ChatterBank0 min ago
Living off benefits
31 Answers
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-114091 2/Benefits-mother-living-unemployed-boyfriend- pregnant-17--triplets.html
She is receiving benefits of �1,126 a month, which includes rent, child benefit and family tax credit. Her mother Rachel Briggs, 40, who has six children, admitted she was disappointed her daughter was pregnant again but has vowed to support her.
Excuse me I think the tax payers are already supporting her, to the tune of almost �260 per week.
She split up with Jaden's father not long after the baby's birth and he does not pay any maintenance.
How does he get away with paying no maintenance?
Miss Robbins admitted that, although she and Mr Thomas did not want a baby, they had not been using contraception. She said: 'It just happened.'
Of course it will 'just happen' if you don't use any contraception.
And she joked: 'I've only got 15 years then they'll be doing what I've been doing - they'll go out and I'll stay in and look after their kids.'
That will be another 4 living off the state.
Mr Thomas said "Sian wants me to be at home with her until the babies are older, so I'll be signing on."
Now that is a surprise.
She is receiving benefits of �1,126 a month, which includes rent, child benefit and family tax credit. Her mother Rachel Briggs, 40, who has six children, admitted she was disappointed her daughter was pregnant again but has vowed to support her.
Excuse me I think the tax payers are already supporting her, to the tune of almost �260 per week.
She split up with Jaden's father not long after the baby's birth and he does not pay any maintenance.
How does he get away with paying no maintenance?
Miss Robbins admitted that, although she and Mr Thomas did not want a baby, they had not been using contraception. She said: 'It just happened.'
Of course it will 'just happen' if you don't use any contraception.
And she joked: 'I've only got 15 years then they'll be doing what I've been doing - they'll go out and I'll stay in and look after their kids.'
That will be another 4 living off the state.
Mr Thomas said "Sian wants me to be at home with her until the babies are older, so I'll be signing on."
Now that is a surprise.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Half of the younger generation around me are living in houses that have been sold to council or other private associations. Keep having more children so as they don,t have to work. They have better things than I have brand new large tv,s new carpets all mod cons. cars. I think I have gone wrong somewhere oh I know what it is I work and pay taxes.
Probably a bit controversial but.....
Why should they work doing menial under paid jobs when eastern europeans are queing up to do it.
If we stopped bringing in workers from abroad the government would have to force them to get off their fat, idle arses and work instead of sitting at home all day watching Jeremy Kyle and procreating.
Why should they work doing menial under paid jobs when eastern europeans are queing up to do it.
If we stopped bringing in workers from abroad the government would have to force them to get off their fat, idle arses and work instead of sitting at home all day watching Jeremy Kyle and procreating.
Sorry debbz, but whilst your sentiments are to be applauded, you have the argument the wrong way round.
They were not forced to work before the Eastern Europeans came here. We were told the Eastern European imports were necessary to fill labour shortages in this country. As I have argued many times before, it is the economics of the madhouse to import foreign labour (which actually results in little benefit to this country) when there are vast numbers of unemployed people sitting around doing nothing.
I heard a professor of Social Claptrap (or something like that) on Radio 4 this morning. His hypothesis explained that large numbers of people were unable to find work in the early 1980s because of �Thatcherism� (as he quaintly called it). So they never worked. These people had children who were unable to find work in the mid 1990s because of the slump then. So they never worked. Their children are now coming up to working age. They will have difficulty finding jobs so � guess what � it is likely that they will never work.
The fact that between these periods of gloom when they were born there has been, in the words of our Supreme Leader, �unprecedented growth� seemed to have escaped the good professor. Something else he missed was that "career unemployed" are of all ages, not just 45, 30 and 16.
I will say it once again � this country will never prosper whilst it is paying huge numbers of people to loaf around all day. Nor will it do so if we insist on treating single mothers as if some tragic disease has overcome them and we must shower them with gifts and money. The bill for benefits exceeds the entire Income Tax revenue. Until this is properly addressed (and I do not mean by increasing the Income Tax take) it will perpetuate in the same way that the professor has noticed it has up to now.
They were not forced to work before the Eastern Europeans came here. We were told the Eastern European imports were necessary to fill labour shortages in this country. As I have argued many times before, it is the economics of the madhouse to import foreign labour (which actually results in little benefit to this country) when there are vast numbers of unemployed people sitting around doing nothing.
