Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Buh

Benefits Britain - channel 5

Recommended Posts

No no no no no! The amount of income taxes an employer pays is based on the worker''s salary. It is money contracted by the employer to the worker. Therefore, the taxes are taken from the worker. It doesn''t matter what the employer''s profit margin is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like facts.Fact One: Only three per cent of the UK Welfare budget is spent on the unemployed, via the Jobseeker''s Allowance.Fact Two: Fraudulent claims amount to only 0.7 per cent of the Welfare budget.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"]I like facts.Fact One: Only three per cent of the UK Welfare budget is spent on the unemployed, via the Jobseeker''s Allowance.Fact Two: Fraudulent claims amount to only 0.7 per cent of the Welfare budget.[/quote]No further questions your honour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Big big difference between fraudulent claims and people abusing the system that is too easy to qualify for. Just because it''s there doesn''t mean you have to use it. But if you can get free money for filling out a few papers, and make life unreservedly more comfortable on the backs of the workers, why not do it. I mean besides being morally bankrupt.

On the other side, giving these mopes money to spend does keep business hopping, and for each pound they get and spend, it really adds about 7 or 8 to the economy as that money gets spent over and over. Supposedly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"]I like facts.Fact One: Only three per cent of the UK Welfare budget is spent on the unemployed, via the Jobseeker''s Allowance.Fact Two: Fraudulent claims amount to only 0.7 per cent of the Welfare budget.[/quote]Since jobseekers is only about 70 quid you would have to ask where the IOW guy with the 26 kids by 15 different woman, was getting the remainder of his £800 from?Nobody can live on jobseekers alone. I know because I got about £62 a week when I was made redundant at 61 yrs of age in 2006. After 6 months of it I got bugger all. Perhaps I should have asked someone who knew the system because I sure as hell never got anything after working and contributing for 45 yrs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''d imagine the rest comes from child benefits, but you can''t really cut those, they''re there for a bloody good reason. And before anyone starts with "oh well they shouldn''t have kids then", it''s not the childs fault, and they still need to eat and live.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"I''d imagine the rest comes from child benefits, but you can''t really cut those, they''re there for a bloody good reason. And before anyone starts with "oh well they shouldn''t have kids then", it''s not the childs fault, and they still need to eat and live."

I very much agree with this, however I think it wouldn''t be too hard to implement a system whereby the money given to parents could only be spent on food, childrens clothing and other essentials. It would only really require the consent of the big 4 supermarket chains, as every other grocery retailer would jump onboard to avoid missing out. Either through a voucher system, prepay card or similar. This would end the perception that child benefits get spent on Booze, Fags and Sky TV whilst also ensuring that the money really was spent on the children and their welfare, when even one family''s idea of a decent meal is a Mcdonalds it clearly isn''t.

"I like facts.

Fact One: Only three per cent of the UK Welfare budget is spent on the unemployed, via the Jobseeker''s Allowance.

Fact Two: Fraudulent claims amount to only 0.7 per cent of the Welfare budget."

I like facts too Purple. While the figures from the Guardian article are a little out of date there are a few more facts to draw:

1) Jobseekers allowance is not the only benefit the unemployed are entitled to and as Ricardo pointed out, on it''s own it is a woefully low benefit if you qualify for nothing else - in itself a major problem.

2) Combined Benefit and Tax credits spending makes up approx 2/7ths of the entire UK Govt spending.

And Purple yes benefit fraud isn''t a huge problem although 0.7% is of course only an estimate and if true equates to around 1.5Bn, a not insignificant number.

"If they qualify for a particular benefit then it ''belongs to them''."

I apologise, I think I''ve caused some confusion of my own views by trying to show how the majority of people unhappy with the benefit system perceive it. They are of course entitled to it.

What I meant to get across is though of course people are entitled to their benefits, the perception of many workers is they don''t deserve them and that the system gives them way too much. The people can''t really be blamed for taking what they are entitled to, except maybe morally if having children is effectively their financial solution.

