pavaroti:
limeyphil:
there shouldn’t be any benefits whatsoever. the ecconomy would recover overnight.+2
I wonder how many of these would think the same if it happened to them.
You are only 10’ away from that truck in front 
Wheel Nut:
pavaroti:
limeyphil:
there shouldn’t be any benefits whatsoever. the ecconomy would recover overnight.+2
I wonder how many of these would think the same if it happened to them.
You are only 10’ away from that truck in front
It did happen to me.Just like plenty of others I found myself out of work sacked on medical grounds.In that case private insurance beats anything that the state can provide just like private health care is better than the zb third rate NHS.
In addition to which taking care of your own provision with private insurances doesn’t leave anyone open to being ‘reviewed’ at a later date because others,who should know better,think that the social security system is only there for their benefit and every one else who needs to claim on it is a scrounger.
Which just leaves the issue of wether the Tory zb’s would then be willing to pay the required wages to sustain such decent private provision and wether they’d reduce taxation to match.
Carryfast:
Wheel Nut:
pavaroti:
limeyphil:
there shouldn’t be any benefits whatsoever. the ecconomy would recover overnight.+2
I wonder how many of these would think the same if it happened to them.
You are only 10’ away from that truck in front
It did happen to me.Just like plenty of others I found myself out of work sacked on medical grounds.In that case private insurance beats anything that the state can provide just like private health care is better than the zb third rate NHS.
In addition to which taking care of your own provision with private insurances doesn’t leave anyone open to being ‘reviewed’ at a later date because others,who should know better,think that the social security system is only there for their benefit and every one else who needs to claim on it is a scrounger.
Which just leaves the issue of wether the Tory zb’s would then be willing to pay the required wages to sustain such decent private provision and wether they’d reduce taxation to match.
And people who are born with a disability or have an accident before they have contributed enough money. The more ■■■■■■■■ you spout, the quicker you should get on the Trans Siberian Express
Wheel Nut:
pavaroti:
limeyphil:
there shouldn’t be any benefits whatsoever. the ecconomy would recover overnight.+2
I wonder how many of these would think the same if it happened to them.
You are only 10’ away from that truck in front
Genuine charitys and friends and family would take care of the genuine sick as they do in most parts of the world.
The situation at the moment where 10% of the workforce, (3 million people) are claiming to be sick for life is unaceptable. 1/3 of the working age population of Glasgow is on incapacity benefit.
The worst thing about being genuinely sick now is guilt by association cos so many low life are at it, that tiny minority gets a bad name.
This country is punch drunk on benefits, it’s a madness that could take us all down if the goverment does’nt sort it out soon.
That is Scottish Devolution for ya!
Free Prescriptions and 1/3 of the budget spent on the NHS
Wheel Nut:
Carryfast:
Wheel Nut:
pavaroti:
limeyphil:
there shouldn’t be any benefits whatsoever. the ecconomy would recover overnight.+2
I wonder how many of these would think the same if it happened to them.
You are only 10’ away from that truck in front
It did happen to me.Just like plenty of others I found myself out of work sacked on medical grounds.In that case private insurance beats anything that the state can provide just like private health care is better than the zb third rate NHS.
In addition to which taking care of your own provision with private insurances doesn’t leave anyone open to being ‘reviewed’ at a later date because others,who should know better,think that the social security system is only there for their benefit and every one else who needs to claim on it is a scrounger.
Which just leaves the issue of wether the Tory zb’s would then be willing to pay the required wages to sustain such decent private provision and wether they’d reduce taxation to match.
And people who are born with a disability or have an accident before they have contributed enough money. The more ■■■■■■■■ you spout, the quicker you should get on the Trans Siberian Express
People who need health care and financial support before they are of working age need to be covered under family policies.Which would at least help the situation in which people have kids who can’t afford to start a family and then rely on the state to keep them all instead.
How do you think that the US economy got to be as powerful as it was before they gave all their jobs away to the Mexicans and Chinese.
Carryfast:
Wheel Nut:
Carryfast:
Wheel Nut:
pavaroti:
limeyphil:
there shouldn’t be any benefits whatsoever. the ecconomy would recover overnight.+2
I wonder how many of these would think the same if it happened to them.