I heard a professor of Social Claptrap (or something like that) on Radio 4 this morning. His hypothesis explained that large numbers of people were unable to find work in the early 1980s because of �Thatcherism� (as he quaintly called it). So they never worked. These people had children who were unable to find work in the mid 1990s because of the slump then. So they never worked. Their children are now coming up to working age. They will have difficulty finding jobs so � guess what � it is likely that they will never work.
The fact that between these periods of gloom when they were born there has been, in the words of our Supreme Leader, �unprecedented growth� seemed to have escaped the good professor. Something else he missed was that "career unemployed" are of all ages, not just 45, 30 and 16.
I will say it once again � this country will never prosper whilst it is paying huge numbers of people to loaf around all day. Nor will it do so if we insist on treating single mothers as if some tragic disease has overcome them and we must shower them with gifts and money. The bill for benefits exceeds the entire Income Tax revenue. Until this is properly addressed (and I do not mean by increasing the Income Tax take) it will perpetuate in the same way that the professor has noticed it has up to now.
It totally infuriates me.
I am single, with an average paid job (that I have worked my way up from to bottom to get - something anyone can do). I get no benefits at all, no reduction on my water, gas or electric. I get 25% discount on my Council tax (Whoopty doo).
I too am surround by people who spew out children, would never ever contemplate getting a job, but they are living in a house that has no problems e.g damp, broken fencing etc cause the council makes sure their premises are tip top and I can't afford any repairs.
They also have big screen plasma/lcd tvs and all the latests clothes and mod cons, which again, I can't afford.
I understand that some people are in situations where this may be the only option (for whatever reason) but its the people who CHOOSE to live off tax payers money 'cause they don't like the alternative - work!. And there are way too many in the latter category, and more and more seem to think it is the way to go.
AAAARGH!!!!
I am single, with an average paid job (that I have worked my way up from to bottom to get - something anyone can do). I get no benefits at all, no reduction on my water, gas or electric. I get 25% discount on my Council tax (Whoopty doo).
I too am surround by people who spew out children, would never ever contemplate getting a job, but they are living in a house that has no problems e.g damp, broken fencing etc cause the council makes sure their premises are tip top and I can't afford any repairs.
They also have big screen plasma/lcd tvs and all the latests clothes and mod cons, which again, I can't afford.
I understand that some people are in situations where this may be the only option (for whatever reason) but its the people who CHOOSE to live off tax payers money 'cause they don't like the alternative - work!. And there are way too many in the latter category, and more and more seem to think it is the way to go.
AAAARGH!!!!
while the government allows it it will continue.
we will soon have a new generation of young adults who see no harm in doing exactly as their parents did.
Just take a look at how many posts there are in Law asking about getting a bigger house when they have more kids.
I wish my income went up to cover a larger houser if i had more children!
we will soon have a new generation of young adults who see no harm in doing exactly as their parents did.
Just take a look at how many posts there are in Law asking about getting a bigger house when they have more kids.
I wish my income went up to cover a larger houser if i had more children!
It's not good, but I'd rather my taxes put food in a child's mouth than have it go on MP's expenses and fund lavish meals when they go off on their jaunts.
However, to the question in hand, I know of an amazing example of playing the system. A woman in her late 40's had PND, which's lasted for 9 years so far. This prevented her from working, yet doesn't stop her from selling at car boots sales whenever she can (average of �100 clear per time). She receives some type of incapacity benefit, yet also claims a carer's allowance for her elderly mother who lived with her - plus money for herself which never goes into any carer's hands. She receives full Council Tax allowance as well. Her young daughter's the brightest little thing you could imagine, but has now "developed" AS, which may, or not be true, but allows the mother to claim extra money for her, plus child benefit. The grandmother recently moved into a Council-owned bungalow, but the daughter still picks up the carer's allowance for her. She lives in her own 5-bed house, and recently bought herself a sports car. When asked how she could afford it, the woman replied: "It's hard. I only get �1400 a month".........
Bearing in mind she just has the one child, how on earth does she manage it?
However, to the question in hand, I know of an amazing example of playing the system. A woman in her late 40's had PND, which's lasted for 9 years so far. This prevented her from working, yet doesn't stop her from selling at car boots sales whenever she can (average of �100 clear per time). She receives some type of incapacity benefit, yet also claims a carer's allowance for her elderly mother who lived with her - plus money for herself which never goes into any carer's hands. She receives full Council Tax allowance as well. Her young daughter's the brightest little thing you could imagine, but has now "developed" AS, which may, or not be true, but allows the mother to claim extra money for her, plus child benefit. The grandmother recently moved into a Council-owned bungalow, but the daughter still picks up the carer's allowance for her. She lives in her own 5-bed house, and recently bought herself a sports car. When asked how she could afford it, the woman replied: "It's hard. I only get �1400 a month".........
