I'm a full time mum and benefits are my wages.

[lisalee 10]

Burgle the biatch.

 

I give you permission.

 

Sorry, but that made me laugh out loud!!

[Ghozer 113]

Why not work full time at the minimum wage as a start, and then your wage will go up as you gain experience and skills.

 

because like I said, if I worked (talking about me here for a moment) I would be left with £80 per month after paying rent etc (but not electric bill)... and that £80 per MONTH (not week) would have to pay my electric, fund my travel, and food to live on (I do need to live after all) and clothes when I need new ones etc..

[bobbie 10]

If people are taking the mick out of the benefits system, then simply do the following.

 

1) Cut benefits

 

2) with the money raised from the cuts going to people on benefits, increase the hourly national minimum wage.

 

Then it would be impossible to be better off not working

[epiphany 10]

If people are taking the mick out of the benefits system, then simply do the following.

 

1) Cut benefits

 

So you think the relative few (yes, FEW) who abuse the system should spoil it for the genuinely needy?

 

Edit: I retract my calling you a plank in anticipation that what you meant was cut benefits for the specific offenders...

 

If so, I apologise *licks bobbie*

Edited February 17, 2010 by epiphany

[Cynic 10]

People who choose not to work should get food vouchers a bus pass and a roof over their head with all the essentials paid for (heating, water, electricity etc). Nothing more.

[DaFoot 10]

because like I said...

Didn't you say 25 hours?

 

edit: yes...

I worked it out for me if I worked minimum wage @ 25 hours per week (which the job centre want me to do, which isn't enough to claim working tax to 'top it up') after rent and bills, I would have £80 per MONTH left over for food and travel and clothes etc...

That's not full time (37-40 hours a week). I think that is what Cyclone was driving at.

 

thats no where near enough... and what if I have an unexpected expense like my glasses break?

That's life.

Edited February 17, 2010 by DaFoot

[DaFoot 10]

I find it more disturbing that she goes to a newpaper to boast about this. I'm sure there are many benefit claimants who are not spending all their dole money on drugs and booze, but why the need to inform the press?

Maybe to get the cash for clothes/food/TV/a holiday/who knows what else?

[Ms Macbeth 76]

My bold

 

A load of tosh! Poverty is no longer defined as being below a certain standard of living, eg: not having a warm, safe house, not having enough food, clothes, etc. Poverty is now "comparative", so if you fall in the bottom whatever percentage of earnings, you're automatically poverty-struck - even if you can maintain a reasonable standard of living. Which means there are always going to be people living in poverty.

 

I know its classed as relative as against absolute poverty, has it gone too far? The majority of people nowadays do have adequate housing (even though not always big enough, or where they want to live), and the income quoted is plenty for food, utilities, clothes etc.

 

There is no point in calling her names, she is being given the opportunity to stay at home with her children, and an income that ensures they can manage to live reasonably well. Of course she'll take it! I might have considered it given the choice. But I wasn't. So for people of my generation, who brought up children through strikes, recessions, massive hikes in interest rates etc with little or no financial help, and have seen pensions shrink year on year, it seems unfair that people working for less than this family receive have to contribute to their lifestyle through income tax.

 

It also begs the question why some children in families with this level of income are really living in poverty? Don't the parents spend the 'Child' tax credit and 'Child' benefit on the children? I've seen the thread discussing freedom of choice to spend benefits on anything people want, but maybe there needs to be some concern shown if children aren't getting their fair share.

[Zaytsev 10]

This did make me laugh. If you have a look at the turn out at local and general elections you'll find that those areas with the highest number of benefit claimants has the lowest turn out. Lower than 25% in some instances. The argument that Labour keeps benefits high in order to ensure votes is risible.

 

Surely the answer to a high benefit culture is to raise the minimum wage to such a level that it really is an incentive to work.

 

Absolutely, because at present the tax payer is subsidising the employers paying minimum wage with tax credits.

[Dave650 10]

Honestly that article is nothing, there are far worse out there.

[hard2miss 10]

If people are taking the mick out of the benefits system, then simply do the following.

 

1) Cut benefits

 

2) with the money raised from the cuts going to people on benefits, increase the hourly national minimum wage.

 

Then it would be impossible to be better off not working

You drive the lower level income further down and you will have crime like you have never seen. Will you be happy going to work to find your door stoved in every other week ?

 

Of course you could build more prisons to home all the new criminals, but with how much that will cost and with how much it is to keep someone locked up (£2000 a week Im led to believe) you would be better off with the benefits system as it is now.

You could buy better home security but then run the risk of being mugged on the way to work instead.

 

I agree tho in putting up the minimum wage but even that has to be found from somewhere and with how things are at present wages and hours are going down so would be hard to justify.

 

I dont think there is much to this story, she is obviously stupid and fell for the reporter saying it would be more of a story and a good idea if she showed her electrical s. The stuff she has isnt that good and anyone on benefits probably could buy them if they budgeted well enough. Just look at what she has and price them up on the forums classifieds and I bet it wouldnt mount to a hill of beans.

[x-GiGgLeS-x 10]

I think our country should be like others where there is NO benefit system in place that way people would have to work. I think you should ONLY be able to claim some kind of benefit IF and proven that you are sick and unable to work.