Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

UKIP don't want benefit claimants driving. Watch

  • View Poll Results: Is it fair that ppl who depend on a car for mobility give it up to appease UKIPvoters
    Yes
    17
    26.98%
    No
    46
    73.02%

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Green_Pink)
    Because people currently out of work have contributed too, and you will no doubt expect to receive support if you ever dare to be old, ill or redundant.
    Even more than that, our economy is knowledge and services thus full employment is an economic impossibility. We are always going to have 5-10% unemployed. Benefits should thus be delivered regardless of contribution or even expected future contribution.

    Here is the germ of the citizen's income. How refreshing to hear it put forward publicly the other day by the Greens. I am watching intently the Swiss referendum on the idea probably scheduled this year or next.

    At least we are better here than some of the barbaric European countries where you may get more unemployment benefit but you only get it if you've worked. Unsurprisingly the streets are full of homeless in places like France.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    Even more than that, our economy is knowledge and services thus full employment is an economic impossibility. We are always going to have 5-10% unemployed. Benefits should thus be delivered regardless of contribution or even expected future contribution.

    Here is the germ of the citizen's income. How refreshing to hear it put forward publicly the other day by the Greens. I am watching intently the Swiss referendum on the idea probably scheduled this year or next.

    At least we are better here than some of the barbaric European countries where you may get more unemployment benefit but you only get it if you've worked. Unsurprisingly the streets are full of homeless in places like France.
    Agreed - although in practice nearly everyone will be in work for the majority of their lives between ~18 and 65 or so anyway. The existence of unemployment is at least in part down to the political and economic choices we make - the capitalist economy actively benefits from having a pool of unemployed workers in order that businesses can choose the most suitable, and know that workers not meeting standards can be replaced. It is only right that we at least support those who then can't find a job to have a basic standard of living.

    I do like the citizen's income too, although in practice I'm not sure it's viable short term given the expense - hence I'm sure why the Greens have it as a long-term ambition rather than an immediate commitment. I thought the Swiss had already voted against it though? Or have I confused it with another of their many, many referendums :lol:

    France is interesting - I'd say a lot of the poverty on the streets is also at least partly due to the forced and deliberate social cleansing that has led some areas gentrified while others are completely ghettoised. Unfortunately with the current housing policy, I wouldn't be surprised to see similar happen here with the poor forced out of London.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cadherin)
    No, I agree with flat taxing of assets as you just said, just as I agree with flat taxing of income.

    Our tax system is not "pretty much flat as it is" - there is a vast difference between 45% and 20%.
    Not when it all kicks in so early in the income scale. It basically splits underclass, working class, lower and upper middle class, then elite is from the 45% band up. But it ignores just how much more money the rich earn than any of us, and promotes division among a populace whose interests would be better served in solidarity against the super-rich. Really if you're on PAYE you are a slave and earn too little to be taxed.

    Yes, whereas I bet you believe all the lefty, tree-hugging *******s you read in the Sun/Mirror/"Independent"/Guardian/Observer, don't you?

    Most disabled people want to work, including one of my relatives, they just aren't given the opportunity or are dismissed and mollycoddled by society.
    Well they have very little chance of getting a job in an economy where unemployment is a constant 5-10 %. Why should they all be forced into work just because some want to work?

    Are you suggesting the Sun is a lefty paper? The Independent is centrist populist, basically Blairite. The Guardian is SDP - also centrist. The Mirror is old Labour, the only one remotely left-wing. Next you will be trotting out the old favourite about the BBC being left-wing!

    And no I do not believe in most lefty causes celebres, particularly identity politics, and only tree-hugging insofar as it will give us energy independence and make us the market leader. I mainly just believe in taking money from those who don't need it and giving to those who need it, and state provision of infrastructure and essentials.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Green_Pink)
    Agreed - although in practice nearly everyone will be in work for the majority of their lives between ~18 and 65 or so anyway. The existence of unemployment is at least in part down to the political and economic choices we make - the capitalist economy actively benefits from having a pool of unemployed workers in order that businesses can choose the most suitable, and know that workers not meeting standards can be replaced. It is only right that we at least support those who then can't find a job to have a basic standard of living.

    I do like the citizen's income too, although in practice I'm not sure it's viable short term given the expense - hence I'm sure why the Greens have it as a long-term ambition rather than an immediate commitment. I thought the Swiss had already voted against it though? Or have I confused it with another of their many, many referendums :lol:

    France is interesting - I'd say a lot of the poverty on the streets is also at least partly due to the forced and deliberate social cleansing that has led some areas gentrified while others are completely ghettoised. Unfortunately with the current housing policy, I wouldn't be surprised to see similar happen here with the poor forced out of London.
    I am rapidly going off the idea of living in London, it seems so much more sterile both in media reports and actuality. Culture and innovation in my view are beginning to move out to the second tier cities. You are definitely onto something with the ghettoisation both in France and here. At least in France you get a decent amount of allocs for other things though and the rent is so much cheaper (more housing benefit too).

    The Green idea of the citizen's income is a little more expensive than the current system but definitely affordable once the economy is reshaped around it and boosted by it.

    Things take a while to proceed in Switzerland, the referendum was accepted in late 2013 and you are usually looking at 2 or 3 years. Of course apart from the odd article it has not been reported in the English-speaking media, information is hard to find.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    I am rapidly going off the idea of living in London, it seems so much more sterile both in media reports and actuality. Culture and innovation in my view are beginning to move out to the second tier cities. You are definitely onto something with the ghettoisation both in France and here. At least in France you get a decent amount of allocs for other things though and the rent is so much cheaper (more housing benefit too).

    The Green idea of the citizen's income is a little more expensive than the current system but definitely affordable once the economy is reshaped around it and boosted by it.

    Things take a while to proceed in Switzerland, the referendum was accepted in late 2013 and you are usually looking at 2 or 3 years. Of course apart from the odd article it has not been reported in the English-speaking media, information is hard to find.
    I wouldn't say it seems sterile but I'm a bit biased, lived here for 20 years and despite everything I love the city. There is normally a lot going on in terms of entertainment and culture which is pretty accessible - it's just unfortunate that it's becoming harder and harder for people to afford to live here in the first place, let alone travel around on the extortionately expensive tube network if they live further out.

    Yep, turns out I was confusing it with the failed initiative on a £15 minimum wage. Surely if that was rejected so comprehensively though something as radical as the Basic Income is pretty unlikely to succeed?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Those are a small minority although i accept there may be cases and proof can be provided.

    I'm not suggesting they sell the car, once they are off JSA they can drive as they like.
    There are a huge amount of people living in the countryside struggling to get to work.

    Buses and trains are limited and stop early - and thats if you're lucky enough to be living in a country town with buses and trains. There are literally hundreds of rural locations that dont even get public transport or something like two buses a day. These small villages and towns barely have any jobs going - some of them have one pub.

    How would people living here even get to the jobcentre everyday to claim their benefits?

    At the time i was living in a small country town, i was lucky enough that my parents were generous enough to lend me money for a car. Otherwise I could not have continued work as I would not have been able to get home on public transport.

    Thats just the county I grew up in, there will be tonnes of other people in similar loacations all over the uk. You dont seem like you know much about the countryside.

    Correction - There are a huge amount of people on this thread who have no idea about life in rural areas. fml
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kunoichi)
    some of them have one pub.
    ........
    There are a huge amount of people on this thread who have no idea about life in rural areas. fml
    Well said my friend.
    People coming on here and brandishing such ugly generic ideas, its disgusting.

    And, sad to say, some villages round the north where i'm from have no pubs left....
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by samba)
    What even....
    Sounds like a benefit claimant to me.

    :mmm:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cadherin)
    The right are constantly modelled to be draconian and selfish - socialism is an ideology founded by jealousy and envy of the successful and do not actually have the ambition to make the poor less poor, but the rich less rich.
    (Original post by Cadherin)
    There is such a thing as a bus, is there not?
    Come on, these answers are a bit obtuse. I would actually agree with the first part - the right (or the rich, come to that) are not for the most part Draconian and selfish, but I think the point is that they don't all have to be. It only takes a few extremely wealthy and/or right wing people to start mucking about and it causes a lot of damage.

    ''There is such a thing as a bus, is there not?'' - oh come on, you know that's dismissive.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Xenorebrem)
    Sounds like a benefit claimant to me.

    :mmm:
    What because they couldn't finish the post because their electricity got cut off in the middle of it?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    What about people like me who want to learn to drive so I can go to college so that I don't have to be unemployed my whole life? No, you'd rather I was sitting feeling **** about myself because then you can moan about how much you pay to feed me (very little).
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Seems very strange that 80 billion was given in banker bonuses, however many billion was lost in tax avoidance, yet UKIP's idea to save taxpayers money is to stop the unemployed spending money on petrol.

    If you do the maths, it's actually close to insanity.

    However, the explanation is scapegoating. And anyone who falls for this has to be a right mug IMO.

    We need a party that has the guts to take the corporations on. Which is none of them. The Greens may have a go, but it'll be like a sparrow taking on a Tyrannosaur.

    Can you imagine if we got all those billions back? Put it into the NHS etc.

    Think about it. We're being conned.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Burgoyne)
    Well said my friend.
    People coming on here and brandishing such ugly generic ideas, its disgusting.

    And, sad to say, some villages round the north where i'm from have no pubs left....
    There does seem to be a dying out of the traditional pub :'( very sad
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Have you noticed UKIP supporters haven't been active after this post lol.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by frankieboy)
    Seems very strange that 80 billion was given in banker bonuses, however many billion was lost in tax avoidance, yet UKIP's idea to save taxpayers money is to stop the unemployed spending money on petrol.

    If you do the maths, it's actually close to insanity.

    However, the explanation is scapegoating. And anyone who falls for this has to be a right mug IMO.
    It's a theme that runs through the whole debate about benefits. This idea that the unemployed people are responsible for their problems, like the woman who said poor people can't cook, the people who dismiss the rise of food banks by saying they should manage their finances better, and the propaganda in papers like the Daily Mail about "benefits scroungers" who don't want to work. I can see it on this thread as well. It's victim blaming and it's absolutely disgusting.

    By far the biggest defenders of "benefit scroungers" are the people who go on and on about unemployed people while ignoring corporate benefit scroungers who get money from the government, which involves far greater sums of money.

    There are problems with benefit scroungers, but most people who complain about it are getting their targets completely wrong, and are ignoring the real scroungers.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by illegaltobepoor)
    Have you noticed UKIP supporters haven't been active after this post lol.
    I expect UKIP head office have told UKIP supporters to STFU to halt the none stop stream of embarassing comments.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RFowler)
    It's a theme that runs through the whole debate about benefits. This idea that the unemployed people are responsible for their problems, like the woman who said poor people can't cook, the people who dismiss the rise of food banks by saying they should manage their finances better, and the propaganda in papers like the Daily Mail about "benefits scroungers" who don't want to work. I can see it on this thread as well. It's victim blaming and it's absolutely disgusting.

    By far the biggest defenders of "benefit scroungers" are the people who go on and on about unemployed people while ignoring corporate benefit scroungers who get money from the government, which involves far greater sums of money.

    There are problems with benefit scroungers, but most people who complain about it are getting their targets completely wrong, and are ignoring the real scroungers.
    Good shot, sir. Well said.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.