Why do a lot of the British public hate people on benefits? Watch

Reue
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#81
Report 3 years ago
#81
I don't hate people on benefits, I hate people on benefits who would be capable of helping themselves but choose not to.
0
reply
PoorBastward
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#82
Report 3 years ago
#82
Labour's something for nothing culture has divided society. Socialism basically..
1
reply
hockham jaynsaw
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#83
Report 3 years ago
#83
(Original post by PoorBastward)
Labour's something for nothing culture has divided society. Socialism basically..
As a conservative libertarian, it disgusts me that it's expected of us to provide for those people, because they say they're entitled to it.
0
reply
mojojojo101
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#84
Report 3 years ago
#84
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
Post ww2 we had 100% unemployement.

However things have changed. Atleast our 6% unemployed are safe in. The knowledge that no matter how much migrant labour flood into the UK, about 6% of our work force will take the 'can't work, won't work attitude towards life.'
Full employment =/= 100% employment.
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#85
Report 3 years ago
#85
(Original post by mojojojo101)
Full employment =/= 100% employment.
6% of the work force is unemployed.

Half of them are long term unemployed.

Those unable to work because of disabilities/health concerns are not classed as unemployed.

We imported a shed load of foreign labour this year and last year.
0
reply
yoshibuster
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#86
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#86
(Original post by adoremorrissey)
I would work for myself, trust me. I am too smug to claim. I would teach private piano lessons, from the comfort of my home - or parent's.
And how would your private piano lessons pay for rent, food, utility bills, water rates, TV licence (if you choose to have one) and the whole host of other costs that come with modern day living? This type of attitude perfectly sums up the selfish white male. 'Get a job' yes but after they have that job, how are they supposed to afford to live and pay their rent? You're telling me minimum wage can pay for all that?
0
reply
Magnus Taylor
Badges: 15
#87
Report 3 years ago
#87
(Original post by yoshibuster)
One thing I don't understand is that people in this country always seem to make a big deal out of those claiming welfare. 'My hard working tax money' ' I don't want my preciously earned taxes going to single mothers', but do these people even pay attention to where ELSE their 'hard earned money' goes? You never hear them speak about it, it's just scroungers this, scrounger that...People like David Icke are right here, surely?

I mean why do people get so up in arms about someone on £50 a week on JSA, but they don't care if a rich, overweight, flabby politician spends some of their hard earned money on stuffing his face with sandwiches and kit kats each week? What about all those illegal wars your tax money paid for?

I have been on benefits before and also worked and it didn't bother me at all that I paid tax that went to help out single moms and those in desperation.

In a country that is still ruled by a monarchy, how can a guy claiming 50 quid a week or 300 quid a week housing benefit and eating tesco value noodles for dinner be your enemy?
Because of the media creating moral panics
reply
adoremorrissey
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#88
Report 3 years ago
#88
(Original post by yoshibuster)
And how would your private piano lessons pay for rent, food, utility bills, water rates, TV licence (if you choose to have one) and the whole host of other costs that come with modern day living? This type of attitude perfectly sums up the selfish white male. 'Get a job' yes but after they have that job, how are they supposed to afford to live and pay their rent? You're telling me minimum wage can pay for all that?

Working the average hours & charging the average rate for a piano lesson. I am sure to make enough to cover all of that, if not more
0
reply
wb25
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#89
Report 3 years ago
#89
I admire you for bringing up a child by yourself and wanting to make a career for yourself, I appreciate how difficult it is to bring up a child by yourself. But, what makes you think that it is perfectly acceptable for someone else who works day and night to pay for your child when they had nothing to do with it ?

