Cameron - The Big Society - sheer genius
15 February 2011, 12:19 PM
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: A big town with sh1t shops: Northampton
Posts: 21,366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a shame helping others out equates to spending money. It's because we all do not have the time to spare to help others because we are so scared that if we don't work as hard as we can, we are in danger of having our rooves taken away from us.
How can I pay the mortgage if I work but don't get paid for it?
How can I pay the mortgage if I work but don't get paid for it?
15 February 2011, 01:04 PM
#35
Guest
Posts: n/a
Back in the real world, government spending STILL outstrips revenue and inflation is taking a big hike. So not only do government debts get "inflated" away, they get to steal even more of our money!
Dave
15 February 2011, 01:24 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pleiades
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
15 February 2011, 02:24 PM
#37
Of course they won't! They'll zap the front line first, rather than make their own jobs redundant, then all the blame can get put on the "nasty" coalition government for making them make cuts.
Back in the real world, government spending STILL outstrips revenue and inflation is taking a big hike. So not only do government debts get "inflated" away, they get to steal even more of our money!
Dave
Back in the real world, government spending STILL outstrips revenue and inflation is taking a big hike. So not only do government debts get "inflated" away, they get to steal even more of our money!
Dave
The general consensus I picked up was that the civil service were particularly well paid when you compared them to the private sector (they were commonly on as much, if not more than their industry equivalents), and the rest were not badly paid either.
Whilst some friends have lost their jobs during the thinning out of some coalition departments, they've generally not been all that bitter, in some cases I think it's because they realised their jobs were not critical to the running of the country, and in some cases the jobs were just plain bonkers!
On the other hand, it makes me sick to see other friends who are nurses getting pitiful wages for working crazy shifts, including only time and a half (if they're lucky) over the holiday period, whilst LU workers go on strike at the drop of a hat, commonly citing health and safety, when we know that generally it's because many of their union members are greedy jobsworths.
Now don't get me wrong, I know we need the people who keep the country going, but what we don't need is more think tanks, ridiculous hierarchies in government organisations, health and safety tying us in knots etc etc.
The "big society" won't fix any of that - it's all a smokescreen anyway.
If we got rid of the "I deserve something for nothing", blame culture that the previous decade seems to have accepted as the norm, both public and private sectors would probably save billions if not trillions a year on having to pay out for people tripping over things at work or on the street because they just weren't looking where they were going, or people who don't take jobs because they think they're too good for them.
Big society? Big Joke.
Rant over - I shall prepare to get flamed
Last edited by MrNoisy; 15 February 2011 at 02:34 PM.
15 February 2011, 02:47 PM
#38
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
15 February 2011, 03:28 PM
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: A big town with sh1t shops: Northampton
Posts: 21,366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
15 February 2011, 03:29 PM
#40
Of course they won't! They'll zap the front line first, rather than make their own jobs redundant, then all the blame can get put on the "nasty" coalition government for making them make cuts.
Back in the real world, government spending STILL outstrips revenue and inflation is taking a big hike. So not only do government debts get "inflated" away, they get to steal even more of our money!
Dave
Back in the real world, government spending STILL outstrips revenue and inflation is taking a big hike. So not only do government debts get "inflated" away, they get to steal even more of our money!
Dave
We're in austere times I think everybody is aware of that. My solution, give manufacturing a huge boost in the UK, this creates jobs. The UK populus then buys only British products where possible yet we sell our services and products worldwide. Hey presto our insularity helps out of the recession. A romantic notion but not beyond the realms of possibility.
15 February 2011, 04:20 PM
#41
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Disco, Disco!
Posts: 21,825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
15 February 2011, 04:26 PM
#42
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pleiades
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had worked in the private sector previously and was shocked at how much money was wasted though.
"Flexi-time" was the biggest con going. In my department we only worked as long as the front desk was open (8.45 - 15.45) but we could go in as early as 7am. There wouldn't be any work for us to do because the claimants couldn't get in until 8.45am but as long as we signed in we got paid (so literally could sit and read the paper for nearly two hours) and the same at closing time.
Before I worked on the front desk I was an admin assistant, I could get all my work done in a couple of hours but still got paid for a full day.
That's just a couple of examples - and one person, multiply it by 200 or so who worked in the same building.