I have not seen any strong evidence that the current benefit system is effective or more importantly does anything to improve the long term conditions of the people it is meant to help. In fact I have read several articles (and not in the Daily Mail) suggesting that the system we have created in the last 20 years has done almost the opposite of what was intended and created a greater problem of both increasing the rich poor divide and increasing the amount of children living in poverty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The "Godwin''s Law" term is unfortunate. Just because a comparison on the internet has been given a dismissive popular term does not mean that the comparison itself is not spot-on or valid. It is very accurate. Someone even suggested forced sterilisation FFS!!

Whilst bankers, corporations, and even politicians screw far more out of the system than anyone on state benefits ever has there is a very depressing divide and conquer technique being applied - successfully it would seem - to the electorate. I''m sad that so many buy into it so quickly and cheaply. I think we should all be questioning why there are endless and unrepresentative series about the most extreme examples of people on benefits and none about the biggest fraudsters of all, who are probably the people who commission this rubbish in the first place.

I am genuinely shocked, saddened, and somewhat ashamed to see some of the posts in this thread on a Norwich board. I hope you all don''t find yourselves unemployed, sick, disabled, or victims of circumstance. Our welfare state, along with the NHS is something we should all cherish and protect, not be brainwashed into thinking that everyone who uses something they have every entitlement to is some sort of scrounger and inferior being exploiting the system therefore it should be scrapped. I''m not saying it doesn''t happen but I am fairly sure it is only a tiny minority and a drop in the ocean in the grand scheme of things. Don''t be so easily fooled by TV and government propaganda. Not so long ago I saw a van go to the trouble of going around a roundabout a second time so that the passenger had time to wind down his window and shout "Get a f***ing job!" to someone in a wheelchair outside the Atos assessment centre. Is this the sort of world you want??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to admit it, but the twice around story made me laugh.

Nobody has said everyone on benefits is a scrounger. My exact point is if benefits went only to the truly needy, there would be plenty more to offer them in their hour of need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"2) Combined Benefit and Tax credits spending makes up approx 2/7ths of the entire UK Govt spending. "

 

Sometimes the government includes state pension when they talk about benefits, is this one of those occasions? 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sh007 - What programmes like Panorama, Newsnight, Question Time, Today on Radio 4? and thats just some on the BBC. There are plenty of programmes exposing crooked wealthy individuals and companies, you just have to watch or listen to them.

"Our welfare state, along with the NHS is something we should all cherish and protect, not be brainwashed into thinking that everyone who uses something they have every entitlement to is some sort of scrounger and inferior being exploiting the system therefore it should be scrapped"

Have people seriously suggested scrapping it? And I agree with your first line - Our welfare state, along with the NHS is something we should all cherish and protect. But do you think it is an effective system and is doing the job it''s meant to do of supporting those in low paid work, supporting those looking for work, supporting those who can''t work and helping keep children out of poverty?

Too often talking about changing benefits is seen as an attack, whatever the circumstances, on those on it. If thats not an example of partisan political brainwashing and propaganda then I don''t know what is. The system needs shaking up, not to persecute those who need it, but to ensure it''s sustainable and is helping people, not creating more socio-economic problems.

 

Oh and TC 2/7ths includes pensions as they come under benefit spending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The Messiah"]I know of some people locally who are on benithieves and admit to playing the system. Stories of always being on hard times but also having many trips into the fine City to buy soft furnishings and frequent many a drinking establishments for more than a skinful.

Have to admire the cheek of some people when their best skill is avoiding work to laze about on our money.[/quote]they are called farmers, if you don''t mind£5billion in subsidiesred deisel in 4x4''s that are almost permanently used on the roadsgrants for every possible activityinsurance scams that would shame a whiplash fraudster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]I like facts.Fact One: Only three per cent of the UK Welfare budget is spent on the unemployed, via the Jobseeker''s Allowance.Fact Two: Fraudulent claims amount to only 0.7 per cent of the Welfare budget.[/quote]Since jobseekers is only about 70 quid you would have to ask where the IOW guy with the 26 kids by 15 different woman, was getting the remainder of his £800 from?Nobody can live on jobseekers alone. I know because I got about £62 a week when I was made redundant at 61 yrs of age in 2006. After 6 months of it I got bugger all. Perhaps I should have asked someone who knew the system because I sure as hell never got anything after working and contributing for 45 yrs.