You are only 10’ away from that truck in front
It did happen to me.Just like plenty of others I found myself out of work sacked on medical grounds.In that case private insurance beats anything that the state can provide just like private health care is better than the zb third rate NHS.
In addition to which taking care of your own provision with private insurances doesn’t leave anyone open to being ‘reviewed’ at a later date because others,who should know better,think that the social security system is only there for their benefit and every one else who needs to claim on it is a scrounger.
Which just leaves the issue of wether the Tory zb’s would then be willing to pay the required wages to sustain such decent private provision and wether they’d reduce taxation to match.
And people who are born with a disability or have an accident before they have contributed enough money. The more ■■■■■■■■ you spout, the quicker you should get on the Trans Siberian Express
People who need health care and financial support before they are of working age need to be covered under family policies.Which would at least help the situation in which people have kids who can’t afford to start a family and then rely on the state to keep them all instead.
How do you think that the US economy got to be as powerful as it was before they gave all their jobs away to the Mexicans and Chinese.
slavery and shooting their own soldiers
pavaroti:
Wheel Nut:
pavaroti:
limeyphil:
there shouldn’t be any benefits whatsoever. the ecconomy would recover overnight.+2
I wonder how many of these would think the same if it happened to them.
You are only 10’ away from that truck in front
Genuine charitys and friends and family would take care of the genuine sick as they do in most parts of the world.
The situation at the moment where 10% of the workforce, (3 million people) are claiming to be sick for life is unaceptable. 1/3 of the working age population of Glasgow is on incapacity benefit.
The situation whereby someone loses their job of whatever trade because there’s no realistic possibility of a return to it means effectively being sick for life.The difference with private insurance cover is that there’s no champaign socialists out there who can then tell someone with such a policy that covers exactly that scenario that it’s unnaceptable.
Which is why there’s plenty of pilots,and train drivers,out there who’ve been retired early on health grounds who don’t have to go through the kangaroo justice of their peers in the industry,saying that it’s unnacceptable for them to call it a day and live in comfortable retirement,if something stops them flying or driving trains,and get a job in a hamburger cafe instead.
Unlike if you’re a truck driver or many other types of workers in which they’re just prepared to be ripped off by,and rely on,the third rate cut price commie ‘social security’ system in which you need to be paralysed from the neck down to be considered as eligible to claim or zb charity while paying over the odds for the whole zb system in taxes.This is supposed to be a civilised developed economy not some third rate commie state like zb North Korea. 
Wheel Nut:
Carryfast:
Wheel Nut:
Carryfast:
Wheel Nut:
pavaroti:
limeyphil:
there shouldn’t be any benefits whatsoever. the ecconomy would recover overnight.+2
I wonder how many of these would think the same if it happened to them.
You are only 10’ away from that truck in front
It did happen to me.Just like plenty of others I found myself out of work sacked on medical grounds.In that case private insurance beats anything that the state can provide just like private health care is better than the zb third rate NHS.
In addition to which taking care of your own provision with private insurances doesn’t leave anyone open to being ‘reviewed’ at a later date because others,who should know better,think that the social security system is only there for their benefit and every one else who needs to claim on it is a scrounger.
Which just leaves the issue of wether the Tory zb’s would then be willing to pay the required wages to sustain such decent private provision and wether they’d reduce taxation to match.
And people who are born with a disability or have an accident before they have contributed enough money. The more ■■■■■■■■ you spout, the quicker you should get on the Trans Siberian Express
People who need health care and financial support before they are of working age need to be covered under family policies.Which would at least help the situation in which people have kids who can’t afford to start a family and then rely on the state to keep them all instead.
How do you think that the US economy got to be as powerful as it was before they gave all their jobs away to the Mexicans and Chinese.
slavery and shooting their own soldiers
Fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work more like.But that (was) the difference between the the aims of unions like the Teamsters as opposed to the zb TGWU before they let Reagan and now zb Obama zb the place up.
We can all come up with the examples of people who are on benefits and who deserve to get something off the state to live off.