Bearing in mind she just has the one child, how on earth does she manage it?
Yes, im, and that �1400 (which a working person would have to earn over �20,000 pa to take home) is all pocket money. Out of that she has to pay for nothing other than food, clothes, and gas/electricity (for which she probably enjoys a �social tariff�).
As has been said, the lunatics are running the asylum and those outside are paying very dearly for it.
I travel abroad quite a lot and chat to many people. All are absolutely astounded when I explain to them some of the things that go on here. We are the laughing stock of the world.
As has been said, the lunatics are running the asylum and those outside are paying very dearly for it.
I travel abroad quite a lot and chat to many people. All are absolutely astounded when I explain to them some of the things that go on here. We are the laughing stock of the world.
I've just gone through a grilling with the Council for Council Tax Benefit. They wanted to see all evidence of my income including bank statements. Now I do not mind that they see on the statements what goes in (it is pensions only) but I had to explain what a �10 was for. It was for a competition (free, I might add) I entered and I was sent a �10 cheque. It makes my blood boil when I see what other people seem to be getting away with. My total income is not even half what some get, even if they have just one child. Yet I still have to pay for everything they do. Yet I can hold my head up hight knowing I do not cheat at all.
"Her young daughter's the brightest little thing you could imagine, but has now "developed" AS, which may, or not be true, but allows the mother to claim extra money for her"
Doctors dont deal out diagnosis' willy nilly ice, her daughter must have fitted the criteria to be able to claim the extra money, I have seen a lot of children with some quite obvious spectrum who do not fit the triad of impairments therefore get a lesser diagnosis which does not entitle then to financial assistance
( It's not good, but I'd rather my taxes put food in a child's mouth than have it go on MP's expenses and fund lavish meals when they go off on their jaunts.)
and in reality
it's not good , but i'd rather my taxes put beer and cigs in a mums mouth than have it go on . etc, etc,etc
::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
and in reality
it's not good , but i'd rather my taxes put beer and cigs in a mums mouth than have it go on . etc, etc,etc
::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Whats the alternative?
Cut their benefits?
two things will happen- we'll let people worse off than the rest of us become even more deprived
or worse they turn to crime which will cost society a lot more anyway!
please eplain in all this vitriol what your alternative is?
how do we stop this attitude?
Cut their benefits?
two things will happen- we'll let people worse off than the rest of us become even more deprived
or worse they turn to crime which will cost society a lot more anyway!
please eplain in all this vitriol what your alternative is?
how do we stop this attitude?
1. We provide hostels for single mothers and their children, not free council flats and houses.
2. We fix benefits at subsistence level, insufficient to buy designer clothes, mobile phones and "big ticket" electrical items.
3. Benefits remain at the level they are provided when first claimed (i.e. more children does not mean more benefits, in the same way that more children does not equal more pay for working folk).
4. Benefits become unavailable in areas where suitable vacancies are evident.
I could go on but I haven't the time or inclination as I imagine you will not agree with me.
2. We fix benefits at subsistence level, insufficient to buy designer clothes, mobile phones and "big ticket" electrical items.
3. Benefits remain at the level they are provided when first claimed (i.e. more children does not mean more benefits, in the same way that more children does not equal more pay for working folk).
4. Benefits become unavailable in areas where suitable vacancies are evident.
I could go on but I haven't the time or inclination as I imagine you will not agree with me.
The alternative is pegging benefits to just below the national minimum wage.
All the time we have the absurd situation whereby people can earn more by sitting on their lazy backsides than working, there will always, always, be people who will be happy to ponce off of those of us that are prepared to schelp our sorry arses on to the 7.56am to London Bridge (or wherever).
They are all workshy, sponging, poncing, lazy wastes of oxygen (to clarify, I am referring to those who choose<:i> not to work, not those who can't work).
All the time we have the absurd situation whereby people can earn more by sitting on their lazy backsides than working, there will always, always, be people who will be happy to ponce off of those of us that are prepared to schelp our sorry arses on to the 7.56am to London Bridge (or wherever).
They are all workshy, sponging, poncing, lazy wastes of oxygen (to clarify, I am referring to those who choose<:i> not to work, not those who can't work).
Latest Posts
ChatterBank0 min ago
News1 min ago
ChatterBank6 mins ago
Death Of Three Young Ladies Backpacking...
News19 mins ago