[/quote]

 

I was made redundant last year and didn''t even get job seekers. I now realise I could have got sickness benefit for 13 weeks instead but I didn''t apply for it. Probably through ignorance. I would think there''s still lost of benefit entitlements that are never claimed for. Rickyyyy, were you actively and genuinely seeking a job while you were claiming jobseekers? Of course you were [A]

 

The other thing to remember is that even the so called ''benefit class'' are also tax payers. When I started work income tax was a much bigger proportion of taxation than it is now. I think income tax was around 33% while purchase tax and then VAT were much les than 10%. I would think that a family of this ''benefit class'' who smoke, drink and run a car pay more taxes than I do! [;)]

 

But seriously I honestly believe that human nature is the same throughout the classes. The same proportion of people are dishonest whichever label we give them. The only way to know is to walk a mile in each person''s shoes...

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]I like facts.Fact One: Only three per cent of the UK Welfare budget is spent on the unemployed, via the Jobseeker''s Allowance.Fact Two: Fraudulent claims amount to only 0.7 per cent of the Welfare budget.[/quote]Since jobseekers is only about 70 quid you would have to ask where the IOW guy with the 26 kids by 15 different woman, was getting the remainder of his £800 from?Nobody can live on jobseekers alone. I know because I got about £62 a week when I was made redundant at 61 yrs of age in 2006. After 6 months of it I got bugger all. Perhaps I should have asked someone who knew the system because I sure as hell never got anything after working and contributing for 45 yrs.

[/quote]

 

I was made redundant last year and didn''t even get job seekers. I now realise I could have got sickness benefit for 13 weeks instead but I didn''t apply for it. Probably through ignorance. I would think there''s still lost of benefit entitlements that are never claimed for. Rickyyyy, were you actively and genuinely seeking a job while you were claiming jobseekers? Of course you were [A]

 

The other thing to remember is that even the so called ''benefit class'' are also tax payers. When I started work income tax was a much bigger proportion of taxation than it is now. I think income tax was around 33% while purchase tax and then VAT were much les than 10%. I would think that a family of this ''benefit class'' who smoke, drink and run a car pay more taxes than I do! [;)]

 

But seriously I honestly believe that human nature is the same throughout the classes. The same proportion of people are dishonest whichever label we give them. The only way to know is to walk a mile in each person''s shoes...

 

 Unless they''re working class, as they''re more likely to have athelete''s foot.

 

 

[/quote]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I doubt it is ''human nature'' master nuttybut as said before fraud etc is rife throughout the worldwhat should be more of debate is why TV knows that focussing on this area causes most interest..................... and mouth frothing (in many cases)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]I like facts.Fact One: Only three per cent of the UK Welfare budget is spent on the unemployed, via the Jobseeker''s Allowance.Fact Two: Fraudulent claims amount to only 0.7 per cent of the Welfare budget.[/quote]Since jobseekers is only about 70 quid you would have to ask where the IOW guy with the 26 kids by 15 different woman, was getting the remainder of his £800 from?Nobody can live on jobseekers alone. I know because I got about £62 a week when I was made redundant at 61 yrs of age in 2006. After 6 months of it I got bugger all. Perhaps I should have asked someone who knew the system because I sure as hell never got anything after working and contributing for 45 yrs.

[/quote]

 

I was made redundant last year and didn''t even get job seekers. I now realise I could have got sickness benefit for 13 weeks instead but I didn''t apply for it. Probably through ignorance. I would think there''s still lost of benefit entitlements that are never claimed for. Rickyyyy, were you actively and genuinely seeking a job while you were claiming jobseekers? Of course you were [A]

 

The other thing to remember is that even the so called ''benefit class'' are also tax payers. When I started work income tax was a much bigger proportion of taxation than it is now. I think income tax was around 33% while purchase tax and then VAT were much les than 10%. I would think that a family of this ''benefit class'' who smoke, drink and run a car pay more taxes than I do! [;)]

 

But seriously I honestly believe that human nature is the same throughout the classes. The same proportion of people are dishonest whichever label we give them. The only way to know is to walk a mile in each person''s shoes...