Many thousands of claimants are genuine and deserve what they get.
But really guys and gals, there are just so many lazy, idle, thick as zb, people around who contribute nothing to society and soak up a lot of our taxes, so that things are totally unfair to those of us who do go out to work and pay in to the pot.
There are two classes of people doing this. . . . .
The first category of people are known to the rest of us as Politicans. These lazy, stupid, thick morons are TOTALLY responsible for the pile of zb we are all in at the moment.
These morons think that they have a god given right to rule us and that they always know better than we do. Even though 95% of them HAVE NEVER DONE A DAY’S WORK IN THEIR LIVES!!!
The second category are the benefit cheats who are too zbing lazy to even think of working. They steal money off YOU and me EVERY DAY of EVERY WEEK of EVERY YEAR!
We all know who they are. They live in your area and they are usually anti-social ZBs as well. 95% of them HAVE NEVER DONE A DAY’S WORK IN THEIR LIVES!!!
I would LOVE to get (only) £26000 per year for doing zb all every day. Oh poor them, how hard it must be to survive on ONLY £26000 per year. Oh deary me, I am going to start a whip round on this site for all the bleeding hearts out there to PUT YOUR MONEY where YOUR MOUTHS are!
Come on guys, who is pledging the first £5 to help somebody raise their benefits from £26000 to £30000 this year?
I think not !!!
Its a zbing disgrace and an insult to those of us who do take responsibility for our own circumstances!
And don’t get me started on those other robbing imbeciles - the SENIOR BANKERS.
I would put those morons in prison and make them pay for their upkeep whilst giving them hard labour on the prison farm.
There they could wallow in the pig s h i t all day if they like.
Happy Easter everybody,
As usual, Carryfast is muddying the waters with confusion. Does he want a Commie social security system or a free market health care industry like the USA?
If anyone has tried to get health cover for an existing medical condition you will know it is virtually impossible, you will also know that any of the ppp unemployment or disability plans that the banks sell only last for one year.
In Derby one in 6 people are looking for work,
I do know of some workshy tossers who rely on benefits, but all along I am talking about people who have fallen upon hard times through illness, accident, or disease.
I fully support paying benefits to
“people who have fallen upon hard times through illness, accident, or disease.”
plus disability either from birth or accident.
I can’t think that these people would need £26000 NET of TAX NI etc. to survive and I am sure that the vast majority of such people don’t get that sort of money from benefits anyhow.
But there are those families who just carry on having kids so that they can steal more money off us, because having kids is their form of employment and the d i c k h e a d s who run the governments and civil service are falling over themselves to pander to them. That’s what keeps them in jobs, paid by OUR hard earned wages in tax and NI.
So the feckless, idle b%$tar*s help the politicians and social worker do-gooders to stay in jobs by being their poor little helpless angels and the aforesaid feckless ffffers are helped to stay as feckless fffers by the incompetent politicians and civil servants who encourage them by paying them to stay as feckless fffers.
Vicious circle of back scratching going on there.
Spend the benefit money on apprentiships. Force the idle fffers to go on apprentiships. No attend apprentiship - no benefits.
The NHS is the absolute best thing we have in this country and we must not waste money on paying idle ffers to stay at home. No, that money is needed for the NHS. But that organisation desperately needs reform. Not at the front line (porters, nurses, some doctors, ambulance people) but within the echelon upon echelon of so called managers who all have limited ability to even think never mind manage.
I would get rid of 50% of managers and NHS Trust board members and pay the rest on RESULTS, not number of hours spent in wasteful time consuming meetings to decide who will be on the committee to decide when the meeting will take place to decide who will be at the meeting to decide when the car park resurfacing committee can start to put out questionnaires to collect thoughts on whether the car park should be resurfaced . . . etc etc blah blah blah.
Thats exactly what its like in these places. I know from first hand experience just how your money is spent in such ways. And all the time they are cutting back on front line services.
Why cant some of these people on benefits who can work be required to work in care homes for the elderly in return for their benefit handouts?
or if not care homes for the elderly, then care homes for people with disabilities? Or day centres or meals on wheels.
