Benefits - Only for lazy, stupid people.... - Page 44

Scroll to see replies

Well, tough ****.

You can home-educate your kids if you don't want them bullied.

Besides, a kid could happen to come from an average-income type home but if they lived in an extremely rich area, every other child might have their own swimming pool, and they might be bullied.

It can work the other way too, if a middle-class kid is sent to a complete ****hole school, because the other children would be jealous.

Bottom line, you can't prevent bullying. Besides, FSMeals exist and you don't get bullied for receiving those.

I got bullied for free school meals. Let's not generalise.
And how can you home educate your kids if you're looking for work?
But still, why should the kids have to put up with bullying because of irresponsible parents? Why should we allow children to go through the cycle of getting bullied and then becoming a bully and possibly a criminal (statistics show this is likely) and then have to spend money on them in prison because it seemed more cost effective to feed them next to nothing because their parents didn't work.

I'm very glad you're not a politician.

Reply 861

Iron Lady

Original post by Elissabeth

That isn't true, have you ever lived in any part of London?

There are no council homes available whatsoever, and a waiting list a mile long. So everyone on benefits claims an extortionate amount of HB.

Besides, whats wrong with a council house? I'd love one! Who the hell wouldn't? The rent is **** all compared to the market value!

Oh my apologies, I was referrring to the UK as a whole, not just London.

Council houses attract too many gangs.

Reply 862

Iron Lady

Original post by minimarshmallow

Most bullies are cowardly prats who behave in that way to mask their own insecurities.

Reply 863

Elissabeth

Original post by ilovehobnobs

Why does your location say London?
And im pretty sure people couldn't afford a million+ worth of house in London on benefits? A lot of the "larger" houses in London cost that much.

My location says London because I just never changed it and that is where I was when I joined this site!

I'm not suggesting they could afford to buy one, but they get to live in them because the council pays the landlord an extortionate amount of housing benefit for the person to live there, out of public money!!!!!

There is a family in Acton who get 12K a month!

Reply 864

TomDixie

Original post by Elissabeth

They dont need to go into care, but why can't they just be fed basic foods at a soup kitchen?
Or why can't the parents just be given a box of Tesco Value food every week?

And some rubbishy second-hand clothes every 6 months?

Thats good enough for them.

These are actual real people - adults and children alike, not the mindless, emotionless, robotic poor.

We, as a society, can thankfully provide a better quality of life through benefits than giving people basic foods and second hand "rubbish" clothes every six months.

In the grand scheme of things we, as a society, lose a hell of a lot more money from rich people avoiding tax than what we pay out in benefits to those at the bottom of the ladder. Yet who is castigated more?

There will always be people who wrongfully exploit certain opportunities, but we're rich enough to deal with those few who do - while maintaining a system that attempts to deal with those kinds of problems.

Reply 865

Elissabeth

Original post by Iron Lady

Council houses attract too many gangs.

Well, that is a very small price to pay for such cheap housing!

Besides, some estates are much worse then others, you can't generalise.

Reply 866

TomDixie

Original post by Elissabeth

You live in a different World love.

I've experienced both sides of the fence, being dirt poor and mixing with the very well off.

You need to reach inside and find some empathy!

Reply 867

lucaf

£80 for 35 hours work? something tells me those figures are not true :tongue:

people should never be able to simply live off of benefits because they simply do not need to work. the government should help people if they are unable to work, or temporarily cannot find any, but people should not be able to simply live off of benefits.

Reply 868

minimarshmallow

Original post by Elissabeth

I highly doubt this, and unless you're their bank manager you can't prove it at all. But even if it did turn out to be true, that's one family, that isn't everyone on benefits.

People do not live a life of luxury on benefits. I've never had a foreign holiday; in fact I've not been on holiday since I was 10. We got a playstation for Christmas off my nan and that was the only games console we had until she also bought my brother a playstation 2 years later when the price came down. We only ever had basic TV, one takeout per month (if my mum could save a bit of child benefit each week) and the only reason we could ever go on family days out was because of my mum's motability car. We got a very basic computer when I was about 9 because my dad was made redundant, and he thought getting the computer would mean he could develop computer and typing skills and try applying for jobs in offices instead of just factories like he had for years. We didn't get internet until two years later - when it became beneficial for him to be able to look for jobs online at home instead of having to catch the bus to the library (because my mum's car can only be used to do stuff for her).

