welfare reform

Quote by kentswingers777

Now that is a lot of people.
I shall give you a scenario of madness which is a true account, and am sure this is not an isolated case either.
My Daughters ex boyfriend is now married to a woman who three years ago had a kidney transplant.
Very tragic indeed for a woman who was only 22. At that time she had only done three months work since she left school, even though her kidney problems only started when she was nearly 19...she left school at 16.
Her Husband who is a tad older is now 27....not the brightest spark in the box by any stretch of the imagination. He has had a few jobs...bottle washer in a hotel, that kind of thing so you get my drift as to his capabilities.
Anyway the last job he actually had was nearly five years ago. When his wife fell ill ( she was not his wife at the time ), she was obviously entitled to additional benefits, as she was now genuinely ill.
Eventually she luckily enough for her managed to get that kidney transpalnt, and along with the anti rejection drugs she had to take, obviously needed care at home, which her then boyfriend provided. They then got married over two years ago and after three years she is fine and dandy but....and here is the but, HE is now her full time carer even though she is perfectly ok now, and he has been that carer for some two years now. He does not even bother going to the hospital with her as he cannot be bothered to " hang around for hours ".
I am not sure of all the benefits they get but I do know she receives Mobility allowance.
Now they are in a situation where he has not worked for years, he has jumped on the bandwagon of more benefits by saying he is her full time carer, so he does not even have to look for work and get this.....they traded in the Mobility allowance and now have a 59 plate car which was new when they got it, they are currently in Spain on a ten day holiday.
Now I know of many people that have never had a new car, and some have not been on holiday for years yet....these two live the life of bloody Riley. Yes she was ill, yes she deserved all the help the state provided but...she is perfectly ok now, but what really pisses me off is that HE can work but now has the system eating out of his sweaty palms, and he knows it.
They get a nice ammount of dosh every month, and it is probably with everything else they get, a damn site more than people who have to get up everyday to get themselves into work, and they could not afford a nice new shiny car, and a foreign holiday.
This is not isolated by any means...I have provided a link above which are official figures of how many people are on over 15 grand a year, and there are many others who after having a gaggle of kids who they expect the taxpayer to foot the bill for, are on well over the average wage. On the BBC news last night there was a family on over 40 grand a year, and she was moaning it was not enough ffs.
Why the feck should the taxpayer have to foot the bill for anyone just because she cannot keep her knickers on? We see it all the time where some have up to nine kids with another on the way. Yes they are certainly not the norm, but they do exist and I hate to see my money being spent on these kinds of piss takers.
It would have been cheaper to buy them a nice big flat screen telly, as they may well have watched that a bit more, rather than being a baby machine courtesy of the British taxpayer.
I hope this Government get a grip on this and help the needy, but give the scrounges the kick up the arse they so richly deserve.
But the likes of my Daughters ex boyfriend will play the system because whilst he is as thick as shite, like so many he knows exactly what he can and cannot claim for, and he takes every single penny he can scrounge.
I hope they catch up with this piss taker but because there are just so many now, it has become an almost impossible task. But it is a start and that is what you have to do to sort out any problem.....at the start. Unlike under Labour where they just made it even easier for the scrounger, people in any doubt should look for the ammount Labour were paying out in welfare benefits pro rata to the national average....scary ammounts of money.

Quote by danne-gary

N snip

Quote by kentswingers777
" how come he gets carers allowance if she is perfectly ok now ? surely she has to be checked medically to see how she is and if shes ok then the allowance would stop .... personally id shop them ".
You see that is where the system can be manipulated. She uses the excuse " well I have good days and bad days ". No way of checking on her bad days as if she has any...yeah right.
When you have a major operation like she had, they are both very clever in not letting on how good she now really is.
I have " shopped them...twice " but the last time was six months ago and they still have the car and their benefits, not worth the cost of the phone call.
You have to remember these people are proffessional scroungers, there are thousands out there who know exactly how to play the system.
As for the Mobility question....yes I know the way it is paid but without the Mobility scheme they would never be able to get the finance.
How many on here could afford the repayments on a 59 plate Astra? Not many I bet and these people have got one courtesy of the taxpayer, and currently as I have said....in Spain.
Nice money if you can get it, and they certainly have. :twisted: :twisted:

Quote by Plimboy
Just a quick point re mention of "the 59 plate car". Some people don't realize that these Motability cars have to be paid for - if they didn't have the car, they would be left with the equiv cash from the Benefit - the car is not on top of the benefit, it's finance etc. is taken out of it.
Plim

Quote by JTS
If you get disability living allowance, you can even use the mobility component to buy the car on HP....@7.6% APR.

Quote by Lizaleanrob
If you get disability living allowance, you can even use the mobility component to buy the car on HP....@7.6% APR.

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
It must be hard living in a world with only cheats and thieves for company...where no-one has any redeeming qualities...and you suffer the ignominy of being the only person to have done an honest days work ever.
I on the other hand spent the years between 1982 and '89 happily unemployed and would like to thank all of you who contributed to my bar bill....cheers :cheers:

Quote by Lizaleanrob
Having read the article i dont see anything new.
Job clubs ran by the private sector and paid on a performance basis already exist,you loose benifits if you turn down work,loans are available for those wishing to set up their own bisunesses.
Incapacity benifit we have shared some of our personal experiences on before,i fear that legitimate claims will be denied if it becomes a results based rather to an extent it is now,which is why you have the horrific situation of people with cancer being assesed fit for work.

