Benefits in Britain: separating the facts from the fiction

[GiRTh]

Article on benefits in this country.

LINK (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/06/welfare-britain-facts-myths)

Its quite a long article so I don't expect all to read it but if you do then you will see that 90% of what the government tell us and the Daily Mail publishes is bullsh*t.

Interesting facts for those who CBA to read.

Only 130 families with 10 or more children are claiming benefits in this country.

A high majority of benefits go to working families and pensioners.

Cutting benefits to unemployed does not mean they get jobs.

[Kizzy]

Thanks for this will have a good looksy tomorrow :D

[joeysteele]

It was a really interesting read GiRTh, it was good to see some realistic balancing done overall with the benefits facts and figures.

[Kizzy]

Would make interesting reading for those who only usually quote the right wing reactionary rags.

[lostalex]

Even if it was just 1 benefits cheat, it would still be an outrage. The fact is there are people that are STEALING from the tax payers. That is the plain truth. people should be just as upset about benefits cheats as they were about the MP expenses scandal. It's the same thing, stealing from the tax payers.

People have every right to be outraged when they are being stolen from. whether it's 1 person, or 1 million people, it's still stealing, and it's the principle that matters.

[GiRTh]

Even if it was just 1 benefits cheat, it would still be an outrage. The fact is there are people that are STEALING from the tax payers. That is the plain truth. people should be just as upset about benefits cheats as they were about the MP expenses scandal. It's the same thing, stealing from the tax payers.

People have every right to be outraged when they are being stolen from. whether it's 1 person, or 1 million people, it's still stealing, and it's the principle that matters.

This report shows they are not being stolen from by the people the government and daily Mail say.

Which is a bigger outrage - That people work the system to their advantage or that official news papers and Government sources deliberately lie to the public in order to push their agenda and politicise certain events?

[Vicky.]

Even if it was just 1 benefits cheat, it would still be an outrage. The fact is there are people that are STEALING from the tax payers. That is the plain truth. people should be just as upset about benefits cheats as they were about the MP expenses scandal. It's the same thing, stealing from the tax payers.

People have every right to be outraged when they are being stolen from. whether it's 1 person, or 1 million people, it's still stealing, and it's the principle that matters.

In every area of life though, there are frauds and cheats. That will NEVER change. There will never be a system created that means no-one at all can be fraudulent. Its just impossible.

These figures show that fraud is extremely low..thats good enough for me to be honest. Yeah, a few people are claiming stuff they arent entitled to. I'm more concerned about large companies avoiding their tax, and MPs claiming for second homes then selling them on, and banks taking the piss, to be honest. So many people get so worked up over benefit fraud, when its actually a really small amount lost compared to the rest of the corrupt UK.

[Omah]

Article on benefits in this country.

LINK (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/06/welfare-britain-facts-myths)

Its quite a long article so I don't expect all to read it but if you do then you will see that 90% of what the government tell us is bullsh*t.

90% ..... or more ..... :idc:

[Vanessa]

Anyone can find himself out of a job. It happened to me and i had to claim benefits. I've never felt more worthless. I've worked all my life and i hated being out of work. :(

[Omah]

Anyone can find himself out of a job. It happened to me and i had to claim benefits. I've never felt more worthless. I've worked all my life and i hated being out of work. :(

Yeah, I've been there, too, only to be told that I'm not entitled to benefits since I have savings ..... :shrug:

[Vicky.]

Yeah, I've been there, too, only to be told that I'm not entitled to benefits since I have savings ..... :shrug:

You must have had a fair amount of savings to not be entitled to anything, I think its something like 16k before you cant get anything :p

And I always thought you could claim contributions based JSA if you had savings..

Its wrong though. Just because you have been sensible shouldnt mean you arent entitled to help if you lose your job. I have this problem with the care home my gran is in..if she hadnt saved all her life she would get care for free..but just because her and my grandad saved, she has to pay £500 per week. Wrong on so many levels.

[Vanessa]

You must have had a fair amount of savings to not be entitled to anything, I think its something like 16k before you cant get anything :p

And I always thought you could claim contributions based JSA if you had savings..

Its wrong though. Just because you have been sensible shouldnt mean you arent entitled to help if you lose your job. I have this problem with the care home my gran is in..if she hadnt saved all her life she would get care for free..but just because her and my grandad saved, she has to pay £500 per week. Wrong on so many levels.