 

 

 

 

[/quote]Yes Nutty I certainly was actively seeking work. You don''t go from 45k a year to Fu(k all without it making a vast difference to your standard of living and I would have done almost anything on offer. However when you are over 60 your skills and experience seem to count for very little and despite many applications I only got a part time job after a year of trying. My mistake was taking some of my pension early so that pretty much killed any chance of pension credit.My experience of that time is that like many others who were in the same boat and had never been unemployed before I didn''t know how to play the system. The programme on C5 was an example of those who did know how to play the system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]I like facts.Fact One: Only three per cent of the UK Welfare budget is spent on the unemployed, via the Jobseeker''s Allowance.Fact Two: Fraudulent claims amount to only 0.7 per cent of the Welfare budget.[/quote]Since jobseekers is only about 70 quid you would have to ask where the IOW guy with the 26 kids by 15 different woman, was getting the remainder of his £800 from?Nobody can live on jobseekers alone. I know because I got about £62 a week when I was made redundant at 61 yrs of age in 2006. After 6 months of it I got bugger all. Perhaps I should have asked someone who knew the system because I sure as hell never got anything after working and contributing for 45 yrs.

[/quote]

 

I was made redundant last year and didn''t even get job seekers. I now realise I could have got sickness benefit for 13 weeks instead but I didn''t apply for it. Probably through ignorance. I would think there''s still lost of benefit entitlements that are never claimed for. Rickyyyy, were you actively and genuinely seeking a job while you were claiming jobseekers? Of course you were [A]

 

The other thing to remember is that even the so called ''benefit class'' are also tax payers. When I started work income tax was a much bigger proportion of taxation than it is now. I think income tax was around 33% while purchase tax and then VAT were much les than 10%. I would think that a family of this ''benefit class'' who smoke, drink and run a car pay more taxes than I do! [;)]

 

But seriously I honestly believe that human nature is the same throughout the classes. The same proportion of people are dishonest whichever label we give them. The only way to know is to walk a mile in each person''s shoes...

 

 

 

 

[/quote]Yes Nutty I certainly was actively seeking work. You don''t go from 45k a year to Fu(k all without it making a vast difference to your standard of living and I would have done almost anything on offer. However when you are over 60 your skills and experience seem to count for very little and despite many applications I only got a part time job after a year of trying. My mistake was taking some of my pension early so that pretty much killed any chance of pension credit.My experience of that time is that like many others who were in the same boat and had never been unemployed before I didn''t know how to play the system. The programme on C5 was an example of those who did know how to play the system.[/quote]

 

You''re like me then Rickyyyyyy! I don''t know how to play the system either. I''m pretty sure I could have claimed sickness for 13 weeks because I was sick when made redundant. I didn''t know that at the time though and I''d just got redundancy money so assumed I was not entitled to anything. As I said I reckon there''s a lot of benefits not claimed for. In fact probably as much as is fiddled because most people, from all walks of life, are honest.

 

