School Dinners and FAT lazy parents!! Grrr
Discussion
martin84 said:
Eccles has a point whether you like it or not. The original point was 'just because you can do something doesnt mean you should, what happened to self respect?' which can easily apply to the bankers. Just because they nailed down contracts saying they'd receive bonus' even for bringing down the bank doesnt mean they had to take them. If they had self respect they could've all waived their bonus and given the taxpayer their money back.
You cannot have one rule for the fat bird and different rules for the bankers. You're essentially saying bankers shouldnt be judged by the 'just because you can doesnt mean you should' standard because they're rich and pay lots of tax.
This is just the kind of ill informed stuff that makes my balls itch, more banker bashing. Yes the banks may have triggered the financial crisis, but yes I see no mention of the people who borrowed irresponsibly, nor those who pissed the money up the wall. Yes there were some bad financial institutions, but generally the whole industry is a massive asset the to the UK. I'm sorry for the fat bird, she is just lazy but I do not see why I should foot the bill for her low aspirations in life, there should be a limit on how much these people cost the public. The damage caused by the banks is bad, but allowing this stuff to go on will only propagate the issue further until we end up like Greece!You cannot have one rule for the fat bird and different rules for the bankers. You're essentially saying bankers shouldnt be judged by the 'just because you can doesnt mean you should' standard because they're rich and pay lots of tax.
Jackleman said:
This is just the kind of ill informed stuff that makes my balls itch, more banker bashing. Yes the banks may have triggered the financial crisis, but yes I see no mention of the people who borrowed irresponsibly, nor those who pissed the money up the wall. Yes there were some bad financial institutions, but generally the whole industry is a massive asset the to the UK. I'm sorry for the fat bird, she is just lazy but I do not see why I should foot the bill for her low aspirations in life, there should be a limit on how much these people cost the public. The damage caused by the banks is bad, but allowing this stuff to go on will only propagate the issue further until we end up like Greece!
Nice speech but would you like to actually respond to my point? I said the original point was 'just because you can get something doesnt mean you should' which can apply to bankers bonuses as well as those choosing to be on benefit. Its the same principle. The bankers were able to get hold of their bonus money for destroying their own bank, but it doesnt mean they had to take it. To quote an earlier poster, what happened to self respect?Why should the fat bird be judged by different standards on the same moralistic point? Thats my question. Please come up with a better answer than 'Financial services is vital to the UK economy' because translated into English that means people dont have to maintain this moral standard if they pay lots of tax. Please come up with something better.
The thing is though why would the long term unemployed BE looking for minimum wage jobs? The length of time some of these people have been just sat on their arses at home they could have been retraining, learning skills that would get them jobs above the minimum wage. The simple fact is that a lot of them would much rather do nothing and get enough from the state in hand-outs than better themselves by putting a bit of effort in.
Dixie68 said:
The thing is though why would the long term unemployed BE looking for minimum wage jobs? The length of time some of these people have been just sat on their arses at home they could have been retraining, learning skills that would get them jobs above the minimum wage. The simple fact is that a lot of them would much rather do nothing and get enough from the state in hand-outs than better themselves by putting a bit of effort in.
You raise a good point and its one I always try to put to anybody who says 'I'm better off on benefits, why bother working for the minimum wage?' I try and tell them that living on benefits means their income is fixed which means they'll never do any better in life, if you go to work you might earn minimum wage today but in five years you could be on a lot more.That doesn't change the fact that here and now for people who've been out of work for many years they will be looking for minimum wage jobs, unless they have excellent qualifications or a staggeringly good back catalogue of work history.
martin84 said:
Jackleman said:
woman who was morbidly obese saying she could not go to work as she would not get her benefits, so she does not want to work
I saw it earlier and what she actually said was she wants to go back to work but its not financially viable. Trust PH to misrepresent somebodies words. This is a major problem that people can end up worse off by going to work. Simpletons would say 'just cut the benefits' but cutting benefits doesnt mean there's any more jobs out there. Having worked in a Job Centre perhaps I know more about the technicalities of how benefits work than most and its been obvious from the start that over simplification of the system will result in problems like this. The 'cliff edge' effect as it were. Personally I think with the billions we throw at education all meals should be free for all students, but there you go.
For whom?
Let's talk instead about REAL benefits, the benefits of having a job:
- self esteem - you contribute to society
- exercise (not to be underestimated in this case) - you get of your lard arse
But of course we live in times where there is a TV series called "Shameless". Say's it all realy.
Do they make that choice? Or does one poor decision early on set them up for life?
Oli.Morals and standards are fine if you can afford them, food on the table and a roof over your head will always win.
zcacogp said:
Countdown said:
She is living off other people. Just because you can do something doesn't necessarily mean you should. What happened to pride and self-respect ?
EXACTLY this. Spot on Countdown. Oli.
CBR JGWRR said:
Just start the whole system all over again.
One benefit (With Disabilities etc still in) worth Just not quite comfortable to live off, but can live off it.
E.g. just enough to survive, varying with area.
Want any more, you work for it.
After ten years, all payments stop. If you haven't got yourself going after ten years, tough.
Yeah....start work at 16, work damn hard for 20 yrs, then at 36 you suffer a stroke or some other traumatic head injury, so you can't walk or talk or look after yourself...the state gives you enough to survive for 10 yrs, then tough, you're on your own. You've had 10 yrs to sort yourself out, you lazy sponger. One benefit (With Disabilities etc still in) worth Just not quite comfortable to live off, but can live off it.
E.g. just enough to survive, varying with area.