Well some of you will mention that would take work away from the low paid people already doing it. Yes it might well do and I dont have an answer to that. Any thoughts?
Wheel Nut:
As usual, Carryfast is muddying the waters with confusion. Does he want a Commie social security system or a free market health care industry like the USA?If anyone has tried to get health cover for an existing medical condition you will know it is virtually impossible, you will also know that any of the ppp unemployment or disability plans that the banks sell only last for one year.
In Derby one in 6 people are looking for work,
I do know of some workshy tossers who rely on benefits, but all along I am talking about people who have fallen upon hard times through illness, accident, or disease.
It’s not confusing at all.There’s no such thing as a free lunch and everything has to be paid for wether it’s the so called ‘free’ NHS and so called Social Security System here or the so called ‘free market health care industry’ and the income protection insurance industry in the US.They are the same thing.
The only difference is that here it’s all done on a publicised lets all chuck our money into a big pot and claim on it when we need to v the US idea of let’s all take out our own private cover made with a private contract that suits our needs and in which the neighbours and public at large don’t get to act as judge,jury and executioner concerning who they think should and shouldn’t have the right to claim.Usually the British criterea being along the lines of if I need it that’s ok but if any one else claims in most cases they must be lazy scrounging zb’s.
As opposed to the US idea of what health cover would you like for yourself and your family,you’ll get a private room in hospital not a overpopulated ward in which someone next to you one side is using the ‘bedside toilet facilities’ and someone the other is vomiting in a bowl,while you’re trying to eat the diabolical hospital dinner that they’ve just brought you,there’s no limits or NHS type postcode lottery rationing to the amounts that you and your family are covered for and everything that can possibly be provided for your/their treatment if required will be.
If you lose the job that the income protection policy covers through reduncancy or sickness your wages be covered and best of all there’s no one like landylad saying that you’re a scrounging zb for claiming on your policy because it’s got absolutely zb all to do with him and his zb commie mates. 
LandyLad:
I fully support paying benefits to“people who have fallen upon hard times through illness, accident, or disease.”
plus disability either from birth or accident.I can’t think that these people would need £26000 NET of TAX NI etc. to survive and I am sure that the vast majority of such people don’t get that sort of money from benefits anyhow.
But there are those families who just carry on having kids so that they can steal more money off us, because having kids is their form of employment and the d i c k h e a d s who run the governments and civil service are falling over themselves to pander to them. That’s what keeps them in jobs, paid by OUR hard earned wages in tax and NI.
So the feckless, idle b%$tar*s help the politicians and social worker do-gooders to stay in jobs by being their poor little helpless angels and the aforesaid feckless ffffers are helped to stay as feckless fffers by the incompetent politicians and civil servants who encourage them by paying them to stay as feckless fffers.
Vicious circle of back scratching going on there.
Spend the benefit money on apprentiships. Force the idle fffers to go on apprentiships. No attend apprentiship - no benefits.
The NHS is the absolute best thing we have in this country and we must not waste money on paying idle ffers to stay at home. No, that money is needed for the NHS. But that organisation desperately needs reform. Not at the front line (porters, nurses, some doctors, ambulance people) but within the echelon upon echelon of so called managers who all have limited ability to even think never mind manage.
I would get rid of 50% of managers and NHS Trust board members and pay the rest on RESULTS, not number of hours spent in wasteful time consuming meetings to decide who will be on the committee to decide when the meeting will take place to decide who will be at the meeting to decide when the car park resurfacing committee can start to put out questionnaires to collect thoughts on whether the car park should be resurfaced . . . etc etc blah blah blah.
Thats exactly what its like in these places. I know from first hand experience just how your money is spent in such ways. And all the time they are cutting back on front line services.
Why cant some of these people on benefits who can work be required to work in care homes for the elderly in return for their benefit handouts?
or if not care homes for the elderly, then care homes for people with disabilities? Or day centres or meals on wheels.
Well some of you will mention that would take work away from the low paid people already doing it. Yes it might well do and I dont have an answer to that. Any thoughts?
Maybe you should have your wages reduced to the levels paid out for jobseekers allowance which might save your employer some money too. 
