Does the welfare system cause you "huge resentment" ?

I have a strong dislike to people who just use it because it's there and they don't even really need it, like they have 7 kids and have all the child benefits for them as well as claiming job seekers and disability allowance and housing allowance and whatever else they can get and then use the excuse that "it's so easy to get it, we might as well use it"

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.

I struggle to pay for the bus to college for a year (£500 for a 24m round journey a day) and I won't get any help because our income is more than the threshold needed to get support, but yet someone who's parents choose not to work only have to pay around £200.

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.


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

David Cameron is a moron to be honest.

Just out of interest what would you propose or would you leave it as it is?

*sigh* it's a difficult one, because if people are having children regardless of whether or not their benefits are cut, it is the children that are going to suffer, which is hardly fair.

How about upping the minimum wage, to actually make it more worthwhile for people to ditch the benefits and find a job? That might help!

And then putting a 2 year time limit on benefits is also absurd in this economic climate where jobs are scarce in the first place. Day after day stories emerge of people resorting to standing next to roadsides holding billboards begging for somebody to employ them. So if people can't find a job within those two years, then what happens to them? They lose their benefits and end up homeless? That's just ludicrous.

Nothing much that he has done for this country has helped so far, it has to be noted. His intentions are noble, that's fine, I don't doubt that he wants to make things better, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions. He's going about things in a way that just isn't going to help and is just going to throw families into abject poverty.

Neither is it fair to expect someone else to pay for your brats and for you to have more of it.




Actually this would have a counter effect than what you are hoping. Firstly higher labour cost = higher inflation rates especially if it isn't followed with reforms to increase productivity and flexibility. The other thing to consider is the more expensive labour becomes not just do less jobs get created but more jobs get lost at the same time especially when it suddenly makes automation and mechanization a more economically viable option. Remember people want goods and services at an affordable price not at a social-benefit blessed price.



It isn't uncommon for there to be time limits on benefits.

A time limit would essentially cure the problem of people being fussy over the type of jobs they are willing to do and suddenly flipping burgers at McD's won't seem beneath some people.

As for what happens after 2 years of no job, chances are then they'd be put on a program for the long term unemployed for retraining.



Actually on contrary a lot of his policies are indeed useful. Just before they came to power, Spain and UK had the same interest rates for sovereign debt, look at where Spain is now....... you want the Spanish interest rates?

The deficit can't go on forever and you can't expect other people to keep paying for it.

David Cameron is a moron to be honest.

No, actually it allows me to have free health care, help when I need it and an education.

*sigh* it's a difficult one, because if people are having children regardless of whether or not their benefits are cut, it is the children that are going to suffer, which is hardly fair.

There's very little that the government can do which isn't going to put children into poverty. And yes, whilst that is the fault of the parents, it's not something that can be allowed to happen.

How about upping the minimum wage, to actually make it more worthwhile for people to ditch the benefits and find a job? That might help!

He's right in the sense that it's ridiculous that people are having tons of kids and living their entire lives on benefits, but slashing the amount of benefits that they receive isn't really the answer here, because some people will continue to have kids regardless, and, as I say, the children then will be the ones that suffer.

And then putting a 2 year time limit on benefits is also absurd in this economic climate where jobs are scarce in the first place. Day after day stories emerge of people resorting to standing next to roadsides holding billboards begging for somebody to employ them. So if people can't find a job within those two years, then what happens to them? They lose their benefits and end up homeless? That's just ludicrous.

I'm not really sure I could propose anything to help right now, I'm not really politically minded enough to think of a decent solution (my dad on the other hand probably would!) but what DC is suggesting isn't going to work. Nothing much that he has done for this country has helped so far, it has to be noted. His intentions are noble, that's fine, I don't doubt that he wants to make things better, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions. He's going about things in a way that just isn't going to help and is just going to throw families into abject poverty.