Does the welfare system cause you "huge resentment" ?

Scroll to see replies

and any solutions to the problems are rejected by Labour supporters and socialists, like yourself no doubt... for being "nasty"

This

This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Reply 761

Herr

Original post by Christianlady

In the USA, the welfare system does not cause me "huge resentments" no, but I don't believe the government was created to provide income and food for the people. The government is created to protect the people, to create and enforce laws, and to make sure people are being treated fairly. The welfare system is not what the government was originally intended for, and actually burdens the government beyond its capabilities. It's like making a fire station, the intent being a place to prepare for going to put out fires, to also be a soup kitchen. It just isn't the best idea.

The welfare system in USA is a different game to that in UK :smile:

Reply 762

ufo2012

Original post by Herr

I think it is high time there was an open and frank discussion about this issue. It is rather obvious that this issue is indeed a sticking point with many people, not just the wealthy who pay the majority of taxes but also the ones who work the everyday usual jobs and pay their taxes, we can't go on forever squeezing the middle class to support the ever burgeoning underclass. I believe it is high time the country as a whole move on from there being such a thing as "taboo subjects" that cannot be discussed or their views cannot be heard on, screw all this PC buill****, it is time to have a discussion on benefits and what exactly is this supposed to do, surely you don't want your country to be the next Greece?

Apparently open and frank discussion of this issue is not allowed, since I had my thread removed and was warned regarding the very issues that surround this.

Disappointing as obviously you are just not allowed to discuss particular topics - I thought this was a place for proper debate.

At least there are plenty of other topics.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 763

adam star

Original post by _Shmiley

I know someone who has a 50" TV, Sky+, Xbox's for each child and laptops for all of them. My parents have always been working, I only ever really see them one day a week because I have college and work, and we can't afford sky or a massive tv or anything like that, yet we still have to pay so other people can have them even though they don't bother applying for jobs or trying to get some because they know they can get more money from benefits.

Some people who actually need to benefits are getting turned down because some people who have nothing wrong with them just choose not to work and take people who work for a livings money. Really annoys me.

I'm not saying it's right but if people choose to use their 'welfare money' to buy luxuries instead of food and clothing that's their business and maybe to their detriment so more fool them.

Also, alot people with these fancy things you mention may have got that stuff on hire purchase, littlewoods or something. They may not even own it yet but as I said more fool them.

When SOME students take out their student loans (maybe when fees were £1,000 pa) they instead of paying for perhaps a heap of text books for their degree or extra tuition, they choose to buy copious amounts of alcohol, tobacco and rizlas or fancy mac books are they too wasting taxpayers money?

How dare they use tax payers money to drink and smoke and do their assignments on fancy computers?(!) and then they have the cheek to come out with 2:2's and ordinary degrees and straight on to JSA because theres not enough vacancies out there(!) (sarcasm)

Yes there are people who abuse the system. But the minority spoil it for the majority. Not everyone on benefits is a sponge / layabout but these are the ones your hear about in the news.

The system is open to abuse. Supposedly well educated people devise a system where -

People can claim uncapped housing benefit. (former system) ie. Instead of claiming on a 5 bed in Dagenham, the system allows them to claim for mansions in Kensington

People claiming benefits for children that dont even exist.

People claiming benefits in the name of dead people.

People claiming benefits when they have an BMW X5 and own two properties and their punishment is 2 years prison max?. (Not much of a deterrent).

The reason? These people are deplorable, yes. However the system is gaping wide open to abuse. Its the system that is the root of the problem. Stringent checks should be in place to verify people's claims. The system for getting people back to work is absolute b*****x . The system and the Department of Work and Pensions / Job Centre need an overhaul. Making someone sign a piece of paper every two weeks does nothing to help them to in to work, yet these people are paid £25k+ a year to pass someone a piece of paper and a pen. Not verifying a claimants job search is also a major problem, this is probably why SOME people can sign on for years whilst also working on the side/ lazing about. The Job Centre should change it's name to thE Dole Centre. It is one of thr most useless and ineffective state-run organisations.

Cameron is out of touch and needs to realise that not everyone is trying to cheat the system. He needs to look at his departments and their inefficiencies and improve the way they operate and perform before any real improvements can be made to the system.

Reply 764

adam star

Original post by _Shmiley

I'm not saying it's right but if people choose to use their 'welfare money' to buy luxuries instead of food and clothing that's their business and maybe to their detriment so more fool them.

Also, alot people with these fancy things you mention may have got that stuff on hire purchase, littlewoods or something. They may not even own it yet but as I said more fool them.

When SOME students take out their student loans (maybe when fees were £1,000 pa) they instead of paying for perhaps a heap of text books for their degree or extra tuition, they choose to buy copious amounts of alcohol, tobacco and rizlas or fancy mac books, are they too wasting taxpayers money?

How dare they use tax payers money to drink and smoke and do their assignments on fancy computers?(!) and then they have the cheek to come out with 2:2's and ordinary degrees and straight on to JSA because theres not enough vacancies out there(!) (sarcasm)

Yes there are people who abuse the system. But the minority spoil it for the majority. Not everyone on benefits is a sponge / layabout but these are the ones your hear about in the news.

The system is open to abuse. Supposedly well educated people devise a system where -

People can claim uncapped housing benefit. (former system) ie. Instead of claiming on a 5 bed in Dagenham, the system allows them to claim for mansions in Kensington

People claiming benefits for children that dont even exist.

People claiming benefits in the name of dead people.

People claiming benefits when they have an BMW X5 and own two properties and their punishment is 2 years prison max?. (Not much of a deterrent).

The reason? These people are deplorable, yes. However the system is gaping wide open to abuse. Its the system that is the root of the problem. Stringent checks should be in place to verify people's claims. The system for getting people back to work is absolute b*****x . The system and the Department of Work and Pensions / Job Centre need an overhaul. Making someone sign a piece of paper every two weeks does nothing to help them to in to work, yet these people are paid £25k+ a year to pass someone a piece of paper and a pen. Not verifying a claimants job search is also a major problem, this is probably why SOME people can sign on for years whilst also working on the side/ lazing about. The Job Centre should change it's name to thE Dole Centre. It is one of thr most useless and ineffective state-run organisations.

Cameron is out of touch and needs to realise that not everyone is trying to cheat the system. He needs to look at his departments and their inefficiencies and improve the way they operate and perform before any real improvements can be made to the system.

Reply 765

ufo2012

(sorry double post)

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 766

ufo2012

999 What's Your Emergency this evening was rather interesting

Was all about how the Emergency Services handle those welfare wasters and those who would live in such typical areas.

Unsurprisingly, it causes the emergency services (at least those shown in the program) both resentment and anxiety about something I mentioned before - the fact that they are out doing their job, earning money, helping others - when it is the benefit scroungers who are the ones using and abusing a vast proportion of their time.

One example given was how they were so busy wasting time on people who had gotten drunk that another call around the corner may have an emergency with a baby needing to be taken straight into hospital but they were so under-resourced that they were already using all they had on other calls which were - as it showed - mostly benefit scroungers.

Reply 767

LeSacMagique

Original post by ufo2012

Do you think that the problems of people on benefits should be treated less urgently by the emergency services?

Reply 768

Squidgyness

Original post by LeSacMagique

Do you think that the problems of people on benefits should be treated less urgently by the emergency services?

I think the problems of drunk people should be ranked lower on the priority list unless they are being harmful to others, or about to keel over and die on the spot. In terms of less important cases like getting someone home because he is so drunk he can't do it or making sure they are alright, then fine but not before other more severe cases are treated\dealt with first.

Benefits shouldn't have anything to do with it though. It's just that some people on benefits have substance abuse issues, so need to be seen more often.

This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Reply 769

ufo2012

Original post by LeSacMagique

Do you think that the problems of people on benefits should be treated less urgently by the emergency services?

Hadn't given it any thought and without giving it much thought atm I would say no, but the issue is not specifically with people on benefits, it is with timewasters. It just seems that a lot of these seem to be benefit scroungers, because they have nothing better to do.

To say that they should be treated less urgently is too general, different people have a vast array of needs. If someone on benefits has a heart attack for example should they be given less priority than someone who is not? Don't think there is a difference.

It is slightly off-topic, but intoxicated people in particular (people who are drunk), should be evaluated at the first point of contact after which if they have simply had too much to drink for example should then be given lower priority (as previous poster mentioned).

In this case it is the first point of contact that is crucial as any emergency service that has been sent is only responding to a call that they have been given information on.

Maybe it is the first point of contact that need to be looked at and/or retrained in some way - maybe have a timetable of how long it will take them to deal with a certain type of issue (they do have this to an extent already but maybe they need to look more closely at how to reprioritise on-the-spot).