[InOne]

Originally Posted by Scott

im already on it

i went for a medical the other week, and my money stopped and i thought it was because i didnt pass the medical, but i rang them and they said they havent even had the report back from the medical (dont know why) and the reason they stopped paying is because my doctors not ran out and until they have had the report back from their people they cant pay me without a note from my own doctor

I get ESA without a doctors note. Didn't you used to get that?

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

no D':

once they have the report back from the medical lady i wont need doctors notes anymore

[InOne]

Originally Posted by Scott

no D':

once they have the report back from the medical lady i wont need doctors notes anymore

I had to appeal for mine, and with this new benefits reform might be quite hard for you

[Livia]

I think that the only way out of poverty is education. The fact that poorer people don't usually have access to great schools is the greatest shame there is in a country as rich as ours. I come from a working class area and a working class family. I work in a field that is dominated by people from privileged backgrounds who automatically had access to the best schools because their parents could afford it. That's simply not fair because there are talented, intelligent people who don't get a fair crack of the whip because they don't have (or can't afford) the education that'd make them rise to the top.

Also, I think contraception should be addressed sensibly. Every child should be a wanted child, and if you can't afford to have half a dozen kids, then you shouldn't have them. Contraception is plentiful and its free. I'm not saying that poor people should not be supported when they have kids, I'm saying that the benefits should not be thrown at people who have loads of kids they can't control or provide for and then rely on the state to support them.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Beastie

Stop Breeding.

Tax even more from the rich and less from the poor.

The tax we pay which should mainly go to hospitals and education and transport. Well it should also go to poor families. Poor families need the basic needs to survive like we all do. Shelter, warm clothing, food and water (hot and cold so they can have a bath/shower)

Poor families need to help themselves too. They shouldn't have a pet cat or dog, they shouldn't have Sky TV. Just basic essentials to keep them going. If you can't afford it. Don't buy it!

Benefits are still being handed out though. Which they should. But to genuine poor families who only spend it on basic rashing. Not luxuries!

On Sky they can change to the free
SkyFreesat.

Then no charge each month.

[Chuck]

[Judas]

Originally Posted by Scott

and yall can stfu anyway, my parents have worked and paid taxes their entire lives

Thats hardly the point. I don't understand why you show no guilt

(I hope you don't think I'm being mean, but I do think it's absurdly stupid how you can claim money you don't really need when others are struggling.

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

sorry but you can **** right off

you know nothing about my situation or why the doctor says i shouldnt work so be quiet

[Judas]

Originally Posted by Scott

sorry but you can **** right off

you know nothing about my situation or why the doctor says i shouldnt work so be quiet

Oh sorry, I wasn't saying the reasons the doctor gives aren't right (I'm not that horrid haha, you explained to me on ******** a while ago when we were speaking about it all with Tommy)... and I'm not suggesting you can just get a job.

What I am saying however is that you don't really need the money. Unless the situation has changed, before you were saying your parents were relatively comfortable, and therefore the amount of money you recieved does not match what it is needed for. What I'm saying is you don't really need the money compared to some people, as your parents can afford to give you some, whereas others genuinely need the money.

I hope this hasn't offended you but I personally feel this is one of the failures in the system.

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

oh well thats ok then

i thought you meant i was faking an illness or something to get the money

[Judas]

Originally Posted by Scott

oh well thats ok then

i thought you meant i was faking an illness or something to get the money

haha no I'm not that harsh, and I don't think you're that mean. I just was arguing that the money is too much... I think it should be more means tested and dependant on whether you live on your own or with parents, and consider how much the parents earn.

[Beastie]

Originally Posted by Judas

haha no I'm not that harsh, and I don't think you're that mean. I just was arguing that the money is too much... I think it should be more means tested and dependant on whether you live on your own or with parents, and consider how much the parents earn.

You shouldn't sponge off anyone. But it's a lot better to sponge off the parents than it is sponging off the government/other people's taxes when that money can be used for genuine poor people!

[Judas]

Originally Posted by Beastie

You shouldn't sponge off anyone. But it's a lot better to sponge off the parents than it is sponging off the government/other people's taxes when that money can be used for genuine poor people!