Want any more, you work for it.
After ten years, all payments stop. If you haven't got yourself going after ten years, tough.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Yeah....start work at 16, work damn hard for 20 yrs, then at 36 you suffer a stroke or some other traumatic head injury, so you can't walk or talk or look after yourself...the state gives you enough to survive for 10 yrs, then tough, you're on your own. You've had 10 yrs to sort yourself out, you lazy sponger.
Drama Queen. I've been working since I was 16 in high-stress, dangerous jobs and I'm 44 and not dead. Your attitude is why we're in this bloody mess.TwigtheWonderkid said:
Yeah....start work at 16, work damn hard for 20 yrs, then at 36 you suffer a stroke or some other traumatic head injury, so you can't walk or talk or look after yourself...the state gives you enough to survive for 10 yrs, then tough, you're on your own. You've had 10 yrs to sort yourself out, you lazy sponger.
There IS a difference between those who cannot work and those who CHOOSE not to work because they are better off on benefits.MR Kirbyz said:
Sandwiches are much cheaper than school dinners
Healthier too! not that she is concerned about that
Disagree about the healthier comment, most pack up is carb led - school dinners for my lad is £2.10 per day (for a hot two course lunch)... Healthier too! not that she is concerned about that
Try and put a filling & nutritious pack-up together for £2.10 a day and see how far you get...
Countdown said:
There IS a difference between those who cannot work and those who CHOOSE not to work because they are better off on benefits.
The post he was replying to suggested a system that doesn't differentiate between those unable and those unwilling. A 10 year maximum limit for both.chris.mapey said:
Disagree about the healthier comment, most pack up is carb led - school dinners for my lad is £2.10 per day (for a hot two course lunch)...
That's a bargain! My sons school are charging £1/day I believe. He has it at a discounted rate because he eats a maximum of 5 teaspoons of food!Robb F said:
Don't worry chaps, one clever news reader has found the answer
I agree with that - it's ridiculous that many people working full time still need to be paid benefits of one sort or another. Tax-payers are subsidising their employer.Genius said:
There is a very easy way to do this, pay people enough money so they don't have to claim benefits in order to survive.
Outstanding work Einstein. If there was a positive difference between life on benefits and life in employment then people would seek to work. The problem in the UK is that life for people at the bottom of the ladder is pretty s
t either way round.VictorMeldrew said:
Let's talk instead about REAL benefits, the benefits of having a job:
Stop kidding yourself mate. The only REAL benefit of working is earning money. People to go to work to get paid, not to gain self esteem or 'contribute to society' or any other nonsense like that.- self esteem - you contribute to society
- exercise (not to be underestimated in this case) - you get of your lard arse
TwigtheWonderkid said:
CBR JGWRR said:
Just start the whole system all over again.
One benefit (With Disabilities etc still in) worth Just not quite comfortable to live off, but can live off it.
E.g. just enough to survive, varying with area.
Want any more, you work for it.
After ten years, all payments stop. If you haven't got yourself going after ten years, tough.
Yeah....start work at 16, work damn hard for 20 yrs, then at 36 you suffer a stroke or some other traumatic head injury, so you can't walk or talk or look after yourself...the state gives you enough to survive for 10 yrs, then tough, you're on your own. You've had 10 yrs to sort yourself out, you lazy sponger. One benefit (With Disabilities etc still in) worth Just not quite comfortable to live off, but can live off it.
E.g. just enough to survive, varying with area.
Want any more, you work for it.
After ten years, all payments stop. If you haven't got yourself going after ten years, tough.
If you CAN'T work, the benefits are still in place. (Emphasis on the CAN'T bit.)
martin84 said:
VictorMeldrew said:
Let's talk instead about REAL benefits, the benefits of having a job:
Stop kidding yourself mate. The only REAL benefit of working is earning money. People to go to work to get paid, not to gain self esteem or 'contribute to society' or any other nonsense like that.- self esteem - you contribute to society
- exercise (not to be underestimated in this case) - you get of your lard arse
martin84 said:
Stop kidding yourself mate. The only REAL benefit of working is earning money. People to go to work to get paid, not to gain self esteem or 'contribute to society' or any other nonsense like that.
I can only speak for myself but I disagree. I claimed benefits for a period of weeks after leaving Uni. I felt ashamed of myself. It was like having a leper sign around my neck. And yes, I do feel good about the taxes I pay. They have contributed (albeit in a very small way) towards giving my family a much better quality of life than they would have had in most other places around the world.If a person needs to live off the hard work of others in the Community (through no fault of their own) it's unfortunate. If a person chooses to do so because they are economically better off then (IMO) that's shameful. The problem is that in recent generations the stigma of living off the State seems to have become less and less.
martin84 said:
VictorMeldrew said:
Let's talk instead about REAL benefits, the benefits of having a job:
Stop kidding yourself mate. The only REAL benefit of working is earning money. People to go to work to get paid, not to gain self esteem or 'contribute to society' or any other nonsense like that.- self esteem - you contribute to society
- exercise (not to be underestimated in this case) - you get of your lard arse
SBDJ said:
CBR JGWRR said:
Read the post.
If you CAN'T work, the benefits are still in place. (Emphasis on the CAN'T bit.)
Your post says one payment including disability.If you CAN'T work, the benefits are still in place. (Emphasis on the CAN'T bit.)
It then says after 10 years payments stop.
Didn't see anything about people who can't work?
Little bit of an expansion - things like disability/unable to work/others are tested, not just thrown in with the main one.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff