not the other way round
The measures Iceland put in place has seen a dramatic reduction in personal debt and huge rise in employment. They are currently enjoying a growth rate of 2.5%. They did not take the austerity root.
Last edited:
don72
Newbie
Look folks; we can’t continue to please everyone all the time. Or this matrix will crash!
-Something has to be done about social benefit and who is eligible for claim it.
This cash ‘social security benefit blanket’ has to be thrown off the bed and a new temporary quilt put on instead; before there’s no bed at all for any of us to lie on when times get bleak.
I’m not a Tory supporter – far from it. But I understand the premise what IDS is trying to do; but he is going about it in the wrong way. Eg. Bedroom Tax etc, etc. Utter nonsense, won’t achieve nothing but create a housing shortage and social unrest.
Getting back to the point though. -Lets not forget was benefit was design to do in the first place.
Benefit is a ‘temporary help’ that is all, design to help people while they are out of work ‘temporary’. Help enough for you to avoid poverty, but a lot, lot less for you to live a comfortable life sustainably.
It is like McDonalds. McDonald is designed for you to get a quick snack or an in-between meal during the day or night. It is not designed for you to have breakfast, lunch and dinner there. (Although there people who use like that and wonder while health problems plague their lives. No, you go home and have your 3 square healthy meals a day there. -McDonalds is temporary.
As such Social benefit is temporary. It was not designed for it to be lived off permanently. But again, there are those who claim it who harbour the clear intent to live of the fat of the land of however long that is for. Perhaps a lifetime!
-This social group cannot continue to continue. They are scroungers and bone-idles who out numbering the genuine in need. -That includes disability people too who do not want to work and young mothers with cricket score amount of kids.
Life owes no one a living. YOU make your living and hopefully in the process you add something back to society.
I have proposal to end this farce for Ian Dunce Duncan Smith to use to combat this benefit parasite paradise problem:
• Ok. Everyone born in the UK is eligible to: Jobseekers Allowance, Council Tax and Housing benefit and Disability benefit.
• But, you are only eligible to apply for these benefits for only 12 years -from the time you are 18 to the retirement age of 65.
• The moment you make a claim for benefit and are accepted by the system to be paid benefit, the clock starts from there. You have 12 years to find work. 11 of those years, you benefit will be paid benefit at current rate. In your twelve year, your benefit is cut down by 25%. (I will explain later why…)
• Case point example, If you were claiming benefit and you found work two year later, then you have taken off two years off your allocated 12 years benefit, leaving you with 10 years.
• If this same person was to work for 5 years or more and then became unemployed and went back to claim benefit, he or she would have their clock reset back to 12 years, because they worked 5 years or more.
• If they worked less than 5 years, then their benefit clock would pick up where it last left off at 10 years and would continue to run-down until they found work before the 12 year allocation was up.
• If said person was still claiming benefit up to 11 years, then in the twelve year it would be cut by 25%. This benefit payment year would be called an ‘end of cycle hardship fund’. At this stage the said person would have 12 months to find work and only 12 months of 25% less benefit paid for 12 months too.
• At 12 years, if the same person was still out of work whether he/she made great efforts or not they would be excluded from benefit completely, no exceptions. However mothers with children under 13 years would get support for their children in the form of tokens for child maintenance only.
• Any foreign national from overseas who settled in the UK for less than 10 years will not be eligible of benefit – full stop. No excuses No exception.
• All benefit payments paid would not be in the form of money anymore.
These payments would not longer be paid straight into bank accounts or cash Giros given from Post Offices.
• All claimants now would be given a single card, which acts just like a debit or credit card. This has their NI number encoded in it. (It is useless to anyone who is not issued it (working folks) or anyone who finds one in the street. Their Jobseekers Allowance would be paid on this card.
