richard10012
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#1
I was watching Yorkshire job centre and this guy only had 50 pounds to live on once he paid his bills and rent. Crazy. A Tory government I guess. How are you meant to live off benefits
1
reply
Calibrated.
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 month ago
#2
With difficulty. I did it for a short period of time. I could manage my basic necessary expenses but anything unexpected like travel expenses for interviews or the fridge going on the blink caused serious troubles. It was a real eye opener to how people in poverty struggle.



I think The Chancellor and other Treasury ministers should be required to live on benefits for a period of time. Their budgeting skills and sense of fiscal responsibility would improve markedly.
2
reply
Napp
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 month ago
#3
You're not, thats the point...
1
reply
L i b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 month ago
#4
(Original post by richard10012)
I was watching Yorkshire job centre and this guy only had 50 pounds to live on once he paid his bills and rent. Crazy. A Tory government I guess. How are you meant to live off benefits
People on out-of-work benefits are generally supposed to be poor. That's kinda the idea: it's the most basic level of income that can reasonably be provided.
3
reply
FRS500
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 month ago
#5
Personally I feel benefits are not fit for purpose. People should be able to afford the basics of living comfortably.

By living comfortably I mean you should be able to properly heat; eat; clothe your family; shouldn't have to worry about rent arrears and if need be you should be able to afford basic public transport (for going to work etc).

On benefit you can hardly do those let alone the basics of running a dirt cheap phone contract; paying your bills (although you can get support with energy and water in some cases) and maybe one subscription.

I really wouldn't begrudge someone who's out of work a Netflix subscription and reasonable access to the internet to help them get back on the job market.

It's not as if you can rely on libraries in these uncertain times, it's also not Dickensian Britain anymore.
0
reply
Gundabad(good)
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 month ago
#6
(Original post by richard10012)
I was watching Yorkshire job centre and this guy only had 50 pounds to live on once he paid his bills and rent. Crazy. A Tory government I guess. How are you meant to live off benefits
If you want to have a relatively comfortable life on benefits, you need to have lots of children. More children = More benefits. Sad system but it exists.
0
reply
YoBoyEddie
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 month ago
#7
The central banks want us all on Universal Basic Income anyway. They are pushing the Marxist rhetoric hard through the zionist media, hence all the Black Lives/Greta/New age stuff.
0
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 month ago
#8
(Original post by Gundabad(good))
If you want to have a relatively comfortable life on benefits, you need to have lots of children. More children = More benefits. Sad system but it exists.
Nothing like some ignorant stereotyping.

My sister-in-law with two kids has fallen on hard times. Her benefit is about £1000 a month. That is to pay everything. Rent, food, bills, the lot. Our shopping bill (2 kids) is about £70 a week. So you tell me how having more kids makes you better off.

My kids are 7 an 10 now. I reckon I'm in the hole for around £120k so far. Kids do not make you better off whether on benefits or otherwise.
0
reply
iNeed2p
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 month ago
#9
Some people get into the benefit system just because of some circumstances and in matter of time those people will get out from the benefit system because they know it doesn’t suit them. And there are these people who are just okay with it and think they’re better off with the benefit system. So they just waste time and probably smoke their wacky-backy ( If they can afford it). These are the unhinged people.
0
reply
imlikeahermit
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 month ago
#10
(Original post by YoBoyEddie)
The central banks want us all on Universal Basic Income anyway. They are pushing the Marxist rhetoric hard through the zionist media, hence all the Black Lives/Greta/New age stuff.
As somebody who leans heavily towards the right, I completely support UBI or Negative Income Tax. The only slight issue I see with it is that you need to have a stringent, tough system to back it up so that people don't take a lend.
0
reply
Gundabad(good)
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 month ago
#11
(Original post by ByEeek)
Nothing like some ignorant stereotyping.