LandyLad:
I fully support paying benefits to“people who have fallen upon hard times through illness, accident, or disease.”
plus disability either from birth or accident.I can’t think that these people would need £26000 NET of TAX NI etc. to survive and I am sure that the vast majority of such people don’t get that sort of money from benefits anyhow.
But there are those families who just carry on having kids so that they can steal more money off us, because having kids is their form of employment and the d i c k h e a d s who run the governments and civil service are falling over themselves to pander to them. That’s what keeps them in jobs, paid by OUR hard earned wages in tax and NI.
So the feckless, idle b%$tar*s help the politicians and social worker do-gooders to stay in jobs by being their poor little helpless angels and the aforesaid feckless ffffers are helped to stay as feckless fffers by the incompetent politicians and civil servants who encourage them by paying them to stay as feckless fffers.
Vicious circle of back scratching going on there.
Spend the benefit money on apprentiships. Force the idle fffers to go on apprentiships. No attend apprentiship - no benefits.
The NHS is the absolute best thing we have in this country and we must not waste money on paying idle ffers to stay at home. No, that money is needed for the NHS. But that organisation desperately needs reform. Not at the front line (porters, nurses, some doctors, ambulance people) but within the echelon upon echelon of so called managers who all have limited ability to even think never mind manage.
I would get rid of 50% of managers and NHS Trust board members and pay the rest on RESULTS, not number of hours spent in wasteful time consuming meetings to decide who will be on the committee to decide when the meeting will take place to decide who will be at the meeting to decide when the car park resurfacing committee can start to put out questionnaires to collect thoughts on whether the car park should be resurfaced . . . etc etc blah blah blah.
Thats exactly what its like in these places. I know from first hand experience just how your money is spent in such ways. And all the time they are cutting back on front line services.
Why cant some of these people on benefits who can work be required to work in care homes for the elderly in return for their benefit handouts?
or if not care homes for the elderly, then care homes for people with disabilities? Or day centres or meals on wheels.
Well some of you will mention that would take work away from the low paid people already doing it. Yes it might well do and I dont have an answer to that. Any thoughts?
LandyLad there are council elections held in May 2012.You get nominated and stand for election onto the council.Then you can work your way up and stand as a candidate to be an MP.Thats if you get voted in as either 
.
Some good points made there gents.
Carryfast, I am not a commie.
My beliefs on society etc. are the exact opposite of those propounded by communism. I am EXTREME right wing.
Each man is responsible for himself, however if he is feeling in a philanthropic mood then he can help out somebody else who has hit hard times IF HE WANTS to (or not if he doesn’t want to).
Why dont I have my wages reduced to ZERO? That would save my employer exactly ZERO pounds per week.
I dont have an employer.
I dont have a job.
I dont have an income at the moment.
If I am lucky, I might get 4 days work in the next 4 weeks, if I am very lucky.
I am not the right sort of person to be a politician.
Let’s return to the actual issue posed by the thread title.
What are YOUR thoughts on capping benefits per household to a specific amount of money?
In the case of the government’s current proposal, that is £26,000 per household per year.
That is supposed to be based on the average top line income of £35,000 per year netted (minus tax and NIC) to a take home pay of £26,000 p/yr.
The other side of the coin could be that all benefit receiving households coul have their benefits made UP to exactly £26,000 per year. Why not? Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander and all that, innit?
Wheel Nut:
pavaroti:
limeyphil:
there shouldn’t be any benefits whatsoever. the ecconomy would recover overnight.+2
I wonder how many of these would think the same if it happened to them.
You are only 10’ away from that truck in front
i have been out of work a couple of times, it didn’t last long, as i got off my arse and knocked on some doors.
to be honest, it was more like having a few days off. but that’s because i’m a grafter, unlike so many of those [zb]ing low life scrubbers that do nothing but drain our society, then they have the cheek to starting [zb]ing breeding like bloody rabbits, which introduces a new batch of scum to our green and pleasant land.
we should have forced labour camps, and public hangings for obese women that wear leggings. i would say the reintroduction of the stocks would be a good idea, but the bloody tax payers havn’t got any bloody money left to pay for a rotten cabbage to throw at the dirty lazy scumbags.