• The card can purchase anything but you cannot draw cash from an ATM machines to buy drugs or purchase items such as, beer, wine, spirits, pay for bets in Gambling casinos or establishments such as Ladbrokes bookie shops or gamble online. Everything would be barcoded to safe guard this. (You can however purchase (if by choice) a Lottery Ticket, (as everyone deserves the chance of better life) but this would be restricted to only 4 £1.00 purchase tickets in any one month.
• This SSBC (Social Security Benefit Card) is a clear way to make sure that claimants, who are given benefit, spend their allowance on what they truly need to survive, for them and their family’s. This action hopes to instil responsibly, and not wastefulness, and to endear the claimant on the value of money. As you are ‘out of work’ it is you duties to get a mind-set of prudence.
- The jobless can avoid all this, - and just get a job!
That is my proposal to IDS.
don72
Newbie
Look folks; we can’t continue to please everyone all the time. Or this matrix will crash!
-Something has to be done about social benefit and who is eligible for claim it.
This cash ‘social security benefit blanket’ has to be thrown off the bed and a new temporary quilt put on instead; before there’s no bed at all for any of us to lie on when times get bleak!
I’m not a Tory supporter, – far from it. But I understand the premise what IDS is trying to do; but he is going about it in the wrong way. Eg. Bedroom Tax etc, etc. --Utter nonsense, won’t achieve nothing but create a housing shortage and social unrest.
Getting back to the point though. -Lets not forget what benefit was design to do in the first place?
Benefit is a ‘temporary help’ that is all, design to help people while they are out of work ‘temporary’. Help enough for you to avoid poverty, but a lot, lot less for you to live a comfortable life sustainably.
It is like McDonalds. McDonald is designed for you to get a quick snack or an in-between meal during the day or night. It is not designed for you to have breakfast, lunch and dinner there. (-Although there are people who use it like that because they are too lazy to cook and wonder why health problems plague their lives. -No, you go home and have your 3 square healthy meals a day at home -McDonalds is temporary.
As such Social benefit is temporary. It was not designed for it to be lived off permanently. -But again, there are those who claim it who harbour the clear intent to live of the 'fat of the land' for however long that is for. >Perhaps a lifetime!
-This social group cannot continue to continue. They are scroungers and bone-idles who are out numbering the genuine in need. -That includes disability people too who do not want to work and young mothers with cricket score amounts of kids.
Life owes no one a living. YOU make your living and hopefully in the process you add something back to society.
I have proposal to end this farce for Ian Dunce Duncan Smith to use to combat this benefit parasite paradise problem:
• Everyone born in the UK is eligible to: Jobseekers Allowance, Council Tax and Housing benefit and Disability benefit.
• But, you are only eligible to apply for these benefits for only 12 years -from the time you are 18 to the retirement age of 65.
• The moment you make a claim for benefit and are accepted by the system to be paid benefit, the clock starts from there. You have 12 years to find work. 11 of those years, you benefit will be paid benefit at current rate. In your twelve year, your benefit is cut down by 25%. (I will explain later why…)
• Case point example, If you were claiming benefit and you found work two year later, then you have taken off two years off your allocated 12 years benefit, leaving you with 10 years.
• If this same person was to work for 5 years or more and then became unemployed and went back to claim benefit, he or she would have their clock reset back to 12 years, because they worked 5 years or more.
• If they worked less than 5 years, then their benefit clock would pick up where it last left off at 10 years and would continue to run-down until they found work before the 12 year allocation was up.
• If said person was still claiming benefit up to 11 years, then in the twelve year it would be cut by 25%. This benefit payment year would be called an ‘end of cycle hardship fund’. At this stage the said person would have 12 months to find work and only 12 months of 25% less benefit paid for 12 months too.
• At 12 years, if the same person was still out of work whether he/she made great efforts or not they would be excluded from benefit completely, no exceptions. However mothers with children under 13 years would get support for their children in the form of tokens for child maintenance only.
• Any foreign national from overseas who settled in the UK for less than 10 years will not be eligible of benefit – full stop. No excuses No exception.
