Where can they cut back on money???

[DonkeyApple]

Raymond, a former educational software writer, has been jobless since 2001.

So, Raymond who is clearly educated to the standard of being able to write software suitable for educational purposes has not bothered to work since 2001.

Raymond needs a fking hard slap.

Every morning Raymond has to turn up at a special council run centre where he is slapped in the face repeatedly. He will be slapped until he decides that he will actually go and get some form of job to provide for his family.

[Asterix]

qube_TA said:

So the wife can't work and his work dried up 10 years ago (but can't retrain), yet in the middle of all that they decided to have an extra child.

My initial reaction as well - these muppets don't do themselves any favours at all. There's loads where they could cut back and they have many a luxury hard working people can't afford.

[Dracoro]

family said:

Mobiles £32
'My wife and I have mobile phones, and so do all of the teenage children. You try telling teenagers they're going to have to do without their mobiles and there'll be hell to pay.'

FFS, grow up you pathetic man.



I really shouldn't read these articles, it does me no good.

[robuk]

It also hides the benefit given in subsidised rent.

£300pm at the moment is what is paid, from benefits. However, it reads that the going rate could be around £800-900!

So a double subsidy.

[DonkeyApple]

Asterix said:

qube_TA said:

So the wife can't work and his work dried up 10 years ago (but can't retrain), yet in the middle of all that they decided to have an extra child.

My initial reaction as well - these muppets don't do themselves any favours at all. There's loads where they could cut back and they have many a luxury hard working people can't afford.

The example does appear to show that the £26k cap is far too high.

There's quite a bit of spend that could be cut back on in the data presented.

The cap ought to be at a level so that people can only just exist so they are incentivised to work.

At the current proposed level Raymond will still be able to not work.

Also, why is he getting Jobseekers' Allowance? It's inconcievable that an educated man such as Raymond could not have worked in the last 11 years.

[0a]

There was a box asking for feedback and comments earlier which has now been removed!

[rover 623gsi]

To be fair £240 a week to feed eight people isn’t that much. It’s only £30 per person. Clearly, however, even on a relatively small income there are some areas where they can cut back – booze being the obvious one. I wouldn’t led my kids go without food or heating just so I could have a few largers.

[nelly1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OA9t61PuiDc&fea...

[Otispunkmeyer]

cut out the sky TV... whats wrong with freeview? Sky's litterally full of ste and the only channels worth a look are the ones you get for free anyway

cut the fags and the booze

phone and internet.... why bother with the phone if you have mobiles? But its a small cost and sometimes you do need to have a land line. Mobiles... again I think useful, but of course need to shop round for the best deals.

Heating and Leccy... £38 a week? I dont even spend that a month... my G&E comes to £25 a month with nPower... What the hell are they doing?

Going to the pub.... hard one IMO, I wouldnt like to stop anyone socialisng, its a human thing, the majority of us need to do it. However, turning tax payer benefit money into piss is a little off.

[zcacogp]

DonkeyApple said:

Raymond, a former educational software writer, has been jobless since 2001.

So, Raymond who is clearly educated to the standard of being able to write software suitable for educational purposes has not bothered to work since 2001.

Raymond needs a fking hard slap.

Raymond is also 45.

He has therefore been unemployed since the age of 34.

The notion that someone of age 34 can't retrain for a job is utter bks.

Asking the question "Where can they cut back on money" is at the root of the problem (no offence intended to the OP.) The notion isn't that they should carry on sponging off the state, the notion is that they go out and get a fu king job. And if telling them that they can't have four pints in the local every friday, smoke themselves silly and have mobile phones for their kids is enough to make their lives so miserable that they need to get a job then bring on those lovely cuts!


Oli.

[joe_90]

This thread is going better than expected

my fav:

freeloader said:

'We get the Sky Movies package because we're stuck in the house all week - otherwise we wouldn't have any entertainment.'

well, maybe use that time to do something constructive, train/learn/play/motivate/play with the kids.

And smokes 200 fags a week, and 24 +4pints) a week..

Any computer program can easily retrain in a new language in a few weeks if motivated to do so. Lazy chunt.