Omg! That's so wrong! :eek:

[King Gizzard]

The most ridiculous thing is they always seem to concentrate on JSA'ers..when they're hardly a smudge on the benefit system

http://i.imgur.com/dwtf598.jpg

[GiRTh]

You must have had a fair amount of savings to not be entitled to anything, I think its something like 16k before you cant get anything :p

And I always thought you could claim contributions based JSA if you had savings..

Its wrong though. Just because you have been sensible shouldnt mean you arent entitled to help if you lose your job. I have this problem with the care home my gran is in..if she hadnt saved all her life she would get care for free..but just because her and my grandad saved, she has to pay £500 per week. Wrong on so many levels.My parent have savings and cuz they live in Jamaica I have access to their bank account for emergencies; when I found my self unemployed I was told this meant I had to live off their savings. I pointed out that technically it wasn't my money and to be honest it felt like stealing and still they weren't interested.

These government departments only have an agenda to reduce the figures they dont care how they do it.

EDIT: Final point off topic, slightly. I was summoned to an interview that was more like an interrogation. The interview was taped and the interviewer went over the questions again and again, over and over making sure every point was explained in full detail. It felt like a police interview TBH . I'd like to see the Daily Mail print articles about how badly people are treated when they are unemployed.

[Vicky.]

My parent have savings and cuz they live in Jamaica I have access to their bank account for emergencies; when I found my self unemployed I was told this meant I had to live off their savings. I pointed out that technically it wasn't my money and to be honest it felt like stealing and still they weren't interested.

These government departments only have an agenda to reduce the figures they dont care how they do it.

Thats actually terrible..

Not surprising, but terrible.

The system at the moment doesnt really encourage people to save for a rainy day does it...save and you get no help. Enjoy it all (eg blow it all) and you can have help from us. But god forbid you dont jump through our hoops and work for free fulltime for tescos and stuff..or we will leave you totally destitute with nothing at all coming in, despite the law saying a person needs £71 per week to live on. Crazy.

[Omah]

You must have had a fair amount of savings to not be entitled to anything, I think its something like 16k before you cant get anything :p

Having been spendthrift in my youth, I grow more miserly with age ..... ;)

[Omah]

These government departments only have an agenda to reduce the figures they dont care how they do it.

Yeah, although I was a career IT specialist and consultant, I was told to apply for 6 jobs (however menial) a week and to actually get one within 12 weeks or my "non-existent" benefit would be stopped ..... :rolleyes:

[GiRTh]

Thats actually terrible..

Not surprising, but terrible.

The system at the moment doesnt really encourage people to save for a rainy day does it...save and you get no help. Enjoy it all (eg blow it all) and you can have help from us. But god forbid you dont jump through our hoops and work for free fulltime for tescos and stuff..or we will leave you totally destitute with nothing at all coming in, despite the law saying a person needs £71 per week to live on. Crazy.totally true. Its a strange system when working people get help but unemployed people are told to help themselves.

[Livia]

Who is the Joseph Rowntree Foundation? What information did their researchers access when they published the report that is being claimed to be definitive? How come if something's published in The Guardian, people who tend toward the Left hold it up as fact, while ridiculing the press of the Right?

I'd need to know a bit more about the report and the foundation that put it together before I started claiming it was fact.

[GiRTh]

Who is the Joseph Rowntree Foundation? What information did their researchers access when they published the report that is being claimed to be definitive? How come if something's published in The Guardian, people who tend toward the Left hold it up as fact, while ridiculing the press of the Right?

I'd need to know a bit more about the report and the foundation that put it together before I started claiming it was fact.

http://www.josephrowntree.org.uk/

[Kizzy]

I am for once speechless :laugh2:
When addressing the family would say the differing media opinion is due to a mix of politics and sociological perspectives.
Here is some info on what shapes family life,
http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/wp/2004/04-02/11.htm

And here is some history about Joseph Rowntree a philanthropist who helped to change the social landscape in the UK.
http://www.jrrt.org.uk/sites/jrrt.org.uk/files/user-uploads/josephrowntree.pdf

[Livia]

http://www.josephrowntree.org.uk/

Yes. I know... I Googled them too. However, I still don't know if their statistics are any more accurate than the government's own. It always seems to me that people are willing to grasp statistics if it fits in with their own ideas.

My local town is an unremarkable little market town with a population of around 7,000. That's 7,000 people from a total of, say, 62 million in the country. I know of four women with no partner in their lives as far as anyone knows, who do not work and who have more than 10 kids. I know this is a fact because they have all used the MP's services to take up cases against various agencies. And yet the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and by extension, the Guardian, is asking me to believe that there are only another 126 families in that position in the remaining 61,999,874 people in the country?

[Livia]

I am for once speechless :laugh2:
When addressing the family would say the differing media opinion is due to a mix of politics and sociological perspectives.
Here is some info on what shapes family life,
http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/wp/2004/04-02/11.htm

And here is some history about Joseph Rowntree a philanthropist who helped to change the social landscape in the UK.
http://www.jrrt.org.uk/sites/jrrt.org.uk/files/user-uploads/josephrowntree.pdf

That's a lot of words for someone who's supposed to be speechless.

[GiRTh]

Yes. I know... I Googled them too. However, I still don't know if their statistics are any more accurate than the government's own. It always seems to me that people are willing to grasp statistics if it fits in with their own ideas.

My local town is an unremarkable little market town with a population of around 7,000. That's 7,000 people from a total of, say, 62 million in the country. I know of four women with no partner in their lives as far as anyone knows, who do not work and who have more than 10 kids. I know this is a fact because they have all used the MP's services to take up cases against various agencies. And yet the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and by extension, the Guardian, is asking me to believe that there are only another 126 families in that position in the remaining 61,999,874 people in the country?From my googling I didn't find any political affiliation so I'm not sure why you feel the stats cannot be trusted. They seem just as trustworthy as official stats produced by the government.

[Kizzy]

That's a lot of words for someone who's supposed to be speechless.

I amended my post when I had rescued my jaw from the floor liv.
What is the governments position on this issue then, do their statistics differ wildly from the Rowntree foundations?
The right wing media have never been found to be economical with the truth to influence the electorate have they?

[Livia]

From my googling I didn't find any political affiliation so I'm not sure why you feel the stats cannot be trusted. They seem just as trustworthy as official stats produced by the government.

Just because they have no published political affiliations doesn't mean they don't have an agenda. Simply by the nature of who they are and what they do they're going to massage any statistics to prove their own points. I don't think the government's official stats can be trusted either, of course. What I'm saying is that the truth probably lays somewhere in the middle of the two.

[GiRTh]

Just because they have no published political affiliations doesn't mean they don't have an agenda. Simply by the nature of who they are and what they do they're going to massage any statistics to prove their own points. I don't think the government's official stats can be trusted either, of course. What I'm saying is that the truth probably lays somewhere in the middle of the two.Possibly true but I want to see reports like this in the Daily Mail and not just to the e usual reactionary garbage they spout. There are clearly two opinions and two sets of stats regarding this issue but we often only get to hear from those who shout loudest.

[Livia]

Possibly true but I want to see reports like this in the Daily Mail and not just to the e usual reactionary garbage they spout. There are clearly two opinions and two sets of stats regarding this issue but we often only get to hear from those who shout loudest.

The thing is, the Daily Mail could publish those stats, and by the time their own people had massaged them, they'd say something else. It would be good to be able to turn to a neutral, trustworth source with no axe to grind and no agenda, who could give us actual data on the state of things. As it is I'm inclined to distrust statistics generally.

[Vicky.]

Yes. I know... I Googled them too. However, I still don't know if their statistics are any more accurate than the government's own. It always seems to me that people are willing to grasp statistics if it fits in with their own ideas.

My local town is an unremarkable little market town with a population of around 7,000. That's 7,000 people from a total of, say, 62 million in the country. I know of four women with no partner in their lives as far as anyone knows, who do not work and who have more than 10 kids. I know this is a fact because they have all used the MP's services to take up cases against various agencies. And yet the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and by extension, the Guardian, is asking me to believe that there are only another 126 families in that position in the remaining 61,999,874 people in the country?

Even the mail isnt far off that when they report...they reckon 'nearly 200' households are claiming for 10 or more kids. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255203/200-families-claiming-housing-benefit-10-children-taxpayers-face-150million-benefit-broods.html

I really think where you live must be the exception...