• All benefit payments paid would not be in the form of money anymore.
These payments would no longer be paid straight into bank accounts or cash Giros given from Post Offices.
• All claimants now would be given a single card, which acts just like a debit or credit card. This has their NI number encoded in it. (It is useless to anyone who is not issued it (working folks) or anyone who finds one in the street. Their Jobseekers Allowance would be paid on this card.
• The card can purchase anything but you cannot draw cash from an ATM machines to buy drugs or purchase items such as, beer, wine, spirits, pay for bets in Gambling casinos or establishments such as Ladbrokes bookie shops or gamble online. Everything would be barcoded to safe guard this. (You can however purchase (if by choice) a Lottery Ticket, (as everyone deserves the chance of better life) but this would be restricted to only 4 £1.00 purchase tickets in any one month.
• This SSBC (Social Security Benefit Card) is a clear way to make sure that claimants, who are given benefit, spend their allowance on what they truly need to survive, for them and their family’s. -This action hopes to instil responsibly, and not wastefulness, and to endear the claimant on the value of money. As you are ‘out of work’ it is you duties to get a mind-set of prudence.
But you can avoid all this, - and just get a job!
That is my proposal to IDS.
-Something has to be done about social benefit and who is eligible for claim it.
This cash ‘social security benefit blanket’ has to be thrown off the bed and a new temporary quilt put on instead; before there’s no bed at all for any of us to lie on when times get bleak!
I’m not a Tory supporter, – far from it. But I understand the premise what IDS is trying to do; but he is going about it in the wrong way. Eg. Bedroom Tax etc, etc. --Utter nonsense, won’t achieve nothing but create a housing shortage and social unrest.
Getting back to the point though. -Lets not forget what benefit was design to do in the first place?
Benefit is a ‘temporary help’ that is all, design to help people while they are out of work ‘temporary’. Help enough for you to avoid poverty, but a lot, lot less for you to live a comfortable life sustainably.
It is like McDonalds. McDonald is designed for you to get a quick snack or an in-between meal during the day or night. It is not designed for you to have breakfast, lunch and dinner there. (-Although there are people who use it like that because they are too lazy to cook and wonder why health problems plague their lives. -No, you go home and have your 3 square healthy meals a day at home -McDonalds is temporary.
As such Social benefit is temporary. It was not designed for it to be lived off permanently. -But again, there are those who claim it who harbour the clear intent to live of the 'fat of the land' for however long that is for. >Perhaps a lifetime!
-This social group cannot continue to continue. They are scroungers and bone-idles who are out numbering the genuine in need. -That includes disability people too who do not want to work and young mothers with cricket score amounts of kids.
Life owes no one a living. YOU make your living and hopefully in the process you add something back to society.
I have proposal to end this farce for Ian Dunce Duncan Smith to use to combat this benefit parasite paradise problem:
• Everyone born in the UK is eligible to: Jobseekers Allowance, Council Tax and Housing benefit and Disability benefit.
• But, you are only eligible to apply for these benefits for only 12 years -from the time you are 18 to the retirement age of 65.
• The moment you make a claim for benefit and are accepted by the system to be paid benefit, the clock starts from there. You have 12 years to find work. 11 of those years, you benefit will be paid benefit at current rate. In your twelve year, your benefit is cut down by 25%. (I will explain later why…)
• Case point example, If you were claiming benefit and you found work two year later, then you have taken off two years off your allocated 12 years benefit, leaving you with 10 years.
• If this same person was to work for 5 years or more and then became unemployed and went back to claim benefit, he or she would have their clock reset back to 12 years, because they worked 5 years or more.
• If they worked less than 5 years, then their benefit clock would pick up where it last left off at 10 years and would continue to run-down until they found work before the 12 year allocation was up.
• If said person was still claiming benefit up to 11 years, then in the twelve year it would be cut by 25%. This benefit payment year would be called an ‘end of cycle hardship fund’. At this stage the said person would have 12 months to find work and only 12 months of 25% less benefit paid for 12 months too.
• At 12 years, if the same person was still out of work whether he/she made great efforts or not they would be excluded from benefit completely, no exceptions. However mothers with children under 13 years would get support for their children in the form of tokens for child maintenance only.
• Any foreign national from overseas who settled in the UK for less than 10 years will not be eligible of benefit – full stop. No excuses No exception.
• All benefit payments paid would not be in the form of money anymore.
These payments would no longer be paid straight into bank accounts or cash Giros given from Post Offices.
• All claimants now would be given a single card, which acts just like a debit or credit card. This has their NI number encoded in it. (It is useless to anyone who is not issued it (working folks) or anyone who finds one in the street. Their Jobseekers Allowance would be paid on this card.
• The card can purchase anything but you cannot draw cash from an ATM machines to buy drugs or purchase items such as, beer, wine, spirits, pay for bets in Gambling casinos or establishments such as Ladbrokes bookie shops or gamble online. Everything would be barcoded to safe guard this. (You can however purchase (if by choice) a Lottery Ticket, (as everyone deserves the chance of better life) but this would be restricted to only 4 £1.00 purchase tickets in any one month.
• This SSBC (Social Security Benefit Card) is a clear way to make sure that claimants, who are given benefit, spend their allowance on what they truly need to survive, for them and their family’s. -This action hopes to instil responsibly, and not wastefulness, and to endear the claimant on the value of money. As you are ‘out of work’ it is you duties to get a mind-set of prudence.
But you can avoid all this, - and just get a job!
That is my proposal to IDS.
Last edited:
sydney greenstreet
Journeyman Pro
Yes but there are not enough jobs out there for everyone on Benefits
don72
Newbie
>There is jobs out there for sure.
If someone can travel the length of the globe, can't utter a word of English with nothing in their pockets, ends up here and finds work. -Then we all can!
Get a grip now, before they pull the plug on the whole thing. Then we'll see who can't find work!
If someone can travel the length of the globe, can't utter a word of English with nothing in their pockets, ends up here and finds work. -Then we all can!
Get a grip now, before they pull the plug on the whole thing. Then we'll see who can't find work!
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
Lets get this straight!! It's not the governments responsibility to create jobs, all they can do is reduce taxation on business so that they have a chance to prosper and create work. Jobs are created by businesses and people prepared to put them selves on the line and take a chance starting a business.
If people really have the sphericals and grit to do something about their lot then they can always become self employed or start a business. It's so easy for people to blame the government or business for their lot when they have no drive themselves and expect someone else to sort their lives for them.
There are jobs out there if you are willing to do them, cleaning, fruit picking, care work etc. Poles and others from abroad seem to do these jobs and be better off than if they were in their home countries. I would agree that we need to limit the number of people coming into the country and get the long term unemployed doing these jobs.
Just look at this disgusting cretin Philpott, he epitomises the worst of the benefit culture that has been growing for the last decade.
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
If people having their rent paid by benefit and the house is too big then moving people with bigger families into their homes will release smaller properties for them to live in. And!! It's not a Tax.
stevie_r
Tour Winner
So someone who is temporarily unemployed for what ends up being a short period and is in receipt of housing benefit should move out of their family home?
Given I don't particularly want an infraction or ban I will refrain from giving my full opinion of your idea; words fail me, they really do.
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
No, they dont have to move out of their home, they get around a 14% reduction in their housing benefit if the house is too big for them and there are a number of exceptions to cover many special needs.
I would suggest you read the bill rather than base your opinion on what the media say.
stevie_r
Tour Winner
I am fully aware that they don't have to move out of their home, I am fully aware of the details of this legislation. It was you however who suggested that they should move out - look, there's the quote
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
Yes! That's the objective to ease overcrowding and help reduce the overall benefit bill. These things will be unpopular and tough but the fact is we are broke.
