Torys Child Benefit Changes

[mr brightside]

I do not know if "Christopher Leigh" is really called Christopher Leigh or is a pseudonym, and in any case this post must be a non sequitur, but I have noticed, wrt other posters, that the most provocative or logorrheic posters on the Forum (in which I include "Christopher Leigh") are not actually members of the FRA.

Which I think is interesting; ie why would people who are not even members spend so much energy posting on the FRA website?

Weird?

I can't see how it would benefit the forum or the FRA to consider excluding people on this basis, i understand you're not pointing directly at that but you seem to be gesturing in the general direction.

[Rob Furness]

The main thing that narks me off about benefits is that both me and my wife have worked since leaving school and had a reasonably good income. We started a family 3 years ago and since then the cost of living has rocketed and my earnings have dropped off. My wife had quit work to look after our son and due to my earnings we weren't entitled to any help other than the universal benefits (I'm not a mega high earner but just over 30k). We tried to get her back to work but cannot afford it, the cost of childcare would eliminate her wages and leave her with around £150 a month for working 40hrs a week. We aren't entitled to help with childcare and have a large mortgage (which takes most of my wage) so we are now in the position of battling to keep the overdraft from getting larger each month. My wife has managed to get a part time job which ties in with a cheaper teatime option at the local nursery but only gets her about £10 a day, and I now have to work saturdays as well as a busy week and as much emergency callout as I can fit in without wrecking my health.

However, if we lived in a council house (even on full rent etc.) we worked out that we would be better off to the tune of about £800 a month plus all the maintenance would be covered for free. If both of us were unemployed we would still have more disposable income than we do now. As usual in this country you get penalised for working hard and trying to stand on your own two feet. It's no wonder so many people take the easy option and have 3 kids at the age of 16. Free house, free rent, no council tax, plenty of benefits. It's no surprise to me when I see brand new plasma TV's etc. in the house of people who have never worked a day in their life. It's a joke really

rant over.....

[Witton Park]

It's a joke really

It's not - we are being well and truly stitched up.

[bigfella]

I sat down with the Sunday Times last night for a quiet read and nearly cried I got so depressed:

Student fees to hit £12,000 (how on earth is a teacher going to repay that)
Amnesty for 135,000 thousand asylum seekers cositing £500,000 to £1m each for lifetime benefits
Mandelson screwing £104.000 pa out of EU by hiding earnings
Four families net £400,00 in housing aid. One familiy moved to an £8,000 a month house in Kensington because the shops didn't stay open late enough where they were.

So yes, you are being stitched up.

[OneHillWonder]

It's a joke really

rant over.....

If only it were a funny joke, but it's not - you are so right.

[CL]

The Liberal/Conservative alliance are right to deal with child tax credits, but they've gone about it in the most illogical and unjust way.They are terrified of cutting benefits because they know most of Britain is on them, and consequently a loss of benefits is a loss of votes. That's why they are dragging their feet and in the meantime our debts are spiralling out of control.

The other thing that disturbs me about the alliance is their sickeneing apologies for the things that need doing. Cameron's "I don't want to do this, but Labour have left us in a mess." He reminds me of Stan Laurel's side kick, Oliver Noble Hardy, who used to blame Stanley with the classic " well there's another nice mess you've gotten me into."

The alliance's intentions are not to get rid of the welfare state, only to reduce it to levels of spending seen in 2006/2007. Ironically the start of the trouble. So most of the benefit dependency will remain and with it the moral and economic disintegration that comes with it.

[daz h]

The Liberal/Conservative alliance are right to deal with child tax credits, but they've gone about it in the most illogical and unjust way.They are terrified of cutting benefits because they know most of Britain is on them, and consequently a loss of benefits is a loss of votes. That's why they are dragging their feet and in the meantime our debts are spiralling out of control.

The other thing that disturbs me about the alliance is their sickeneing apologies for the things that need doing. Cameron's "I don't want to do this, but Labour have left us in a mess." He reminds me of Stan Laurel's side kick, Oliver Noble Hardy, who used to blame Stanley with the classic " well there's another nice mess you've gotten me into."

The alliance's intentions are not to get rid of the welfare state, only to reduce it to levels of spending seen in 2006/2007. Ironically the start of the trouble. So most of the benefit dependency will remain and with it the moral and economic disintegration that comes with it.

This morning it was reported that there are 2.1million people on the sick in the Uk and unable to work

[john doe]

This morning it was reported that there are 2.1million people on the sick in the Uk and unable to work

being unable to work through drink or drug abuse is classed as sickness.

[Witton Park]

The Liberal/Conservative alliance are right to deal with child tax credits, but they've gone about it in the most illogical and unjust way.They are terrified of cutting benefits because they know most of Britain is on them, and consequently a loss of benefits is a loss of votes. That's why they are dragging their feet and in the meantime our debts are spiralling out of control.

The other thing that disturbs me about the alliance is their sickeneing apologies for the things that need doing. Cameron's "I don't want to do this, but Labour have left us in a mess." He reminds me of Stan Laurel's side kick, Oliver Noble Hardy, who used to blame Stanley with the classic " well there's another nice mess you've gotten me into."

The alliance's intentions are not to get rid of the welfare state, only to reduce it to levels of spending seen in 2006/2007. Ironically the start of the trouble. So most of the benefit dependency will remain and with it the moral and economic disintegration that comes with it.

I agree Chris - I would dismantle the whole thing - and then we would probably differ as I would start with something more realistic and something that impels the vast majority to do something for themselves.

I've been on the Isle of Benbecula in the Outer Hebrides today. The fish processing plant here of a local Salmon Producer has a majority of Bulgarian workers. Nothing against those guys - they are only here though because local employers cannot get some of our bone idle population to do a days work.
We have a similar situation all over the country.

Before the minimum wage, people used to quite happily work in factories for £3 - £4 per hour, go on holiday, own a home. Now we have the minimum wage, many won't get out of bed for it.

When you here that the Tories put a cap on benefits of 26K per annum it explains why. 1 working adults on minimum wage will get a net income of less than 20K per year so the typical benefit household is on the equivalent of both parents on around £17K per year if they were in paid work.

[TheHeathens]

I agree Chris - I would dismantle the whole thing - and then we would probably differ as I would start with something more realistic and something that impels the vast majority to do something for themselves.

Which (despite CL's inability to read and poor attempts at a wind-up) is exactly what I would do. Welfare should be for those in exceptional hardship as a last ditch safety net, not a lifestyle you choose