Is this fair? (political debate)

[Randy-Darkshade]

The British government want to put a cap on the amount of benefits we can claim. Because they say families claiming welfare earn more than the average working person. Now I was gonna jump on my high horse and rant but I have been thinking about it.

I have done some quick math and found I claim a total of 6156 pounds per year in welfare. This includes my housing welfare which pays my rent and my job seekers allowance which I live on. If I add council tax to that it comes too 7157 pounds per year. No where NEAR what the government is saying we get. However I am just a single man living alone.

Families however get to claim extra welfare such as family allowance, which is a set amount per child in the household, family tax credits which again is a set amount per child in the house hold. Which is 648 per year per child added to 7157 whi9ch brings the total to 7805. eldest child is 20 pounds a week. Unless the average family has like four children I can't get my sums to match what the government is saying we claim.

My sums are not even close and I am using their amounts.

Soooo, wtf have I missed here?

 

[Kryn]

I have no idea how it works over there. But here in America you can only come out ahead using government support if you're a single woman with multiple kids. A "friend" of mine has 4 kids from 4 daddys and makes about $20k a year. And she only has to work like 3 months out of the year to claim some extra taxes or something. Plus her schooling is almost 100% payed for as well. I'm not 100% on her details, but I'm a single man working full time and I make about $11k a year. And I get to work around heavy machinery that can rip my limbs off. yaaaaaay.

And no I don't think it's fair. Just because you were irresponsible and popped out a bunch of fucking kids doesn't mean you deserve a basically free ride till your kids are 18.

 

[Jashwa]

Yes, it's fair that they're cutting back. Why? Because there's no obligation for them to keep supporting people. Sure, it's a great thing and I'm 100% behind the concept of welfare and supporting those in need, but it's not like you have a right to that money. And it's probably the right decision, since there are lots of people who are living off of it and won't get a real job because it wouldn't pay as much as welfare/etc.

 

[Schwimmwagen]

Putting a cap on sounds good to me. That way people won't be intentionally making so many babies for profit.

 

[Bliss]

Yes, it's fair that they're cutting back. Why? Because there's no obligation for them to keep supporting people.

And if we are obliged by a constitution?

 

[Dreaming]

Politics aren't always fair.

 

[BRN]

Yeah, it's fair to support a benefits cap. Benefits aim to promote equality. At the moment, someone on benefits can live more easily and with more disposable income than a working person. It's an out of control system.

I support a cap on every benefit except child support.

 

[Schwimmwagen]

I support a cap on every benefit except child support.

But then you'll still get those nutcases who have babies just to reap government benefits. Tbh, I don't think anybody should even consider having a child at all if they're in a position where they need to live on welfare. Not til they get on their feet.

 

[BRN]

But then you'll still get those nutcases who have babies just to reap government benefits. Tbh, I don't think anybody should even consider having a child at all if they're in a position where they need to live on welfare. Not til they get on their feet.

It's true, but any system where we promise something for free is up for exploitation... I'm not sure if you can profit off having another child. A sheer cap on benefits with a small increase per child should discourage people. I hope. :s

Maybe we can provide higher benefits for people who choose to adopt.

 

[Randy-Darkshade]

Yes, it's fair that they're cutting back. Why? Because there's no obligation for them to keep supporting people. Sure, it's a great thing and I'm 100% behind the concept of welfare and supporting those in need, but it's not like you have a right to that money. And it's probably the right decision, since there are lots of people who are living off of it and won't get a real job because it wouldn't pay as much as welfare/etc.

That does not mean everyone on welfare wont get a job because it pays less than welfare. In fact if you're a single man like myself, you'd be far better off in a full time job than you would on welfare and my sums in the OP prove that. Not everyone wants to be on welfare, many of us don't have a choice.

Yeah, it's fair to support a benefits cap. Benefits aim to promote equality. At the moment, someone on benefits can live more easily and with more disposable income than a working person. It's an out of control system.

I support a cap on every benefit except child support.

I disagree. My sums prove I don't even get the equivalent of a part time job a year. I get less than everyone else, is it really fair to cap my money when I get next to nothing as it is?

But then you'll still get those nutcases who have babies just to reap government benefits. Tbh, I don't think anybody should even consider having a child at all if they're in a position where they need to live on welfare. Not til they get on their feet.

They say one of the reasons so many young "women" get pregnant is because it's the easy road to get a home and benefits. I can only support myself hence why I'm not a daddy. Though with the introduction of a new niece and nephew last week makes me wanna be a daddy.

 

[Schwimmwagen]

Maybe we can provide higher benefits for people who choose to adopt.

I'm 50:50 on that one. :c On one hand, orphaned kids get homes and families again, on the other hand, people will be adopting kids as if they were cattle and treating them poorly. If there were measures taken that could prevent the latter from happening, I'd fully support the idea.

 

[Mayfurr]

Putting a cap on sounds good to me. That way people won't be intentionally making so many babies for profit.

<facepalm>
I keep seeing this being trotted out damn near every time there's a discussion on social welfare benefits, but has anyone actually have any hard actual proof of people doing this?

Anyone?