(Original post by JessSLT)
And what about us with children who are not school age and would be earning less due to childcare costs ???
Everything is not black and white .
What about those who are like me trying to go back to study whilst mothering our children (single may I add ) who wanted to bring up children rather than a stranger .
Us on benefits are not all lazy liars :-)
1
reply
wb25
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#90
Report 3 years ago
#90
Granted, 100% employment is not feasible, or desireable. There will always be those who actively seek work. But there is no excuse for someone who is long term unemployed.
0
reply
Dalek1099
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#91
Report 3 years ago
#91
(Original post by wb25)
Granted, 100% employment is not feasible, or desireable. There will always be those who actively seek work. But there is no excuse for someone who is long term unemployed.
Why what if they are actively seeking work?You can be long term unemployed and working hard to get work those two aren't mutually exclusive, it might just be you don't have the skills to get jobs or the intelligence/ability to get those skills or probably most likely the competition is simply much better than you.Vacancies are much lower than the number of unemployed seeking work thus you have to be really good and better than the competition to get work.

People being long term unemployed is kind of what you would expect with high unemployment as the most intelligent/skilled are getting the jobs and the dumbest people are the worst for most jobs thus why would they be able to get any job?
0
reply
frankieboy
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#92
Report 3 years ago
#92
(Original post by lankyryan)
Its not all people on benefits, its those who can work, but choose not to, as they cant be bothered, the culture where Labour made it possible for those who were not in work to earn more than those who do.

Hearing of families that have 8 children who get a free 6 bedroom house, free car and living fairly lavish lifestyle's funded purely by the tax payer, is quite disgusting. This was fairly common place where I used to live
Where did you used to live, out of interest?
0
reply
yoshibuster
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#93
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#93
(Original post by wb25)
But, what makes you think that it is perfectly acceptable for someone else who works day and night to pay for your child when they had nothing to do with it ?
Why should I pay for defence if I don't agree with the armed forces waging illegal wars in foreign lands? Why don't you care that your precious taxes have been used to blow Iraqi kids to bits?Is that not more important to you than a single mom having her pampers paid for from your 'hard earned' money?
0
reply
frankieboy
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#94
Report 3 years ago
#94
(Original post by wb25)
Granted, 100% employment is not feasible, or desireable. There will always be those who actively seek work. But there is no excuse for someone who is long term unemployed.
Explain your thinking behind that.
0
reply
lankyryan
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#95
Report 3 years ago
#95
(Original post by frankieboy)
Where did you used to live, out of interest?
Mid-Wales
0
reply
Antifazian
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#96
Report 3 years ago
#96
People are easily manipulated into scapegoating those who are in fact the most marginalised in society, while the most affluent get away with murder.
0
reply
TimmonaPortella
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#97
Report 3 years ago
#97
(Original post by yoshibuster)
but they don't care if a rich, overweight, flabby politician spends some of their hard earned money on stuffing his face with sandwiches and kit kats each week?
Usually if your job involves moving around you get expenses. I'm not sure why that's an issue. MPs are generally dedicated people with a tough job, and are welcome to as many sandwiches and kitkats as they like from my point of view.

What about all those illegal wars your tax money paid for?
I'm not sure that people expressing a view on welfare means that they can't have a view on foreign policy.

In a country that is still ruled by a monarchy
The monarchy pays its way amply, so this seems pretty irrelevant.
1
reply
Ki Yung Na
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#98
Report 3 years ago
#98
The average person relies on average news outlets which provides for the masses - The scope of knowledge is limited and so unfortunately, so is one's knowledge regarding people receiving welfare which is a tiny number relative to the population and even then is a tiny amount in monetary terms relative to the economy and the abuses and inefficiencies occurring elsewhere in Government funds.
0
reply
wb25
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#99
Report 3 years ago
#99
If you truly want to be in work, you will find it sooner rather than later. I would expect someone out of work to be looking for work 12 hours a day.

(Original post by frankieboy)
Explain your thinking behind that.
0
reply
username1875705
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#100
Report 3 years ago
#100
It's the ones who have the ability to have an occupation but choose not to, and those who rather choose to have plenty of kids and not work at all are the reason why I sometimes get annoyed at why they get benefits when they can at least try to get a job.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Do unconditional offers make teenagers lazy?

Yes (238)
59.65%
No (161)
40.35%

Watched Threads

View All