Honestly I could go on and on about the money being wasted (personal phone calls to Australia!), it just would not be tolerated in the private sector.
15 February 2011, 05:19 PM
#45
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pleiades
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A few pence more than minimum wage. It's going back a few years but it was less than £10k put it that way.
We were told, for safety reasons, that we couldn't have anything out on our desks except a pen, keyboard and monitor. Male staff had to wear a tie but it must be a clip-on tie so they couldn't be strangled with it.
On my first day dealing with claimants I sat at my virtually empty desk and within an hour someone had picked up the pen and threatened to stab my eyes out with it unless he got more money.
The following week the woman who sat next to me had her computer set on fire and a claimant told me he was going to come in with a machete and chop my hands off.
Funnily enough I liked most of the claimants more than I did my colleagues
We were told, for safety reasons, that we couldn't have anything out on our desks except a pen, keyboard and monitor. Male staff had to wear a tie but it must be a clip-on tie so they couldn't be strangled with it.
On my first day dealing with claimants I sat at my virtually empty desk and within an hour someone had picked up the pen and threatened to stab my eyes out with it unless he got more money.
The following week the woman who sat next to me had her computer set on fire and a claimant told me he was going to come in with a machete and chop my hands off.
Funnily enough I liked most of the claimants more than I did my colleagues
15 February 2011, 05:40 PM
#46
A few pence more than minimum wage. It's going back a few years but it was less than £10k put it that way.
We were told, for safety reasons, that we couldn't have anything out on our desks except a pen, keyboard and monitor. Male staff had to wear a tie but it must be a clip-on tie so they couldn't be strangled with it.
On my first day dealing with claimants I sat at my virtually empty desk and within an hour someone had picked up the pen and threatened to stab my eyes out with it unless he got more money.
The following week the woman who sat next to me had her computer set on fire and a claimant told me he was going to come in with a machete and chop my hands off.
Funnily enough I liked most of the claimants more than I did my colleagues
We were told, for safety reasons, that we couldn't have anything out on our desks except a pen, keyboard and monitor. Male staff had to wear a tie but it must be a clip-on tie so they couldn't be strangled with it.
On my first day dealing with claimants I sat at my virtually empty desk and within an hour someone had picked up the pen and threatened to stab my eyes out with it unless he got more money.
The following week the woman who sat next to me had her computer set on fire and a claimant told me he was going to come in with a machete and chop my hands off.
Funnily enough I liked most of the claimants more than I did my colleagues
Seems like you should have been on some danger money too. Surely some security should have been on hand to 'escort' the undesirables from the premises.
15 February 2011, 05:48 PM
#47
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pleiades
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I grew up in a very rough area so was quite streetwise anyway but it was still an education.
99% of the time I knew the people I was dealing with weren't mad at me personally, they were just frustrated with the system and the situation they were in.
15 February 2011, 06:44 PM
#48
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The very people who spent the second half of the last decade condemning the 'nanny-state' are now criticising libertarian ideals. No position, just an objection to any move made by an authority. Utterly pointless.
16 February 2011, 12:28 AM
#49
Originally Posted by Lydia72
I was a civil servant (Benefits Agency) and was paid peanuts. To rub salt into the wound I was getting threatened, spat at, sworn at etc on a daily basis by claimants who received more money in benefits than I got in wages.
I had worked in the private sector previously and was shocked at how much money was wasted though.
"Flexi-time" was the biggest con going. In my department we only worked as long as the front desk was open (8.45 - 15.45) but we could go in as early as 7am. There wouldn't be any work for us to do because the claimants couldn't get in until 8.45am but as long as we signed in we got paid (so literally could sit and read the paper for nearly two hours) and the same at closing time.
Before I worked on the front desk I was an admin assistant, I could get all my work done in a couple of hours but still got paid for a full day.
That's just a couple of examples - and one person, multiply it by 200 or so who worked in the same building.
Honestly I could go on and on about the money being wasted (personal phone calls to Australia!), it just would not be tolerated in the private sector.
I had worked in the private sector previously and was shocked at how much money was wasted though.
"Flexi-time" was the biggest con going. In my department we only worked as long as the front desk was open (8.45 - 15.45) but we could go in as early as 7am. There wouldn't be any work for us to do because the claimants couldn't get in until 8.45am but as long as we signed in we got paid (so literally could sit and read the paper for nearly two hours) and the same at closing time.