LandyLad:
Some good points made there gents.Carryfast, I am not a commie.
My beliefs on society etc. are the exact opposite of those propounded by communism. I am EXTREME right wing.
Each man is responsible for himself, however if he is feeling in a philanthropic mood then he can help out somebody else who has hit hard times IF HE WANTS to (or not if he doesn’t want to).
Why dont I have my wages reduced to ZERO? That would save my employer exactly ZERO pounds per week.
I dont have an employer.
I dont have a job.
I dont have an income at the moment.
If I am lucky, I might get 4 days work in the next 4 weeks, if I am very lucky.I am not the right sort of person to be a politician.
Let’s return to the actual issue posed by the thread title.
What are YOUR thoughts on capping benefits per household to a specific amount of money?
In the case of the government’s current proposal, that is £26,000 per household per year.
That is supposed to be based on the average top line income of £35,000 per year netted (minus tax and NIC) to a take home pay of £26,000 p/yr.The other side of the coin could be that all benefit receiving households coul have their benefits made UP to exactly £26,000 per year. Why not? Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander and all that, innit?
Extreme right wing commie they’re both effectively exactly the same thing at the end of the day such as the irony of one extremist lot of nutters in Russia who called themselves communists fighting with another extremist lot of nutters in Germany who called themselves National Socialists.
In both cases there were those who followed the party line who denounced their fellow citizens for being anti social or not fitting in with what (they felt) was the correct line.
You say that you don’t have a job and you don’t have an income but you think that you’ve got the right to decide who is and who isn’t eligible to claim benefits.Under your (British commie) idea we’ve got the typical socialist bs of someone like you who’s least qualified to make the judgement saying,that a family all living in one house,that’s been working hard for years and contributing to the zb’d up commie/socialist so called ‘social security’ system,that just because they’ve been unlucky enough to all get made redundant at the same time and are all claiming the benefits that they’re entitled to and have been paying in for while they were working,will have a cap put on those benefits,which in the case of a family of 3 or more would provide them with a lot less than they would get if they were even just working for minimum wage let alone what they were getting if they’d been earning more and have a mortgage on the house based on that amount of money coming in each week as in many cases of households in the South East where housing costs are zb expensive.
In which case what would probably happen is that they’d get the house repo’d and then they’d be asking the council to house them all seperately,or at least with just the parents being able to stay together,so that their benefits aren’t all totalled up together as a ‘household’ and capped accordingly,and in which case instead of one house being needed we now need two or more to be provided.
However under a ‘real’ free country system as in the States in which their redundancy and sickness income protection insurance was all their own private insurance to cover themselves and themselves only for their full wages and not just given into the British commie/socialist zb’d up system,in which people like you say they should get nothing and/or work for their dole money pittance,they’d be ok and it would be you who’s in the financial zb and homeless not them.
limeyphil:
Wheel Nut:
pavaroti:
limeyphil:
there shouldn’t be any benefits whatsoever. the ecconomy would recover overnight.+2
I wonder how many of these would think the same if it happened to them.
You are only 10’ away from that truck in front
i have been out of work a couple of times, it didn’t last long, as i got off my arse and knocked on some doors.
to be honest, it was more like having a few days off. but that’s because i’m a grafter, unlike so many of those [zb]ing low life scrubbers that do nothing but drain our society, then they have the cheek to starting [zb]ing breeding like bloody rabbits, which introduces a new batch of scum to our green and pleasant land.
we should have forced labour camps, and public hangings for obese women that wear leggings. i would say the reintroduction of the stocks would be a good idea, but the bloody tax payers havn’t got any bloody money left to pay for a rotten cabbage to throw at the dirty lazy scumbags.
Great idea.Check out the figures and you’ll find that in most cases human beings are financially unviable in that the wages they earn over a lifetime won’t cover the costs of their retirement, food requirements,housing,health care and social security requirements such as redundancy and sickness etc.So that menas sterilisation for every person in the country except zb bankers,MP’s and proffessional footballers.