Any study at all that proves significant numbers of people are intentionally farming babies for welfare cheques?

Because in the absence of any hard evidence, I'm calling bullshit on this happening.

 

[Schwimmwagen]

<facepalm>
I keep seeing this being trotted out damn near every time there's a discussion on social welfare benefits, but has anyone actually have any hard actual proof of people doing this?

Anyone?

Any study at all that proves significant numbers of people are intentionally farming babies for welfare cheques?

Because in the absence of any hard evidence, I'm calling bullshit on this happening. It's a pretty nasty accusation.

It's one of those things you pick up from living in/near an area where people actually do that. Get to the shittier streets in England and you'll see and hear about those who treat their children really fucking poorly yet SOMEHOW have plenty of extra money to spend on themselves.

 

[Onnes]

So what happens to a family with multiple children when their wage earners lose their jobs and the benefit cap does not provide sufficient income?

 

[BRN]

I disagree. My sums prove I don't even get the equivalent of a part time job a year. I get less than everyone else, is it really fair to cap my money when I get next to nothing as it is?

A cap isn't a reduction. The last I heard, the cap was going to be set as 'the average working wage'. Which means you wouldn't lose a penny of your benefits because apparently you're earning less than that.

And it's tough to support having benefits exceed the average working wage.

So what happens to a family with multiple children when their wage earners lose their jobs and the benefit cap does not provide sufficient income?

This is the left-wing objection to the Conservative government. They're asking for the 'cap' to be removed on child support.

 

[Schwimmwagen]

Oh hey, here's an example of people exploiting the child welfare system.

An Oklahoma County district judge has been charged with felony fraud for taking foster care payments for twins that she adopted, but secretly gave to another woman to raise.
Judge Tammy-Bass LeSure, 43, and husband Karlos Antonio LeSure, 46, took $22,000 in foster care reimbursements from the Oklahoma Department of Human Services beginning in January 2008, when they agreed to become foster parents of the infant boy and girl. The DHS paid the pair $730 per month.

http://corruptauthority.com/corrupt...ge-charged-with-stealing-child-welfare-funds/

 

[Randy-Darkshade]

<facepalm>
I keep seeing this being trotted out damn near every time there's a discussion on social welfare benefits, but has anyone actually have any hard actual proof of people doing this?

Anyone?

Any study at all that proves significant numbers of people are intentionally farming babies for welfare cheques?

Because in the absence of any hard evidence, I'm calling bullshit on this happening.

It may be a misconception. However many "families" or single mums I know are far younger than me and are claiming welfare, in fact if you wanted me too I could count them up and I know it will go well into double figures, and that is in my small town alone. Maybe these mothers did not set out to have a baby just to claim welfare, but when you look at statistics, especially of the number of teen mothers here in the UK it does give off the impression that they do, especially when they have another one. A lot of fathers are lazy layabouts also on welfare (if we believe what we see on Jeremy Kyle lol). It may all be a misconception caused by the media industry though.

I don't think capping the money for those who are actively seeking work is fair, the government should be doing more to help us get into work. If they do go ahead and cap my money I wont be able to do what they want me to do to find work. I wouldn't be able to make the phone calls needed, or to travel to interviews because I wouldn't be able to pay the train or bus fare. To be honest if they capped my welfare I wouldn't even be able to live in a home, I'd be on the streets like thousands of other people.

This is why I fucking hate our coalition government right now, because to me they seem hell bent on making our lives as hard as fucking possible. they haven't done a thing to help any of us. Regardless of whethere you're employed or not.

A cap isn't a reduction. The last I heard, the cap was going to be set as 'the average working wage'. Which means you wouldn't lose a penny of your benefits because apparently you're earning less than that.

And it's tough to support having benefits exceed the average working wage.



This is the left-wing objection to the Conservative government. They're asking for the 'cap' to be removed on child support.

Ahh, I did wonder about that, when I watched the news lunchtime it sounded more like they were targeting families more than anything. It also said that most politicians are likely to vote against it because of some faults with the bill or something.

It just worries me that I'd loose money because I really don't want to loose my home.

 

[Onnes]

Oh hey, here's an example of people exploiting the child welfare system.

Realize where this argument leads: in the US we largely did away with all forms of welfare due to stereotypes like the "welfare queen". Now 1 in 5 children live in poverty and homeless families are a fairly common sight.

 

[Schwimmwagen]

Realize where this argument leads: in the US we largely did away with all forms of welfare due to stereotypes like the "welfare queen". Now 1 in 5 children live in poverty and homeless families are a fairly common sight.

But the point is, there are good things that come out of welfare, yes. No doubt about it. But look at welfare theives in general. If you were in charge, what would you suggest to stop people from exploiting the system, as well as allowing those who really do need it to survive?

 

[BRN]

It may be a misconception. However many "families" or single mums I know are far younger than me and are claiming welfare, in fact if you wanted me too I could count them up and I know it will go well into double figures, and that is in my small town alone. Maybe these mothers did not set out to have a baby just to claim welfare, but when you look at statistics, especially of the number of teen mothers here in the UK it does give off the impression that they do, especially when they have another one. A lot of fathers are lazy layabouts also on welfare (if we believe what we see on Jeremy Kyle lol). It may all be a misconception caused by the media industry though.