[Kizzy]

Trusting statistics compiled by sociologists and not political groups might be a start in getting to the truth.

[Livia]

Even the mail isnt far off that when they report...they reckon 'nearly 200' households are claiming for 10 or more kids. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255203/200-families-claiming-housing-benefit-10-children-taxpayers-face-150million-benefit-broods.html

I really think where you live must be the exception...

I doubt it's anything to do with where I live. This place is prosperous compared to where I come from. How many families have 9 kids? 8 kids? Anyhoo... we'll have to agree to differ. I just don't trust statistics 98% of people is nearly all of them.

[Vicky.]

I doubt it's anything to do with where I live. This place is prosperous compared to where I come from. How many families have 9 kids? 8 kids? Anyhoo... we'll have to agree to differ. I just don't trust statistics 98% of people is nearly all of them.

~45k have 5 or more. According to the mail anyway (so if anythings up with the figures its likely to be less than that, not more)..theres a little breakdown table thing on the article.

Though 10k or so of those seem to be on disability benefits..would love to know how someone who is disabled can deal with that many kids. I couldnt do it myself and I'm not disabled :S

[Niamh.]

I've deleted some off topic/arguing posts in here, can we get back on topic now please?

[Jesus.]

I'm one of 6. My parents moved to the country though, so I doubt there was much else to do.

[Livia]

I'm one of 6. My parents moved to the country though, so I doubt there was much else to do.

I'm one of two. My parents had a telly.

[Vicky.]

I'm one of two. My parents had a telly.

:laugh:

I am one of 3 (though theres 10 years between me and my brother)

I actually cant imagine having loads of kids. I'm stopping after the next one.

[Livia]

:laugh:

I am one of 3 (though theres 10 years between me and my brother)

I actually cant imagine having loads of kids. I'm stopping after the next one.

Try and time the next one for next year's Most Loved and perhaps Ben will give you better odds than he has this year! It honestly won't be the same this year without you going into labour. The things you mods will do to steal Marc's limelight...

[Kizzy]

Right I will attempt to stay on topic, here are some stats on families in the UK
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/family-demography/families-and-households/2012/stb-families-households.html

[Vicky.]

Right I will attempt to stay on topic, here are some stats on families in the UK
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/family-demography/families-and-households/2012/stb-families-households.html

Not surprised there are less one person households..its so expensive to live alone. I barely managed, and I was working fulltime.

[Vicky.]

http://www.thefedonline.org.uk/disability-in-the-news/mps-set-to-quiz-minister-over-misleading-benefit-stats

Seems IDS is going to be pulled up on his misleading use of statistics...wonder how that goes :laugh:

[Omah]

http://www.thefedonline.org.uk/disability-in-the-news/mps-set-to-quiz-minister-over-misleading-benefit-stats

The Commons work and pensions select committee has now decided to ask a work and pensions minister – ideally Duncan Smith himself – to answer key questions about how ministers have used those statistics.

The decision to hold the session was prompted by the Labour MP Sheila Gilmore, who has accused Conservative ministers of “knowingly misusing figures on benefits that disabled people rely on” as part of a campaign to undermine public trust in the welfare system.

McVey and Duncan Smith were both caught last month quoting increases in the overall number of disability living allowance (DLA) claimants – including older people and children – to try to explain why they needed to cut the number of people claiming DLA.

But they failed to point out that the number of working-age claimants – the only group who will be affected by the cuts – had actually been falling.

Caught out in manipulation of the truth ..... :suspect:

[joeysteele]

http://www.thefedonline.org.uk/disability-in-the-news/mps-set-to-quiz-minister-over-misleading-benefit-stats

Seems IDS is going to be pulled up on his misleading use of statistics...wonder how that goes :laugh:

He will be his smug, rotten, pompous and arrogant self as he always is.

Finding some way of going round all the houses in order to baffle and sound like he is in any way right even when told he is not.
Thankfully more and more people see him as one of most vile politicians around at present.
I just see him as totally cold and heartless anyway. How he has any say in peoples lives and incomes is competely beyond me,he is a truly horrible man.

[Kizzy]

http://www.thefedonline.org.uk/disability-in-the-news/mps-set-to-quiz-minister-over-misleading-benefit-stats



Caught out in manipulation of the truth ..... :suspect:

Lying?.... No, I don't believe it :laugh: