Home Search Calendar Help Login Register
Did you miss your activation email?
MurraysWorld Discussions  >  General Community  >  Chit Chat  >  Benefits and financial support 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 38 39 40 [41] 42 43 Go Down Reply
Author Topic: Benefits and financial support  (Read 8058 times)
Iluvandy
Seed
****
Posts: 3,828

Gender: Female
Location: Scotland


Re: Benefits and financial support « Reply #600 on: April 04, 2013, 07:16 PM »
Reply

I don't know why I don't know about the tax frauds and I certainly didn't know anyone that would admit they were committing tax fraud. Perhaps the law (which needs tougher sentences imo) needs to make better examples of people. I got so bitter about everything that we left the UK!

My local council was the centre of the Donnygate scandal

http://m.guardian.co.uk/society/2002/mar/13/uknews

And things didn't improve!
http://m.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/apr/19/doncaster-council-failing-and-dysfunctional

Some things are the same here too.


Tax frauds don't get much publicity but I did see a programme on TV a number of years ago about the fact that the government spend a lot more resources on trying to catch benefit cheats than tax fraudsters.   
   
IP Logged
Littlebuddha
Seed
****
Posts: 3,339


Re: Benefits and financial support « Reply #601 on: April 04, 2013, 07:28 PM »
Reply

This government are very pro the city were all the big companies and banks are. You just have to see what has happened with banks who lost millions and the public had to save them. I do not see the government chasing all the hooks and crooks in the city of london. The Tories are far to close to banks and big business in fact I am sure if they pursued them re tax it would make benefit fraud seem very small. It is time they started chasing there friends in the city. They seem to have no remorse about tax fraud it is time they did.
IP Logged
Joe
Top Seed
*****
Posts: 5,570

Gender: Male
Location: London


Boo hoo hoooooooo :'(

Re: Benefits and financial support « Reply #602 on: April 04, 2013, 10:57 PM »
Reply

I understand why this riles you Hazel, but your thinking seems too simplistic to me. Where does Osborne compare Mick Philpott to the average claimant? I don’t see such a linkage or distinction made.

It’s clear that the welfare system needed to be reviewed. Even if this was the exception to the rule, the fact that Mick Philpott could claim the amount of money he did, is rather alarming, and highlights a huge flaw in the way the system operates. I’m averse to the ‘Daily Mail’ mentality, where exceptional cases are brought to our attention, and used as ammunition to tar all of those who claim benefits. However, there must be changes that can be made to prevent this parasitic lifestyle that Philpott enjoyed, without constricting funds to those who need it. This legislation needs to be passed, imo.

Sadly it has taken this story, sensationalised by the tragic loss of life, to provoke a national debate on our welfare system. Looking forward to Question Time tonight.


Regardless of whether or not the wider debate on welfare was needed, Osborne's decision to use a story involving the deaths of six children to garner more support for his and Duncan-Smith's policies is breathtaking in its insensitivity. Philpott may have been a benefit piss-taker, I'll give him that, but it's such a blatant political move. "I know, everyone is disgusted by the Philpott case, so I'll use the fact that he was a benefit claimant to link benefits to child murder. It'll play brilliantly with the Sun and Mail crowd."

It's a measure of how low politicians have sunk in my estimation that I'm not particularly surprised by this story.
IP Logged
Iluvandy
Seed
****
Posts: 3,828

Gender: Female
Location: Scotland


Re: Benefits and financial support « Reply #603 on: April 04, 2013, 11:36 PM »
Reply

Regardless of whether or not the wider debate on welfare was needed, Osborne's decision to use a story involving the deaths of six children to garner more support for his and Duncan-Smith's policies is breathtaking in its insensitivity. Philpott may have been a benefit piss-taker, I'll give him that, but it's such a blatant political move. "I know, everyone is disgusted by the Philpott case, so I'll use the fact that he was a benefit claimant to link benefits to child murder. It'll play brilliantly with the Sun and Mail crowd."

It's a measure of how low politicians have sunk in my estimation that I'm not particularly surprised by this story.

I think I smell desperation from Cameron, Osborne & Co.    Osborne is a self-satisfied prat and his remarks on  the Philpott case are disgusting.     No mention of the publicity granted to this odious person by our gutter press and whatever TV company decided to make a programme about his life.    No wonder he thought he was a star!!!     
IP Logged
Sir Panda
Murraymaniac
**********
Posts: 31,156

Gender: Male
Location: Right behind you.


Misunderstood genius.

Re: Benefits and financial support « Reply #604 on: April 05, 2013, 12:01 AM »
Reply

Can anyone provide the quote where he links benefit claims to child murder?
IP Logged
Clydey
Murraymaniac
**********
Posts: 22,136

Gender: Male
Location: Scotland


Re: Benefits and financial support « Reply #605 on: April 05, 2013, 12:44 AM »
Reply

Can anyone provide the quote where he links benefit claims to child murder?

I'd say it's implicit. He's basically saying, "This is the type of person who's on benefits."
IP Logged
DaveH
Satellite Level
**
Posts: 206



Re: Benefits and financial support « Reply #606 on: April 05, 2013, 12:56 AM »
Reply

Tax frauds don't get much publicity
   

They certainly don't get publicity in The Daily Heil (and I wonder if anyone would read it if they knew its history) , the Telegraph, the Times, the Sun, etc. The Tory politicians are not talking about corporate or tax fraud either.

This despite the fact there are bigger problems with fraud.  Of course, the self-employed who under declare their income, for example, are potential Tory voters, whereas people who claim benefits largely are not. And this is the sole reason that people are so hot on benefit fraud. It's how the right wing want people to think.


IP Logged
DaveH
Satellite Level
**
Posts: 206



Re: Benefits and financial support « Reply #607 on: April 05, 2013, 01:00 AM »
Reply

Can anyone provide the quote where he links benefit claims to child murder?

"Philpott is responsible for these absolutely horrendous crimes and these are crimes that have shocked the nation; the courts are responsible for sentencing him.

"But I think there is a question for government and for society about the welfare state - and the taxpayers who pay for the welfare state - subsidising lifestyles like that, and I think that debate needs to be had."


It's so unsubtle it's almost explicit: "subsidising lifestyles like [Philpott's lifestyle]."

Sickening. Cheap. Inhumane.

IP Logged
Sir Panda
Murraymaniac
**********
Posts: 31,156

Gender: Male
Location: Right behind you.


Misunderstood genius.

Re: Benefits and financial support « Reply #608 on: April 05, 2013, 07:23 AM »
Reply

I'd say it's implicit. He's basically saying, "This is the type of person who's on benefits."

I suppose that is your interpretation of things. Mine is slightly different.

It seems like I'm defending George Osborne here which is no hobby of mine, but I just don't see the linkage.

My interpretation of the phrase 'Lifestyles like that' in this context is addressing the rather extreme cases, rather than the general claimant. This was a guy who didn't work, was having children at an incredible rate with two separate women under the same roof, and demanding a bigger council house. It was as far removed an example as you could find.

Is this a reflection of the people on benefits? Absolutely not, it's a grotesque extreme.

Should this provoke a debate? Yes, because putting the whole house fire incident apart, the fact that a lifestyle like that could be funded by the welfare state is staggering, and needs examining.
IP Logged
blueberryhill
Veteran
******
Posts: 9,297



Re: Benefits and financial support « Reply #609 on: April 05, 2013, 07:33 AM »
Reply

Surely the answer to that is to give people a lot of money for the first two, then tail it off so over four you don't get any?
Not to start it yesterday either, children already born should be protected.
IP Logged
Caz
Murraymaniac
**********
Posts: 20,444


I'd like to be the good person my dog thinks I am!

Re: Benefits and financial support « Reply #610 on: April 05, 2013, 08:26 AM »
Reply

I think that's a good idea BBH, but I'd only give for the first two!
IP Logged
Iluvandy
Seed
****
Posts: 3,828

Gender: Female
Location: Scotland


Re: Benefits and financial support « Reply #611 on: April 05, 2013, 09:47 AM »
Reply

I suppose that is your interpretation of things. Mine is slightly different.

It seems like I'm defending George Osborne here which is no hobby of mine, but I just don't see the linkage.

My interpretation of the phrase 'Lifestyles like that' in this context is addressing the rather extreme cases, rather than the general claimant. This was a guy who didn't work, was having children at an incredible rate with two separate women under the same roof, and demanding a bigger council house. It was as far removed an example as you could find.

Is this a reflection of the people on benefits? Absolutely not, it's a grotesque extreme.

Should this provoke a debate? Yes, because putting the whole house fire incident apart, the fact that a lifestyle like that could be funded by the welfare state is staggering, and needs examining.

You may not see the linkage but it is meant for the reactionaries who don't think - they only have knee-jerk reactions and to even mention"Philpott" anywhere close to "Welfare State"  is wrong.   Judging from the smug expression on Osborne's face I would guess he knew exactly what he was doing.   
IP Logged
Masaka
ATP Level
***
Posts: 1,737

Gender: Female
Location: Norfolk UK


Re: Benefits and financial support « Reply #612 on: April 05, 2013, 10:45 AM »
Reply

I am not a fan of Osbourne of the Torys/Labour/LibDems either. I don't think that any of the political parties have come out well out of this.

What I do think has been established is that the Welfare State has got well out of control, and something drastic needs doing about it. Given the way MP's/euro politicians rip off everyone in every country, its not about money as far as I am concerned per say. It is about the fact that the benefits culture condemns many children and families to grinding along at the bottom of the heap. It has made it too easy just to grub along. Philipot and loads of other families are receiving vast sums in benefits. In a lot of cases those vast sums are not being used for the intended purpose. They are supporting a nice, cushy lifestyle for the parents. The children are still going to school dirty and hungry. No - very few of them actively set out to kill or damage their kids, but a hell of a lot of kids get caught up in the collateral damage.
Realistically had those children survived, what path would you have expected them to follow in life? If Philpot and his ilk did not receive more money for every child, would they have bother to have them?

We are in the ridiculous situation whereby children can be used as cash cows, soaking up the states largess. Meanwhile the likes of Hazybear and myself have to do battle to get disabled benefits, and old people in this country are having to chose whether to "eat or heat".

Whether we like it or not living on benefits, has for certain sectors of the community, become a lifestyle choice.  For the good of all this has to change. Many people opt to have a limited number of children, based on their economic state. Those that live off the state are not constrained by the same limitations.
Can you imagine somebody in work, going to their employer and saying "I'm having another child, You have to give me a substantial pay rise and subsidise a bigger house.

I really do thing that a drastic revision of the system might well hurt some children in the short term, but I think it potentially will save an awful lot more in the long term.

When I was a teacher I used to set the Year 7's. having returned to work after a hip replacement. I looked at the names and notes about the children on the list in front if me. I was then able to fill 75% of the places in the bottom set based on that information alone. When cross checked with the SATS scores and reading/spelling tests, I didn't need to alter that. The majority of those children were benefits families.

We need to stop the situation whereby money is handed out without any accountability.

I will now duck and prepare for the flames...!!!
IP Logged
DaveH
Satellite Level
**
Posts: 206



Re: Benefits and financial support « Reply #613 on: April 05, 2013, 11:08 AM »
Reply

I suppose that is your interpretation of things. Mine is slightly different.

It seems like I'm defending George Osborne here which is no hobby of mine, but I just don't see the linkage.


Phillpott -> "I think there is a question for government and for society about the welfare state."

It's not hard to see.

As if there are a number of other potential arsonists receiving benefits.

You don't use a man convicted of manslaughter to remind the taxpayer that there is benefit fraud, unless you want to stir up emotive reactions.

You are naive if you think Osborne wasn't aware what he was doing.
IP Logged
DaveH
Satellite Level
**
Posts: 206



Re: Benefits and financial support « Reply #614 on: April 05, 2013, 11:14 AM »
Reply

If Philpot and his ilk did not receive more money for every child, would they have bother to have them?

What ilk? How many people do you think are like him??
IP Logged
Pages: 1 ... 38 39 40 [41] 42 43 Go Up Reply 
« previous next »