Do people deserve benifits
I’m doing a speech on benefits and wheather people should have them I have a side , I’m just wanting to hear urs , willing to debate
Scroll to see replies
Opinions by people who probably never been on them, ignorance is bliss and all.
All cost you more tax if a system did not exist, crime would be up for starters, people would not be able to afford needed medication which would then entail more money needed within the NHS to help those who are now ****ed. You then would also have more homeless people which would also entail more costs from the NHS to help those dying. The list is endless, TSR users are too young and clueless.
Original post by random_matt
All cost you more tax if a system did not exist, crime would be up for starters, people would not be able to afford needed medication which would then entail more money needed within the NHS to help those who are now ****ed. You then would also have more homeless people which would also entail more costs from the NHS to help those dying. The list is endless, TSR users are too young and clueless.
If that’s aimed at me, I’m 31.
The counter argument is that reducing tax leads to increased spending which in turn strengthens the economy. Reducing corporation tax encourages new business, leading to new employment opportunities and you guessed it... more revenue for the government.
Regarding the NHS I’d be in favour of private healthcare so that argument doesn’t wash with me, I’m afraid. You should pay your way through life, not expect the state and in turn hardworking taxpayers to fund you.
Original post by random_matt
All cost you more tax if a system did not exist, crime would be up for starters, people would not be able to afford needed medication which would then entail more money needed within the NHS to help those who are now ****ed. You then would also have more homeless people which would also entail more costs from the NHS to help those dying. The list is endless, TSR users are too young and clueless.
Well it is the Student room so you would expect students under the age of 25 mostly to be on here.
I would definitely talk about when different types of benefits started and the differences they made at the time (and possibly why these are still relevant now).
Original post by Mike172
If that’s aimed at me, I’m 31.
The counter argument is that reducing tax leads to increased spending which in turn strengthens the economy. Reducing corporation tax encourages new business, leading to new employment opportunities and you guessed it... more revenue for the government.
Regarding the NHS I’d be in favour of private healthcare so that argument doesn’t wash with me, I’m afraid. You should pay your way through life, not expect the state and in turn hardworking taxpayers to fund you.
The counter argument is that reducing tax leads to increased spending which in turn strengthens the economy. Reducing corporation tax encourages new business, leading to new employment opportunities and you guessed it... more revenue for the government.
Regarding the NHS I’d be in favour of private healthcare so that argument doesn’t wash with me, I’m afraid. You should pay your way through life, not expect the state and in turn hardworking taxpayers to fund you.
Then perhaps you should work within the government and try argue your case, one which has never come to fruition for obvious reasons. Your last sentence is way to assuming, you honestly think people expect, have some self-entitlement to free money? You are lost son, time to get your head out the ground.
Original post by random_matt
Then perhaps you should work within the government and try argue your case, one which has never come to fruition for obvious reasons. Your last sentence is way to assuming, you honestly think people expect, have some self-entitlement to free money? You are lost son, time to get your head out the ground.
Yes I do. I’ve met people on benefits who have even said so themselves. Some people on benefits, not all, do see it as a right.
Of course people deserve benefits we don't live in the 1800s no more when people were forced to continue working or risk not putting food on the table because they were sick or injured.
To consider whether people should be on benefits you will need to look at all types of benefits and all types of people who are on benefits. Consider why they are on benefits. Consider whether they are capable of work. I can see already there are a few on here with blinkered opinions who have very limited experience of life on benefits - you should ignore them.
There are those who choose to be on benefits but could work but there are others who cannot work because of physical or mental problems and need benefits to live. Have an open mind about it.
There are those who choose to be on benefits but could work but there are others who cannot work because of physical or mental problems and need benefits to live. Have an open mind about it.
Well, benefits are a form of society worse-case optimization strategy - If people didn't receive benefits when in need it would probably cost more later anyway. Also given we have the NHS it would definitely cost a lot more in health costs later.
Collectively, we have a duty to look after the most vulnerable groups in our society who are reliant on the help of others. Be they the disabled, the terminally ill, struggling families or unemployed people trying to get on their feet. Some of these groups face an inherent disadvantage in our economic system, and many of them are the product of the huge economic inequality spurred by neoliberalism. Society shouldn't look to punish those at the bottom, rather it should offer a helping hand to support them. If you were to suddenly stop benefits, deaths would rise rapidly - those with long term illnesses would die as they cannot enter work to support themselves, expect child mortality to increase to levels not seen in decades, crime would rise and you'd probably create mass scale civil unrest in Britain not seen in over a century.
Many right-wingers would argue that some people leech off benefits, which I don't doubt, though despite media reports they form a slither of claimants. The use of sanctions to encourage employment only leads to people entering poorly paid employment which offers lower pay and only forces them to reclaim benefits, or people may just exit the system entirely - just look at the extent of homelessness in Britain. The welfare system is necessary to avoid a return to Dickensian poverty, but also to regulate unchecked capitalism which disproportionally affects the lowest strata of society.
Many right-wingers would argue that some people leech off benefits, which I don't doubt, though despite media reports they form a slither of claimants. The use of sanctions to encourage employment only leads to people entering poorly paid employment which offers lower pay and only forces them to reclaim benefits, or people may just exit the system entirely - just look at the extent of homelessness in Britain. The welfare system is necessary to avoid a return to Dickensian poverty, but also to regulate unchecked capitalism which disproportionally affects the lowest strata of society.
(edited 4 years ago)
If there's any purpose to a government at all, it is to serve and protect its citizens and ensure their well-being. A safety net like welfare is necessary for that under the current capitalist system.
Original post by Satyr
No no no
The welfare system is outdated and unnecessary.
The welfare system is outdated and unnecessary.
I couldn't agree more. I want to see more of this on our streets like back in the glory days of the great Victoria.
I mean - just look how happy those street urchins look!
</sarcasm>
Evaluate the quality of the argument, not the individual making the argument.
Original post by Satyr
No no no
The welfare system is outdated and unnecessary.
The welfare system is outdated and unnecessary.
'outdated' ? its not a fashion statement lol. 'Unnecessary' is also arguable
I believe there are many people in the UK deserving of benefits, since there are a lot of people who are unable to work due to illness, or they are struggling to get a job and have genuinely been trying. Without a source of income, those people needing it wouldn't be able to afford food, housing, clothing etc. They would essentially suffer and their situation would become worse because sadly that's how it works in a consumerist society. On the other hand, there are those who are not deserving of benefits as they 'cheat' the system and manage to earn benefits despite not having a seemingly genuine reason, which is a shame. There will always be people who take advantage of things like benefit payments
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