Before I worked on the front desk I was an admin assistant, I could get all my work done in a couple of hours but still got paid for a full day.
That's just a couple of examples - and one person, multiply it by 200 or so who worked in the same building.
Honestly I could go on and on about the money being wasted (personal phone calls to Australia!), it just would not be tolerated in the private sector.
However, I know people who were on more than £50k a year in the civil service in Sheffield who were doing nothing more than glorified office admin work, and it really used to **** me off that my taxes were funding that.
To be fair, in my eyes it's less important if the private sector waste money as long as they're not industries the tax payer has helped to prop up - and to be honest, Labour could have chosen to let them fail as they did in the US.
We did have a security guard, he used to hide in the toilets if he thought someone was going to kick off
I grew up in a very rough area so was quite streetwise anyway but it was still an education.
99% of the time I knew the people I was dealing with weren't mad at me personally, they were just frustrated with the system and the situation they were in.
I grew up in a very rough area so was quite streetwise anyway but it was still an education.
99% of the time I knew the people I was dealing with weren't mad at me personally, they were just frustrated with the system and the situation they were in.
16 February 2011, 12:50 AM
#50
So Joe Public gets shafted from all fronts (and behinds)! I don't have a problem with services being cut but the public sector needs to move with the times. We need more transparency, less red tape and less bullshyte.
We're in austere times I think everybody is aware of that. My solution, give manufacturing a huge boost in the UK, this creates jobs. The UK populus then buys only British products where possible yet we sell our services and products worldwide. Hey presto our insularity helps out of the recession. A romantic notion but not beyond the realms of possibility.
We're in austere times I think everybody is aware of that. My solution, give manufacturing a huge boost in the UK, this creates jobs. The UK populus then buys only British products where possible yet we sell our services and products worldwide. Hey presto our insularity helps out of the recession. A romantic notion but not beyond the realms of possibility.
The last government spent 7-8 years pumping vast amounts of money into the public sector, which accomplished nothing except creating thousands of jobs, the majority of which weren't necessary to begin with, and hence are being cut now!
Doing the same to the manufacturing sector isn't likely to change that - you've got to create demand if you want growth - throwing money at it won't suddenly trigger it - innovation is what we need, and for innovation, we need education.
Except that competition at school isn't allowed now. Because Mrs Blair said "that might be unfair" - or "it might violate someone's human rights"...or something like that....
- so nobody's encouraged to excel or be different anymore. Which is sad.Throwing lots of money at the public sector allowed prior government ministers to conveniently ignore all the issues with the private sector that they'd pointed the finger at the Tories for during their period in office, whilst claiming they'd "fixed" unemployment.
It's a joke really as neither side has achieved anything truly groundbreaking in that regard.
An obvious problem in my eyes is that local government, moving 10 years behind the times, now seems to be labouring under the impression that "outsourcing is the key" to everything, hence all equipment is being sold off on the cheap, and contractors are being employed to do everything by people who have no grounding in the jobs they're recruiting for - hence the roads, the NHS, IT systems and much of the remaining infrastructure has been left in a total shambles. Before you know it the local NHS switchboard will be in a call centre abroad if it's not already.
You know what though - there is something to be said for "Big Society" in so far as - MP's in general are in politics for what they can gain financially -whilst I'd like to believe that there are a few well meaning souls in amongst the lazy majority of out of touch head cases who inhabit parliament, the fact remains that really good results don't often come from MP's actions, but from the actions of people who aren't afraid to get off their backsides and take action for what they believe in.
English history would support this argument, but look at Egypt for a more recent example that's outside our borders!
And this is where the problem lies. I went on a fuel demonstration a few years back organised on here. Over 200 people signed up and said they'd come, but out of that 200, less than 20 turned up. That's not even 10%. Why?
Because nowadays most people feign to be "too busy" to help out with demonstrations or causes to fight political idiocy. They'd rather be on Facebook, or watching Big Brother.
And as long as you're content to do that rather than take positive action against the system, the politicians will sit in their big posh houses, regardless of their background and laugh at all of us.
Truth be told, we've all got a bit too comfortable.
16 February 2011, 09:16 AM
#51
I agree with your first paragraph, but not the second.