I don't think capping the money for those who are actively seeking work is fair, the government should be doing more to help us get into work. If they do go ahead and cap my money I wont be able to do what they want me to do to find work. I wouldn't be able to make the phone calls needed, or to travel to interviews because I wouldn't be able to pay the train or bus fare. To be honest if they capped my welfare I wouldn't even be able to live in a home, I'd be on the streets like thousands of other people.

Jeremy Kyle isn't a psychologist, he's the presenter of an entertainment show. They pick the applicants who they reckon will be the most entertaining. I wouldn't want to use it as a representation of English society.

I have a parent who actually works in council benefits, specifically homing. She gives us some unpalatable stories about people. But honestly, there's a good proportion of victims in amongst the exploitative handout-seekers.

 

[Kitutal]

For what it's worth, my dad has a job that pays less than he could earn were he unemployed, simply because he doesn't want to sit around the house all day doing nothing. But the fact is, there are nowhere near enough jobs out there to go around, a lot of people are looking for jobs and unable to find one, and struggling to live on what the government gives them in the meantime, and being given even less because they refused to apply for a job that would have earnt them barely as much as the cost of commuting half way across the county every day. The whole system is a mess and neads to be taken apart and rebuilt from scratch, at least, that's what I want to try doing when I'm prime minister.

 

[Onnes]

But the point is, there are good things that come out of welfare, yes. No doubt about it. But look at welfare theives in general. If you were in charge, what would you suggest to stop people from exploiting the system, as well as allowing those who really do need it to survive?

You are asking to punish families with children and legitimate needs just to stop potential fraud. Which is the worse outcome here: that someone defrauds the government or a family can't afford to raise their kids?

 

[Schwimmwagen]

You are asking to punish families with children and legitimate needs just to stop potential fraud. Which is the worse outcome here: that someone defrauds the government or a family can't afford to raise their kids?

Ok, think about this. You have people who are currently on welfare and struggling. They intentionally have babies and carry on doing so until they actually have quite a decent standing whilst not working at all. They shouldn't be having children when they are living in a poor state. Government aside, that's just common bloody sense.

You have people who are working and already have kids and then the shit hits the fan. Jobs are lost, as well as the home. Kids were already there before said shitstorm. Since those kids weren't intentionally born and raised during a poor state, it would be fair to provide extra benefits for them because they are already there and the poor state itself is caused by accident and/or poor luck.

And I asked you a question.

 

[Ad Hoc]

I have no idea how it works over there. But here in America you can only come out ahead using government support if you're a single woman with multiple kids. A "friend" of mine has 4 kids from 4 daddys and makes about $20k a year. And she only has to work like 3 months out of the year to claim some extra taxes or something. Plus her schooling is almost 100% payed for as well. I'm not 100% on her details, but I'm a single man working full time and I make about $11k a year. And I get to work around heavy machinery that can rip my limbs off. yaaaaaay.

And no I don't think it's fair. Just because you were irresponsible and popped out a bunch of fucking kids doesn't mean you deserve a basically free ride till your kids are 18.

Math time. You have $11k to yourself. She has $20k between herself and four children (five people total), which comes out to about $4k per person assuming a perfectly even split. She'll have a little more on account of the schooling but not enough to bridge that $7k gap.

 

[Randy-Darkshade]

But the point is, there are good things that come out of welfare, yes. No doubt about it. But look at welfare theives in general. If you were in charge, what would you suggest to stop people from exploiting the system, as well as allowing those who really do need it to survive?

There is a program on BBC one at 11am each morning called Saints and Scroungers. It shows what people will do to be benefit thieves but they always get caught, it also shows people who rightly deserve benefits. It's presented by Dominic Littlewood. He also co presented Cowboy Builders. It makes me sick that people will exploit the system just because they are greedy. I claim what I am entitled to by law, no more, no less.

I sometimes wonder if it's a social thing that is the reason people want money. I mean to buy things like an LCD TV, modern games consoles, blueray player, iphones, ipods, imacs etc etc, just so they feel.....I don't know, the word has slipped my mind. It's almost like people expect you to have all the modern tech these days and you're seen as lower class if you don't so people do what they can to get it.

Me? Well, if anyone saw my ghost thread I linked a video of my home, you can see in that I don;t have anything of any value, in fact any would be thieves would probably come in, take one look, turn around and fuck off lol. But, I'm happy. I have not paid for one piece of furniture in this place. I was lucky, mum agve up her home to live with her BF, so I got a bed, wardrobe, chest of draws, oven, the widescreen CRT TV, the computer desk, the corner unit and the washing machine from her for free.I have new carpet down that cost me nothing, mums BF is a carpet layer and he had a load of carpet floor tiles left from a job and gave em to me.

It isn't what you know, It's who you know.

Math time. You have $11k to yourself. She has $20k between herself and four children (five people total), which comes out to about $4k per person assuming a perfectly even split. She'll have a little more on account of the schooling but not enough to bridge that $7k gap.

If you can't afford to support four kids, don't have four kids.