I didn''t see the programme in question but I have seen plenty like it. From the ones I have seen i certainly wouldn''t want to trade places with the stars of the shows!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This type of argument has been going on for hundreds of years. I spent some time at University studying it (many, many years ago). There has always been a proportion unable to work, either because they were not capable of the work required or work was not available. Equally, in peoples'' mind there has always been a distinction in peoples'' minds between the "deserving" poor and the "undeserving" poor. I must emphasise that unfortunately, the judgement of "undeserving" has tended to be erratic and subjective and only rarely well-informed. To encourage the latter to work there have been quite predictable remedies - physical punishment,; houses of correction and most recently, workhouses. Oliver Twist, was essentially a social satire based around the horrors of workhouses. None of these have ever worked and almost all have made the matter worse rather than better. They distorted the labour market, driving down wages to below poverty levels; were very expensive (ratepayers would not pay for them) and just simply could not cope with the volume of the "undeserving" poor. They are also widely regarded as leading to increased levels of crime.This issue has been magnified by capitalism since the mid-18th century because of the trade cycle meaning that there tends to be large numbers of able-bodied poor at the same time. In its most modern version, with capital mobility the problem is even greater.Basic pattern is that everybody gets very "het up" (understandably) about the "undeserrving" poor. Sporadically, governments - local and national - have cracked down on it. This intervention has usually made matters worse because of the problems mentioned above. I am sure that the Pink un message board will have similar threads in a few hundred time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user=" Badger"]This type of argument has been going on for hundreds of years. I spent some time at University studying it (many, many years ago). There has always been a proportion unable to work, either because they were not capable of the work required or work was not available. Equally, in peoples'' mind there has always been a distinction in peoples'' minds between the "deserving" poor and the "undeserving" poor. I must emphasise that unfortunately, the judgement of "undeserving" has tended to be erratic and subjective and only rarely well-informed. To encourage the latter to work there have been quite predictable remedies - physical punishment,; houses of correction and most recently, workhouses. Oliver Twist, was essentially a social satire based around the horrors of workhouses. None of these have ever worked and almost all have made the matter worse rather than better. They distorted the labour market, driving down wages to below poverty levels; were very expensive (ratepayers would not pay for them) and just simply could not cope with the volume of the "undeserving" poor. They are also widely regarded as leading to increased levels of crime.This issue has been magnified by capitalism since the mid-18th century because of the trade cycle meaning that there tends to be large numbers of able-bodied poor at the same time. In its most modern version, with capital mobility the problem is even greater.Basic pattern is that everybody gets very "het up" (understandably) about the "undeserrving" poor. Sporadically, governments - local and national - have cracked down on it. This intervention has usually made matters worse because of the problems mentioned above. I am sure that the Pink un message board will have similar threads in a few hundred time.[/quote]
The robots would''ve taken over by then.  And every human will be in the workhouse forced to make more robots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The robots would''ve taken over by then.  And every human will be in the workhouse forced to make more robots."

 

But if all the humans are in the workhouse who/what will be earning the money to pay for the robots?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Socialism does not work. Stop voting for them and we have at least a small chance of rectifying the spending waste of all Labour governments of the past 50 years and their policy of lower

class and immigrant bribery. They always run out of other people''s money !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="paul moy"]Socialism does not work. Stop voting for them and we have at least a small chance of rectifying the spending waste of all Labour governments of the past 50 years and their policy of lower

class and immigrant bribery. They always run out of other people''s money !![/quote]

The 99% of the world runs on other peoples money, thats why its so screwed. I don''t think anyone can make a case that any of the political/economic theories work, you have to pick the one you believe is the one right for you and vote for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don''t remember one Herman. We tried the other ways so why not give it a go? Are you up for getting a socialist part going?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great stuff Herman. Let''s get shot of boring centre party politics and its little belief and passion. Let''s get radical buddy. You''re only up against farage on the other wing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Herman "]When did we last have a socialist government anyway?[/quote]Or more to the point have we ever had one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user=" Badger"][quote user="Herman "]When did we last have a socialist government anyway?[/quote]Or more to the point have we ever had one?[/quote]You are all far to young to remember.The Gas Board, The Coal Board, British Rail, British Road Services etc etc.Read some history and let the rose tinted glasses fall from your eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user=" Badger"][quote user="Herman "]When did we last have a socialist government anyway?[/quote]Or more to the point have we ever had one?[/quote]The reforming government of 1945-51, led by the greatest peacetime prime minister of the 20th century (or the 21st), was the closest we have had. Its welfare policies were widely copied throughout western Europe, and led to a social democratic (note the lower cases) political consensus that was broadly beneficial, certainly in decades past, and even now, despite horrendous finacial pressures undreamt of at the outset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...