The last government spent 7-8 years pumping vast amounts of money into the public sector, which accomplished nothing except creating thousands of jobs, the majority of which weren't necessary to begin with, and hence are being cut now!
Doing the same to the manufacturing sector isn't likely to change that - you've got to create demand if you want growth - throwing money at it won't suddenly trigger it - innovation is what we need, and for innovation, we need education.
Except that competition at school isn't allowed now. Because Mrs Blair said "that might be unfair" - or "it might violate someone's human rights"...or something like that.... - so nobody's encouraged to excel or be different anymore. Which is sad.
Throwing lots of money at the public sector allowed prior government ministers to conveniently ignore all the issues with the private sector that they'd pointed the finger at the Tories for during their period in office, whilst claiming they'd "fixed" unemployment.
It's a joke really as neither side has achieved anything truly groundbreaking in that regard.
An obvious problem in my eyes is that local government, moving 10 years behind the times, now seems to be labouring under the impression that "outsourcing is the key" to everything, hence all equipment is being sold off on the cheap, and contractors are being employed to do everything by people who have no grounding in the jobs they're recruiting for - hence the roads, the NHS, IT systems and much of the remaining infrastructure has been left in a total shambles. Before you know it the local NHS switchboard will be in a call centre abroad if it's not already.
You know what though - there is something to be said for "Big Society" in so far as - MP's in general are in politics for what they can gain financially -whilst I'd like to believe that there are a few well meaning souls in amongst the lazy majority of out of touch head cases who inhabit parliament, the fact remains that really good results don't often come from MP's actions, but from the actions of people who aren't afraid to get off their backsides and take action for what they believe in.
English history would support this argument, but look at Egypt for a more recent example that's outside our borders!
And this is where the problem lies. I went on a fuel demonstration a few years back organised on here. Over 200 people signed up and said they'd come, but out of that 200, less than 20 turned up. That's not even 10%. Why?
Because nowadays most people feign to be "too busy" to help out with demonstrations or causes to fight political idiocy. They'd rather be on Facebook, or watching Big Brother.
And as long as you're content to do that rather than take positive action against the system, the politicians will sit in their big posh houses, regardless of their background and laugh at all of us.
Truth be told, we've all got a bit too comfortable.
The last government spent 7-8 years pumping vast amounts of money into the public sector, which accomplished nothing except creating thousands of jobs, the majority of which weren't necessary to begin with, and hence are being cut now!
Doing the same to the manufacturing sector isn't likely to change that - you've got to create demand if you want growth - throwing money at it won't suddenly trigger it - innovation is what we need, and for innovation, we need education.
Except that competition at school isn't allowed now. Because Mrs Blair said "that might be unfair" - or "it might violate someone's human rights"...or something like that....
- so nobody's encouraged to excel or be different anymore. Which is sad.Throwing lots of money at the public sector allowed prior government ministers to conveniently ignore all the issues with the private sector that they'd pointed the finger at the Tories for during their period in office, whilst claiming they'd "fixed" unemployment.
It's a joke really as neither side has achieved anything truly groundbreaking in that regard.
An obvious problem in my eyes is that local government, moving 10 years behind the times, now seems to be labouring under the impression that "outsourcing is the key" to everything, hence all equipment is being sold off on the cheap, and contractors are being employed to do everything by people who have no grounding in the jobs they're recruiting for - hence the roads, the NHS, IT systems and much of the remaining infrastructure has been left in a total shambles. Before you know it the local NHS switchboard will be in a call centre abroad if it's not already.
You know what though - there is something to be said for "Big Society" in so far as - MP's in general are in politics for what they can gain financially -whilst I'd like to believe that there are a few well meaning souls in amongst the lazy majority of out of touch head cases who inhabit parliament, the fact remains that really good results don't often come from MP's actions, but from the actions of people who aren't afraid to get off their backsides and take action for what they believe in.
English history would support this argument, but look at Egypt for a more recent example that's outside our borders!
And this is where the problem lies. I went on a fuel demonstration a few years back organised on here. Over 200 people signed up and said they'd come, but out of that 200, less than 20 turned up. That's not even 10%. Why?
Because nowadays most people feign to be "too busy" to help out with demonstrations or causes to fight political idiocy. They'd rather be on Facebook, or watching Big Brother.
And as long as you're content to do that rather than take positive action against the system, the politicians will sit in their big posh houses, regardless of their background and laugh at all of us.
Truth be told, we've all got a bit too comfortable.
Picking up on your last point again we are becoming a bit of a soft touch as a nation. We seem to accept whatever the government throws at us, okay we'll have a little moan and a grumble but then it's business as usual. Even the rest of the world takes the p!ss. Cars are poorly specced and far more expensive in Britain than the rest of the world. No wonder the Far East calls us 'Treasure' Island! They can make far more out of us than any other nation they export to.
A revolution is perhaps a little extreme but we do need some sort of evolution that's for sure. For this to happen people need to dispense with this feckless 'I'm alright Jack' attitude. Those in power cannot be relied upon to look after our best interests, history proves this. I'm not suggesting anarchy and lawlessness but we can all make small efforts. Things like actually turning up for a demo, boycotting goods that we pay too much for and so on.
Education, now there's another political hot potato! I watched part of the Richard Dimbleby lecture yesterday given by author and former teacher Michael Morpugo. It was a wonderfully impassioned and moving speech that came straight from his heart and I urge you to watch it if you can. His lecture highlighted some of the things lacking in our education system. Suffice to say his words need to be heeded and some of those in office would do well to take his advice.
Last edited by Maz; 16 February 2011 at 09:19 AM.
16 February 2011, 01:42 PM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So Joe Public gets shafted from all fronts (and behinds)! I don't have a problem with services being cut but the public sector needs to move with the times. We need more transparency, less red tape and less bullshyte.
We're in austere times I think everybody is aware of that. My solution, give manufacturing a huge boost in the UK, this creates jobs. The UK populus then buys only British products where possible yet we sell our services and products worldwide. Hey presto our insularity helps out of the recession. A romantic notion but not beyond the realms of possibility.
We're in austere times I think everybody is aware of that. My solution, give manufacturing a huge boost in the UK, this creates jobs. The UK populus then buys only British products where possible yet we sell our services and products worldwide. Hey presto our insularity helps out of the recession. A romantic notion but not beyond the realms of possibility.
No guarantee that is not coming though!
Les
16 February 2011, 05:37 PM
#54
The last line of your post is quite a good summary of society today. It is people power that is going to change things not soundbites from Westminister. This is why I said we only buy the domestic manufactured products whilst selling to everyone else. Manufacturing gives us something tangible to invest in and by shunning foreign goods we keep our wealth within our borders. Only society can make this happen, the will of the people for the people. It's a flawed notion at best I know but we need to put the Great back in to Britain.
Picking up on your last point again we are becoming a bit of a soft touch as a nation. We seem to accept whatever the government throws at us, okay we'll have a little moan and a grumble but then it's business as usual. Even the rest of the world takes the p!ss. Cars are poorly specced and far more expensive in Britain than the rest of the world. No wonder the Far East calls us 'Treasure' Island! They can make far more out of us than any other nation they export to.
A revolution is perhaps a little extreme but we do need some sort of evolution that's for sure. For this to happen people need to dispense with this feckless 'I'm alright Jack' attitude. Those in power cannot be relied upon to look after our best interests, history proves this. I'm not suggesting anarchy and lawlessness but we can all make small efforts. Things like actually turning up for a demo, boycotting goods that we pay too much for and so on.
Education, now there's another political hot potato! I watched part of the Richard Dimbleby lecture yesterday given by author and former teacher Michael Morpugo. It was a wonderfully impassioned and moving speech that came straight from his heart and I urge you to watch it if you can. His lecture highlighted some of the things lacking in our education system. Suffice to say his words need to be heeded and some of those in office would do well to take his advice.
Picking up on your last point again we are becoming a bit of a soft touch as a nation. We seem to accept whatever the government throws at us, okay we'll have a little moan and a grumble but then it's business as usual. Even the rest of the world takes the p!ss. Cars are poorly specced and far more expensive in Britain than the rest of the world. No wonder the Far East calls us 'Treasure' Island! They can make far more out of us than any other nation they export to.
A revolution is perhaps a little extreme but we do need some sort of evolution that's for sure. For this to happen people need to dispense with this feckless 'I'm alright Jack' attitude. Those in power cannot be relied upon to look after our best interests, history proves this. I'm not suggesting anarchy and lawlessness but we can all make small efforts. Things like actually turning up for a demo, boycotting goods that we pay too much for and so on.