You hear about the odd family who are working the system (which I disagree with) and assume that anyone on benefits is the same, it isn't the case!

Reply 869

TomDixie

Original post by lucaf

£80 for 35 hours work? something tells me those figures are not true :tongue:

They have to be able to live off them, to a certain degree. The balance just needs to be found between providing this but giving incentives for people to try and enhance their lives also.

Reply 870

Elissabeth

Original post by minimarshmallow

Oh, well a bit of name-calling is a small price to pay for an endless supply of free lunches?

Besides, how do you think they felt if it was their parents taxes that had to pay for your B***** lunch?

Are you seriously telling me that your family couldn't afford a loaf of bread to send you in with a sandwich?

Your point is flawed about criminality. You have the choice. My Mum grew up with absolutely nothing and did not become a criminal.

Reply 871

TomDixie

Original post by minimarshmallow

You hear about the odd family who are working the system (which I disagree with) and assume that anyone on benefits is the same, it isn't the case!

She gives off a certain Daily Mail reader vibe :biggrin:

Reply 872

TomDixie

Original post by Elissabeth

There's a factual correlation between poverty and crime rates, linked to poor educational attainment, lack of jobs, poorer health etc.

Reply 873

Iron Lady

Original post by TomDixie

There's a factual correlation between poverty and crime rates, linked to poor educational attainment, lack of jobs, poorer health etc.

To an extent, possibly.

However as Elissabeth commented, commiting a crime is a choice. A choice that someone can choose not to do.

Off topic, but have you heard the cases where celebrities (namely footballers) commit crimes? They aren't exactly poor, are they?

Reply 874

minimarshmallow

Original post by Elissabeth

Yeah, a bunch of 9 year olds understood that it was their parents taxes paying for my meals. As far as they were concerned the school paid because I was poor and therefore they were better than me.
And no, they couldn't afford an extra loaf of bread a week, plus fillings, plus fruit or something else to go along with it because let's face it, no kid is full after just a sandwich. Hell I don't do as much running around now as I did then and a sandwich is not big enough for a meal for me now.

Yeah, I have a choice, I'm not a criminal. But statistics show that bullied children are more likely to be criminals. Are you gonna go around telling bullied victims they have a choice in the future, or are you gonna do something about the bullying?

Reply 875

Elissabeth

Original post by TomDixie

You live in a different World love.

I've experienced both sides of the fence, being dirt poor and mixing with the very well off.

You need to reach inside and find some empathy!

Why do I need to 'find some empathy', I've never bullied anyone for being poor, or for being rich, for that matter!

But I think if someone is a scrounger then thats fair game- I mean they have chosen that lifestyle.

Reply 876

TomDixie

Original post by Iron Lady

Not possibly, it's factual.

Obviously individual people have a choice - but that isn't relevant to those trying to improve society, who deal with stats. The fact remains that the poorer an area the higher the crime rate, thus more individuals in those areas choose to commit crime. Forcing people to live in poverty isn't the answer for a progressive society.

I was brought up in these areas, I know how it works.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 877

lucaf

Original post by TomDixie

They have to be able to live off them, to a certain degree. The balance just needs to be found between providing this but giving incentives for people to try and enhance their lives also.

oh of course. but it really shouldn't be anything more than enough for them to survive on, in most cases at least. we don't want them to starve, but we want them to be uncomfortable enough to try to get off it

of course, there are always exceptions. people actually unable to work due to disabilities and such should be given more, seeing as encouraging them to work would be pointless

Reply 878

TomDixie

Original post by Elissabeth

There's a difference between being a scrounger and being on benefits.

Reply 879

minimarshmallow

Original post by Elissabeth

How many times do I have to say that a lot of people don't choose to be on benefits.
My mum can't work because she is disabled and often in too much pain to get out of bed.
My best friend just lost her job because there weren't enough hours, so she's now claiming JSA till she can find something else.
My best friend's sister left her abusive husband, and shortly after was made redundant, has three kids to look after.

None of these people are scroungers, none of them are choosing to be on benefits. It's claim benefits or starve until they can find a job (or in the case of my mum just starve as she can't work at all).
Stop reading the daily mail and stop generalising.

(edited 12 years ago)