My sister-in-law with two kids has fallen on hard times. Her benefit is about £1000 a month. That is to pay everything. Rent, food, bills, the lot. Our shopping bill (2 kids) is about £70 a week. So you tell me how having more kids makes you better off.

My kids are 7 an 10 now. I reckon I'm in the hole for around £120k so far. Kids do not make you better off whether on benefits or otherwise.
Sorry, if I offended you. I mean the people on benefits who don't have a reasonable number of children like 2-3. Those people have 5-6 kids and that's where the money comes flooding in. That spend a money's worth for 3 kids on 6 kids and pocket the difference for ****/booze/drugs.
0
reply
looloo2134
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 month ago
#12
(Original post by ByEeek)
Nothing like some ignorant stereotyping.

My sister-in-law with two kids has fallen on hard times. Her benefit is about £1000 a month. That is to pay everything. Rent, food, bills, the lot. Our shopping bill (2 kids) is about £70 a week. So you tell me how having more kids makes you better off.

My kids are 7 an 10 now. I reckon I'm in the hole for around £120k so far. Kids do not make you better off whether on benefits or otherwise.
Children are mainly a benefit to society and their parents because they grow up work and look after their parents
0
reply
imlikeahermit
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 month ago
#13
(Original post by looloo2134)
Children are mainly a benefit to society and their parents because they grow up work and look after their parents
Your assumption that children will grow up to work is right in about 99.99999% of cases however some families see living on benefits as the family tradition, so in those cases, it is questionable how much of a benefit they'll be.
0
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 month ago
#14
(Original post by Gundabad(good))
Sorry, if I offended you. I mean the people on benefits who don't have a reasonable number of children like 2-3. Those people have 5-6 kids and that's where the money comes flooding in. That spend a money's worth for 3 kids on 6 kids and pocket the difference for ****/booze/drugs.
Out of curiosity, how many people have you met who told you this is what they so?

Or is it just obvious?
0
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 1 month ago
#15
(Original post by looloo2134)
Children are mainly a benefit to society and their parents because they grow up work and look after their parents
Are you looking after your parents? I so, you are quite rare.
0
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#16
Report 1 month ago
#16
(Original post by imlikeahermit)
however some families see living on benefits as the family tradition,
Or is it more that they don't know anything else and equally don't have the skills or know how to get a job. How can you fill in an application form when you can't read. And this isn't rare. The average reading she for the UK is 11 with up to about 5.1 million adults being functionally illiterate.
0
reply
looloo2134
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#17
Report 1 month ago
#17
(Original post by ByEeek)
Out of curiosity, how many people have you met who told you this is what they so?

Or is it just obvious?
Mostly likely they never meant any person that fit that picture they just believe they exist. The birth rate per woman has gone down from 2.2 children about 1.8 children
Last edited by looloo2134; 1 month ago
0
reply
alice544
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#18
Report 1 month ago
#18
I think the tory arguement is that JSA or Universal credit is only suppose to be temporary and not life dependent things. That why it is so low but it doesn't account for the fact unemployment people are actually still people that need to pay bills and rent and eat
1
reply
looloo2134
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#19
Report 1 month ago
#19
(Original post by alice544)
I think the tory arguement is that JSA or Universal credit is only suppose to be temporary and not life dependent things. That why it is so low but it doesn't account for the fact unemployment people are actually still people that need to pay bills and rent and eat
They also need to socialize and be able to exercise.
0
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#20
Report 1 month ago
#20
(Original post by looloo2134)
Mostly likely they never meant any person that fit that picture they just believe they exist. The birth rate per woman has gone down from 2.2 children about 1.8 children
Quite. No doubt caused by the huge cost of children in the UK and women choosing to give birth when older or deciding to pursue their career. The tabloid t scrounger is in a minority of 1 or two extreme families and even in the Daily Mail you won't get the full story.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
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

Are you confident you could find support for your mental health if you needed it in COVID-19?

Yes (91)
22.09%
No (321)
77.91%

Watched Threads

View All