Exacatly, I'm not saying Scott isn't ill, but I am saying that the money isn't really needed. (And he is just a minor example for people that do it to a much larger scale - often genuinely not even being ill/needing the money)

[InOne]

Originally Posted by Judas

Exacatly, I'm not saying Scott isn't ill, but I am saying that the money isn't really needed. (And he is just a minor example for people that do it to a much larger scale - often genuinely not even being ill/needing the money)

So are you saying just cos his parents earn a bit of money he's not entitled to any, just cos they might be able to afford to support him?

[Judas]

Originally Posted by InOne

So are you saying just cos his parents earn a bit of money he's not entitled to any, just cos they might be able to afford to support him?

Basically, yes. If an individual is living with their parents and they are of sufficient income to support the individual they don't need as much money. They don't need to pay for food, accomadation, gas, electricity, water, internet, council tax, state tax, etc. And thus often in these cases the money is spent on crap, when some people actually need the money.

(This is in general cases, not directly aimed at Scott)

[InOne]

Originally Posted by Judas

Basically, yes. If an individual is living with their parents and they are of sufficient income to support the individual they don't need as much money. They don't need to pay for food, accomadation, gas, electricity, water, internet, council tax, state tax, etc. And thus often in these cases the money is spent on crap, when some people actually need the money.

(This is in general cases, not directly aimed at Scott)

I get what you mean. But they pay taxes as well so surely their money they pay from that should go back to their kid who just cos he's a bit well off them some, doesn't make any less ill? It's not like a person in that situation is cheating the system as well, they are just as much entitled to it as anyone. They just need to do more to catch the real cheats.

[Judas]

Originally Posted by InOne

I get what you mean. But they pay taxes as well so surely their money they pay from that should go back to their kid who just cos he's a bit well off them some, doesn't make any less ill? It's not like a person in that situation is cheating the system as well, they are just as much entitled to it as anyone. They just need to do more to catch the real cheats.

That's the thing though. The welfare state should be about need not entitlment. Alot of people may be 'entitled' to money, but why? They don't need it. The welfare state should be a safety net to catch people when they most need help - not just a system of 'entitlement' to benefits when you don't need them.

It's easier to say they need to catch the 'real cheats' that it is to do it. I argue that the government need to remove funding from those who don't need it even if they are 'entitled' to it, and give it to those who really need financial assistance.

[InOne]

Originally Posted by Judas

That's the thing though. The welfare state should be about need not entitlment. Alot of people may be 'entitled' to money, but why? They don't need it. The welfare state should be a safety net to catch people when they most need help - not just a system of 'entitlement' to benefits when you don't need them.

It's easier to say they need to catch the 'real cheats' that it is to do it. I argue that the government need to remove funding from those who don't need it even if they are 'entitled' to it, and give it to those who really need financial assistance.

I know what you're saying. Maybe something will change with this new benefit reform thing. It's a tricky one that seems to balance moral and practical principles. But unless you're millionaires are on very decent wage, it's still quite hard to fully support a person even with both parents working

[BB_Eye]

I watched the show on iPlayer today and it's made me rethink some of my feelings about the benefits for families with children.

Even though I know a few low-income single parents from work, I've never gotten to see that sort of life first-hand so I've often naively taken it for granted that as long as you have the child benefit and child tax credit with your rent paid for you, you'd be okay, but in actual fact, it's really not a lot of money and if you're unluckly enough to be the unfortunate souls who occupy those decrepid tower blocks, it must feel like living in Eastern Europe. I really hope we can soon build more council properties so such families won't have to deal with so many awful private landlords.

As it happens, those kids are wonderful and really count their blessings. Amazing how hardship makes people grow up so quickly.

[BB_Eye]

Originally Posted by Judas

Basically, yes. If an individual is living with their parents and they are of sufficient income to support the individual they don't need as much money. They don't need to pay for food, accomadation, gas, electricity, water, internet, council tax, state tax, etc. And thus often in these cases the money is spent on crap, when some people actually need the money.

(This is in general cases, not directly aimed at Scott)

Well the simple answer to this one is that parents should always charge their kids board money if they are at working age and still living at home. The benefit system pretty much takes this as a given although not all parents do it.