The lib/dem idea of raising the tax threashold may be the simplest and best way of cutting the economic disincentive to work,but someone who doesnt have to take their crocs off to count to 20 will be better commenting on that

Quote by Lizaleanrob
Just a quick point re mention of "the 59 plate car". Some people don't realize that these Motability cars have to be paid for - if they didn't have the car, they would be left with the equiv cash from the Benefit - the car is not on top of the benefit, it's finance etc. is taken out of it.
Plim

Quote by JTS
If you get disability living allowance, you can even use the mobility component to buy the car on HP....@7.6% APR.

Quote by JTS
They have been run by "private" companies for some time now.
And with very limited success.
Holding group sessions to enable the applicants to gain a boost in their confidence takes a hit when they get "out" there and find there are few jobs.
And it lowers still further when they get a low-paid job and the promised "top-up benefit" fails to arrive (20hrs/wk part-time + top-up = liveable_just)
Now, if the applicant was a single mother and got a low-paid job there are a raft of benefits available..
The best idea yet (which will therefore never arrive) is to just hand-over the entire jobcentre "chain" to local employment services...
Child tax benefit may get a shake-up, hopefully. Or be stopped, completely. This enables the guy to work less hours and collect more dosh.....another form of "welfare benefit"....I even know one that reduced his hours from 50+ to 40- and was 140 quid a week better off...
I'm afraid the "benefits" of a "welfare state" do not just go to those with nothing. I won't even go into the grants to insulate/improve your private home.....
I may just mention the employer who installed a new heating system in the companies offices....except he installed it in his home and SAID it was in the offices.....the offices still have fan heaters...so...hmrc are going to be bizzy-bizzy soon...and with the excise going deeper into biz fiddles we may soon see some real return of revenue...and don't forget, once fraud has been shown to have been happening the revenue can claim back for a greater length of time than six years.
Benefit "cheats" was not the only thing Labour was soft on.
This lot may even relax the rather stringent rules on self-employment as well, which will mean that people can work for just one person/company AND be self-employed....maybe..

Quote by Plimboy
Excellent thread, Lizaleanrob - thank you :thumbup:
Much of what Mr. Duncan-Smith proposes is actually new - and in my view quite refreshing, although elements of detail are subject to comment. Ever thus!
The full report from his "think tank" is in the public domain and can be downloaded from the website of the above organisation. Just enter the title into your search engine and follow the link to "Dynamic Benefits".
NB I will comment on this thread shortly as I am still reading through another report on it and would like to let you have the best of both worlds, but in the meantime anyone who is really interested ought to visit the above Website, although I would mention that the paper is rather long.
Plim

Quote by kentswingers777
That does not include child benefit being paid to foreigners children who do not even live here.:shock:

Quote by kentswingers777
A good link Rob.
This comment though is quite relevant...
" Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith is set to create a welfare to work programme and make benefits more conditional on willingness to work ".
There lies the major issue for me, whereby so many can work but choose to live on the gravy train of hot and cold running benefits.
Yes I agree that there is always some that will be forced into work that possibly should not be but...IF it gets a lot of the lazy bad back shirkers back to work, it surely has to be worth a try?
As the article also states that if someone does go to work they are then called " morons ". That is the culture that 13 years of Labour rule have created where to work in so many cases is frowned upon, and why would they work when we see how much benefits some do get....hardly worth getting out of bed to look for work with that crazy system going on.
Genuine cases to be given all the help and support and money that is available but....the lazy workshy scroungers...get them back into work by force and stop their benefits. The only people that will really suffer are the Bingo halls and the fag and drink companies.

Quote by kentswingers777
I think child benefit should only be paid to the first child, like it was for many years.
If you cannot afford to have more than one child...then don't.
When my parents had their first child back in 1956 they only got child benefit for that first child. Any subsequent child you got nothing for, and times were much bloody harder for families then than they are now.
IF child benefit is to remain it should be a means tested benefit, so people on 50 grand a year are not automatically entitled to it. Which means that the poorest families should get a bit more than they currently do....it is called the " Robin Hood scheme ".

Quote by Bluefish2009
A good link Rob.
This comment though is quite relevant...
" Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith is set to create a welfare to work programme and make benefits more conditional on willingness to work ".
There lies the major issue for me, whereby so many can work but choose to live on the gravy train of hot and cold running benefits.
Yes I agree that there is always some that will be forced into work that possibly should not be but...IF it gets a lot of the lazy bad back shirkers back to work, it surely has to be worth a try?
As the article also states that if someone does go to work they are then called " morons ". That is the culture that 13 years of Labour rule have created where to work in so many cases is frowned upon, and why would they work when we see how much benefits some do get....hardly worth getting out of bed to look for work with that crazy system going on.
Genuine cases to be given all the help and support and money that is available but....the lazy workshy scroungers...get them back into work by force and stop their benefits. The only people that will really suffer are the Bingo halls and the fag and drink companies.

Quote by kentswingers777
I think child benefit should only be paid to the first child, like it was for many years.
If you cannot afford to have more than one child...then don't.
When my parents had their first child back in 1956 they only got child benefit for that first child. Any subsequent child you got nothing for, and times were much bloody harder for families then than they are now.
IF child benefit is to remain it should be a means tested benefit, so people on 50 grand a year are not automatically entitled to it. Which means that the poorest families should get a bit more than they currently do....it is called the " Robin Hood scheme ".

Quote by kentswingers777
No Gold you are quite correct, my mistake.
Must have had too much to drink when I wrote that.....my appologies.

Quote by goldsmith
No Gold you are quite correct, my mistake.
Must have had too much to drink when I wrote that.....my appologies.

Quote by Plimboy
A number of posters are making the comment that the Taxpayer picks up the cost (of DLA). But if ANY taxpayer has the misfortune to have an accident that qualifies them, they can have it too. Nobody complains about paying car and home insurance each year just because they don't have a claim.
Plim.