Education, now there's another political hot potato! I watched part of the Richard Dimbleby lecture yesterday given by author and former teacher Michael Morpugo. It was a wonderfully impassioned and moving speech that came straight from his heart and I urge you to watch it if you can. His lecture highlighted some of the things lacking in our education system. Suffice to say his words need to be heeded and some of those in office would do well to take his advice.
Where can I find this Dimbleby lecutre - I'd be interested to see this - was it a Beeb one documentary?
16 February 2011, 07:04 PM
#56
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pleiades
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The worst being the long-term (probably never had a proper job) unemployed, from the most deprived parts of town, a lot of them drug addicts. They just see you as someone who is telling them 'no'.
Having said that people who had had jobs but who had been made redundant could be very arrogant and rude. Usually come in declaring "I'm not like all these spongers". They could not comprehend how little money they would be expected to live on and would say that their benefit wasn't going to cover their supermarket shopping let alone pay the rest of the bills. It doesn't help that the Daily Mail portray benefit claimants as living the life of Riley.
Someone could come in, complete the forms, be interviewed etc, then demand to know when they could expect payment. People who had been given a few thousand in redundancy but wanted their dole to start straightaway, but they're not like all the other spongers....
One woman had £45k in redundancy and was furious that she couldn't get her £50 a week dole straightaway.
Or someone who wanted a burial grant of £1000 to bury her husband. They had over £125k in savings.
Half the country is greedy, that's why the Lotto is so popular
18 February 2011, 10:00 AM
#57
I think you could put them in three or four groups.
The worst being the long-term (probably never had a proper job) unemployed, from the most deprived parts of town, a lot of them drug addicts. They just see you as someone who is telling them 'no'.
Having said that people who had had jobs but who had been made redundant could be very arrogant and rude. Usually come in declaring "I'm not like all these spongers". They could not comprehend how little money they would be expected to live on and would say that their benefit wasn't going to cover their supermarket shopping let alone pay the rest of the bills. It doesn't help that the Daily Mail portray benefit claimants as living the life of Riley.
Someone could come in, complete the forms, be interviewed etc, then demand to know when they could expect payment. People who had been given a few thousand in redundancy but wanted their dole to start straightaway, but they're not like all the other spongers....
One woman had £45k in redundancy and was furious that she couldn't get her £50 a week dole straightaway.
Or someone who wanted a burial grant of £1000 to bury her husband. They had over £125k in savings.
Half the country is greedy, that's why the Lotto is so popular
The worst being the long-term (probably never had a proper job) unemployed, from the most deprived parts of town, a lot of them drug addicts. They just see you as someone who is telling them 'no'.
Having said that people who had had jobs but who had been made redundant could be very arrogant and rude. Usually come in declaring "I'm not like all these spongers". They could not comprehend how little money they would be expected to live on and would say that their benefit wasn't going to cover their supermarket shopping let alone pay the rest of the bills. It doesn't help that the Daily Mail portray benefit claimants as living the life of Riley.
Someone could come in, complete the forms, be interviewed etc, then demand to know when they could expect payment. People who had been given a few thousand in redundancy but wanted their dole to start straightaway, but they're not like all the other spongers....
One woman had £45k in redundancy and was furious that she couldn't get her £50 a week dole straightaway.
Or someone who wanted a burial grant of £1000 to bury her husband. They had over £125k in savings.
Half the country is greedy, that's why the Lotto is so popular
The incident with the request for a burial grant of £1k for someone who had £125k in savings beggars belief - in that situation there's just no excuse to be that tight!
However, in the case of the woman who'd been paid £45k redundancy, in some ways, whilst there's no point in getting angry about it, I can understand why she wanted the money straight off - she probably thinks she's entitled to it, and that's the main issue with today's society - because there are some long-term unemployed, like the people you mentioned, who have probably never worked in a decade (and indeed there are some in society who have never ever worked - we hope they're in the minority!), then the rest of us who work hard to support ourselves and our families feel hard done by.
After alll - why should we support them? - what the hell are they giving to society other than a bill to feed their lifestyles? But what's the alternative - don't pay them and they mug people or burgle their homes? It's a difficult problem to fix, but a problem that the politicians need to stop ignoring and put some effort into fixing rather than doing crappy surveys on "happiness"
We also constantly have the papers telling us that living on benefits is evil, and then we have the BBC frequently publicising that "millions of pounds of benefits go unclaimed each year" which serves to do nothing more than encouraging the nastier side of society from seeking out new ways of scrounging more money out of the coffers.
Not really surprising everything's in such a state.
You know what - it would be interesting to see who would vote for who should get benefits if the public were allowed to decide...
Last edited by MrNoisy; 18 February 2011 at 10:02 AM.
18 February 2011, 05:48 PM
#58
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pleiades
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ideally the benefits system would exist just to help the vulnerable but it's gone way beyond that.
I don't know what the answer is. To get people into work there has to work available for them and to be fair how could you force employers to take on lowlife? (druggies etc not saying that all unemployed are lowlife!)
I don't know what the answer is. To get people into work there has to work available for them and to be fair how could you force employers to take on lowlife? (druggies etc not saying that all unemployed are lowlife!)
18 February 2011, 06:17 PM
#59
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ideally the benefits system would exist just to help the vulnerable but it's gone way beyond that.
I don't know what the answer is. To get people into work there has to work available for them and to be fair how could you force employers to take on lowlife? (druggies etc not saying that all unemployed are lowlife!)
I don't know what the answer is. To get people into work there has to work available for them and to be fair how could you force employers to take on lowlife? (druggies etc not saying that all unemployed are lowlife!)
18 February 2011, 07:49 PM
#60
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pleiades
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When Job Seeker's Allowance was brought in (95/96) it was meant to weed out the lifelong unemployed. Claimants were supposed to have their benefit stopped if they refused suitable employment, lone-parents were supposed to be encouraged to work....
With that in mind I'm a bit "Believe it when I see it".
I'm interested in the Incapacity Benefit cuts. I know at least three people with severely life-limiting illnesses/ disabilities. Each year they have to complete review forms for Disability Living Allowance and have the possibility of a medical assessment and in each case it is a complete waste of time because the nature of their illnesses means they will never get better.
20% cuts would be great if it weeds out the fraudsters, I just hope it's not at the expense of the most vulnerable.
What I could never get my head around was people being better off claiming as two x single households rather than one unit. So woman in one house with children and claiming as a single parent, father lives somewhere else claiming as unemployed, living together meant less money. But then the system is paying two lots of benefits plus housing benefit plus obviously two lots of admin. A huge amount of fraud in our area was down to couples pretending they had split up to claim more money but who were actually living together.
We would have visiting officers going round to try and suss them out, usually because one of the neighbours had grassed them up.
I understand with the reforms that the scenario where families are better off splitting up will be changed. Personally I think it's an excellent idea however someone involved with Women's Aid is complaining that women will be forced to stay with abusive partners if it goes through.
Those refusing employment losing benefits for up to three years - I can't see how that will work. Like Bugeye_Scoob said earlier people will just go out on the rob.
No one capable of work should be better off on benefits, if the new reforms pull that off then great
With that in mind I'm a bit "Believe it when I see it".
I'm interested in the Incapacity Benefit cuts. I know at least three people with severely life-limiting illnesses/ disabilities. Each year they have to complete review forms for Disability Living Allowance and have the possibility of a medical assessment and in each case it is a complete waste of time because the nature of their illnesses means they will never get better.
20% cuts would be great if it weeds out the fraudsters, I just hope it's not at the expense of the most vulnerable.
What I could never get my head around was people being better off claiming as two x single households rather than one unit. So woman in one house with children and claiming as a single parent, father lives somewhere else claiming as unemployed, living together meant less money. But then the system is paying two lots of benefits plus housing benefit plus obviously two lots of admin. A huge amount of fraud in our area was down to couples pretending they had split up to claim more money but who were actually living together.
We would have visiting officers going round to try and suss them out, usually because one of the neighbours had grassed them up.
I understand with the reforms that the scenario where families are better off splitting up will be changed. Personally I think it's an excellent idea however someone involved with Women's Aid is complaining that women will be forced to stay with abusive partners if it goes through.
Those refusing employment losing benefits for up to three years - I can't see how that will work. Like Bugeye_Scoob said earlier people will just go out on the rob.
No one capable of work should be better off on benefits, if the new reforms pull that off then great