Edited by joe_90 on Wednesday 1st February 14:50

[Camoradi]

The really enlightening fact here is the low rent of £76 a week

We've been told in the media by the hand wringers that all the people claiming over £26,000 are living in London in expensive rented property, so they can't possibly reduce their expenditure, but these "people" (I'm being kind here) manage to claim £30k p/a on the lowest rent imaginable.

They enjoy luxuries which my partner and I, both working full time, do not. It gives me a real warm feeling inside, having just paid last years tax, knowing that they are enjoying their cheap lager and Lambert and Butlers

Get it sorted Cameron, in fact make it £20k per annum

[rover 623gsi]

Otispunkmeyer said:

Heating and Leccy... £38 a week? I dont even spend that a month... my G&E comes to £25 a month with nPower... What the hell are they doing?

I don't think £150 a month is excessive for a family of eight - especially considering they proably spend propotionally more time at home compared to a working family. Equally, their council house is likely to be quite old and expensive to heat. Also, given their circumstances they may not be able to get the best deals.

Having said that, I think there coule be some saving if they wer able to shop around.

me - family of four in a 3-bed semi and pay £70 a month for G+E with British Gas.

[0a]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

This really irritates me. People may read the text of the article and the headline and think "poor them" when the truth is they spend almost half their money on luxury items.

[rover 623gsi]

Camoradi said:

The really enlightening fact here is the low rent of £76 a week

We've been told in the media by the hand wringers that all the people claiming over £26,000 are living in London in expensive rented property, so they can't possibly reduce their expenditure, but these "people" (I'm being kind here) manage to claim £30k p/a on the lowest rent imaginable.

They enjoy luxuries which my partner and I, both working full time, do not. It gives me a real warm feeling inside, having just paid last years tax, knowing that they are enjoying their cheap lager and Lambert and Butlers

Get it sorted Cameron, in fact make it £20k per annum

families of eight are very rare

the people that are going to suffer are those renting in London and larger families elsewhere

[DonkeyApple]

rover 623gsi said:

Otispunkmeyer said:

Heating and Leccy... £38 a week? I dont even spend that a month... my G&E comes to £25 a month with nPower... What the hell are they doing?

I don't think £150 a month is excessive for a family of eight - especially considering they proably spend propotionally more time at home compared to a working family. Equally, their council house is likely to be quite old and expensive to heat. Also, given their circumstances they may not be able to get the best deals.

Having said that, I think there coule be some saving if they wer able to shop around.

me - family of four in a 3-bed semi and pay £70 a month for G+E with British Gas.

The food bill thing of a grand a month is pretty shocking.

Why doesn't the Govt tie up with a TV chef to produce a cook book pamflet that teaches people how to feed a family perfectly well on fk all and then give them food stamps that allow them to eat properly.

I'm certainly tired of seeing these monkeys filling up their trolleys with Coke and ready meals.

[onyx39]

spitfire-ian said:

With the fags...

said:

On the cigarettes, my wife tried to give up, but she missed one appointment on the course and they threw her off it.'

So basically he's saying it's not her fault she's spending £50 a week

because she was so busy doing what exactly??

[rover 623gsi]

There are definitely areas where this family could cut back, but I really don’t think that £240 a week on food for eight people is over the top.

[mxspyder]

DonkeyApple said:

Raymond, a former educational software writer, has been jobless since 2001.

Raymond needs a fking hard slap.

I earn less after tax than they do, I pay the mortgage on a 4 bed house, feed three of us, fuel the cars and work fking hard.

The end result is I hardly ever go to the pub, I don't smoke (not that money has anything to do with it, but I couldn't afford to even if I was stupid enough). The worst bit is, I can't justify spending £30 a month on Sky to get the F1 next season

Edited to Add:

Lazy Family said:

...Katherine suffers from bipolar disorder with an anxiety disorder

So she gets grumpy and scared, welcome to the real world - now get a fking job and you wont have time to be either!

Edited by mxspyder on Wednesday 1st February 15:13

Edited by mxspyder on Wednesday 1st February 15:20

[0a]

rover 623gsi said:

There are definitely areas where this family could cut back, but I really don’t think that £240 a week on food for eight people is over the top.

It is when you claim you have to chose between eating and heating, and it's miles higher than it needs to be to eat healthy tasty food. They claim they are eating value food but this isn't the case if they are spending this much.