Slavery "Work for Your Benefit"

[kurvaface]

Slavery is working for nothing.

 

Jobseekers allowance etc, although next to nothing is not actually nothing.

 

Never having had the benefit of the benefits system (Although I contribute to it by way of taxes), I cannot imagine sitting on my backside doing nothing whilst being given benefits.

 

As an employer, I can also tell you that for anyone who genuinely wants a job, they are there for the taking.

 

The benefits system really should only support those in need and anyone who is taking their "wage" without putting something back is taking from those in real need and the rest of us who would prefer to see our hard earned money being used well.

[RaeUK]

I cannot imagine sitting on my backside doing nothing whilst being given benefits...

 

The benefits system really should only support those in need and anyone who is taking their "wage" without putting something back is taking from those in real need and the rest of us who would prefer to see our hard earned money being used well.

 

Thanks kurva for that post. It allows me to illustrate again the problem we sometimes find on forums. The vast majority of us who post here - if not all - fall into the second part of the quote. And would give anything not to be there. We'd like to work and get off the benefits and introduce those long forgotten creature comforts. Such as Tesco Finest instead of Tesco Value...

Whilst we're not able to work per se, many of us find other ways of repaying society for looking after us. I'll use Honeybees tireless greeting and comforting here as an example.

Unfortunately, we are very sensitive to the fact that many people lump us unfairly into the first part of the quote.

Which is why when seriousfred posted a short note that appeared to do just that he was jumped on from all sides and treated with suspicion thereafter. Sorry fred.

 

Best wishes

Rae

[honeybee13]

'Slavery is working for nothing.

 

Jobseekers allowance etc, although next to nothing is not actually nothing.'

 

Is it forced labour perhaps? HB

[Allwood]

Makes me sick! To think someone is so poorly treated in old age without any dignity or respect.

 

When I was young I was always told to respect my elders, I didnt agree with it all the time but I did it..and it should be pushed on todays youth. Getting onto the tube and little s**ts wont stand up and give an elderly person a seat...to busy listening to the iPod with the hoodie on and the jeans around the ankles. Arrrhhh I get mad.

 

Ok off topic I know. In the case you listed, this is where individual assesment should take place. She needs help...The state should sell the property and use the money to fund her final years with dignity and stuff the kids!

 

Oh by the way Im still young before everyone thinks I should be eating my soup through a straw. Im only 35

 

It is not just elderly people that these selfish people do not consider it is disable people as well, in fact, there has been a lot of disable people murdered after lots of harassment by their tormentors and the police also knew of it but of course they did not do anything about it. It was no the bbc new recently about people complaining about disable people using mobile wheel chairs. How could anyone complain about people that could not walk….

 

Regarding the individual assessment that was not done as the person in question was transferred to the care home from hospital because her s**t of family did not want her home as they lived next door to her. Most of her possessions were taken by her lovely family.

 

There are different laws concerning care for elderly in the British Isle and her home will probably will have to be sold but at present the care home is taking around £40k from pensions that her husband had work for over the lives. The £40k is paid yearly for her care or should I say non care. There is barely enough staff to give any individual attention to patients in these home. These elderly and disabled people are lumped in together regardless of their conditions. Elderly people are seen as cash cows to these greedy care home owners. These owners do not even have to have a licensed to open a care home.

 

Very few medical people/GP or consultants are aware of all condition and it is only trail and error that they make a diagnosis. My point was these medical people are not interested in people with disability or elderly people as they are classed in the country as third class citizens.

 

All resources are geared towards children, they are well looked after now and so it should be the case….however there was that case recently about baby P, he was seen by a GP a couple of days before he died. That GP failed to diagnose that he had many injuries and a broken back. The head of the social services department that lost her job is taking her case to court to see if she will be able to get her job back, so we know where her concerned is for.

 

kervaface, well you are the lucky one, not to have sit on your backside due to illness, but you should not crow as being disable is not life style choice it can happen to anyone no one knows what is around the corner for them.

 

You say you are an employer, how many disabled people do you employ and what is your policy on age discrimination, also are flexible regarding letting your employees work flexible hrs if they have to care for a disable person.

 

Would you be willing to train someone in your organization for a job, people do not want to live on pittance if they can at all work. I still work part time and this is good as it get me out of my home environment,which is good for the soul and spirit, but there is a lot of discrimination in the workplace today dog eat dog attitude , which is not been dealt with by employers or governments because I feel that these organization wants to keep their staff in fear of loosing jobs and income. Also its keeps them in their place and they can get their pound of flesh out of them. My employer is a very big organization many branches throughout the UK. I can assure you sometime my workplace is not a nice place to be regardless of being able to leave your home environment. :confused:

Edited May 13, 2010 by Allwood

[PriorityOne]

Without tackling this underlying malaise then having a benefits system merely serves as a tool for politicians to control the masses with. And therefore it fails to efficiently and truly serve the purpose it was originally designed for and only deepens the long term social issues for all in society.

 

Totally agree that it's social control. I'm sure it wasn't intended to be way back in 1945, but it is now because of the difficulty in getting a living wage and a permanent job, as opposed to seasonal/contractual work.

 

So in one political master stroke; unemployed (but not for Unemployment statistics as they are now on training allowances) scroungers now work for benefits which the public love, employers have an ultra cheep and unlimited labour pool and no liability (e.g. wages, benefits and pensions) and the government looks good on all sides.

 

This kind of thing has been going on for years.... remember the YTS in the 1980s that effectively cut young people out of the unemployment stats? The official figures are based upon those claiming JSA (previously Unemployment Benefit).... which means that those on Income Support and ESA are not classed as unemployed. The real figure is probably nearer 8 million, if the truth were known.

 

In additon, you will be competing against EU Nationals from certain countries that are prepared to work at the minimum or a lower wage therefore making the field more competitive for an employer.

 

Hmmm... and for as long as this continues, our chances of being offered a living wage by UK standards grows more and more remote.

 

The future is very bleak indeed....

Edited May 13, 2010 by PriorityOne

[ANDYANDFLO]

no, here is the real maths:

 

more people who could actually work if they got off their ar$es but have become permanently reliant on benefits = less money for those who really need the benefits and provision of good school and health services for everyone in this country.

There are always two sides to any argument and I would like to think that I weigh both up when raising issue.

 

Take the first, a couple aged 60 who have had a good life, paid off all but £100,000 of their mortgage, have savings of £10,000 in the bank and decided to enjoy their income and not save for any pension. What do they get - Guaranteed Pension Credit & Savings Credit in excess of £200 per week. In addition, the mortgage interest is paid and they have no Council Tax to pay. To my way of reckoning that comes to approx £385pw. What would you have to earn to have that left after all work expenses? So why not retire early and let the State pay. Of course thay could work - whether they should is another matter!!

 

On the other hand we have people who are genuinely sick and/or unable to hold down a job. Should the State provide for them and expect nothing in return - of course it should, most would want to work if given half a chance. - there by the grace of God go I!!!!

 

The way I see it is that yes those that CHOOSE not to work but could SHOULD be penalised, the savings should then be shared with those that don't have that option!!! Why on earth are we looking after people over 60+ who are neither ill nor unemployable, just because they choose to take life easy and believe that they have given enough to society. My Grandfather worked 12 days 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year as a farmer right up until his death at 75. Why ? because he loved his work and knew he still had responsibilities!!!

[RaeUK]

I don't want to pick up on any one persons posts. But can I just say that all this 'life on benefits is a bed of roses' malarky is beginning to irritate? It isn't.

I've had to accept the kindness of the taxpayer for the last year and half. Whilst I appreciate it and understand it is just a safety net, it really does not provide a quality of life.

Don't get me wrong, I am gratefull and appreciative. But let us get one thing straight. Anyone who chooses to live on benefits and can easily negotiate financially from monday to sunday are doing something very dodgy indeed. No question.

I get ESA at the assessment rate, full HB and CT. I can rarely afford clothing and rely on the charity of friends. Luckily I don't like TV so I don't have to worry about Sky or the suchlike. [instead, I worry about how the heck I can buy a TV licence for the few hours use I get out of the old moving picture machine...]

I can't even afford the fuel to visit my elderly stepmother 60 miles away. And how many times did I have to turn my heating off in the winter? Oh, a life on benefits is a life led high on the hog indeed!

Get real people and stop believing everything you read in the press.

Rae

[ANDYANDFLO]

I don't want to pick up on any one persons posts. But can I just say that all this 'life on benefits is a bed of roses' malarky is beginning to irritate? It isn't.

I've had to accept the kindness of the taxpayer for the last year and half. Whilst I appreciate it and understand it is just a safety net, it really does not provide a quality of life.

Don't get me wrong, I am gratefull and appreciative. But let us get one thing straight. Anyone who chooses to live on benefits and can easily negotiate financially from monday to sunday are doing something very dodgy indeed. No question.

I get ESA at the assessment rate, full HB and CT. I can rarely afford clothing and rely on the charity of friends. Luckily I don't like TV so I don't have to worry about Sky or the suchlike. [instead, I worry about how the heck I can buy a TV licence for the few hours use I get out of the old moving picture machine...]

I can't even afford the fuel to visit my elderly stepmother 60 miles away. And how many times did I have to turn my heating off in the winter? Oh, a life on benefits is a life led high on the hog indeed!

Get real people and stop believing everything you read in the press.

Rae

 

Hi Rae, I agree with you completely. Yes, I up until recently, had to survive on Assessment Rate ESA & CT benefit, and know that it does not stretch beyond Wednesday! What my little beef is, why on earth just because I have just turned 60, I get an increase of over £135pw! This only came about because someone told my wife that it is not worth working beyond 60 because you get over £200pw whether sick, lazy or indifferent. This is what should be scrapped -if you can work you should, never mind being 60+. Also how can it be that the State say you need more to live on when you reach 60?

[RaeUK]

Hi andyandflo, you got to wednesday? You are clearly a frugal person! Yeesh, the system is clearly up the creek. I really don't want to reach 60 - but you're making it sound promising...

There really needs to be a top to tail in depth revue of how it works.

Best wishes

Rae

[Helen2264]

no, I will answer this and feel free to criticise as much as you want, just as much as I will feel free to respond. This is after all what debate in a free society is or at least should be.

 

whilst I have sympathy for anyone down on their luck and do believe the welfare system has major merits, I also believe that there are huge numbers of people who are now reliant on it to the point where they will not go to any major efforts to change their situation. everyone (myself included) is used to a society where we believe we have rights these days, when, although it is admirable to aim for such a society, in reality we are merely an advanced form (in some ways) of animal that lives with the illusion of such rights. We are not owed a living and although there is poverty in this country, there are relatively few instances of people not being able to eat or have some sort of roof over thier heads. And there would be a damn sight more money to help those who are truly in dire straits if they were the only ones receving welfare. And more cash for key workers, etc.

 

I might upset some people but I have to agree with you 100% that's because I have seen with my own eyes where I live how some people has never ever worked nor do they intend to one woman she is in her 40s she keeps having children her latest is just under 2 her eighth the other seven children are all in care they all seems to have children until the last child reach to certain age then the mother won't need to work because she would reached retiring age. They keep having children they don't care about nor want the reasons for that is because of the benefit money they receive from what I see it doesn't even go on the children as some of them are in rags, dirty and looks malnourished because mum are busy drinking or drugging the money and the men are the same they are either druggies or alcoholic who have no intention to better themselves or to do an honest days work. I've been off work for five years due to ill health but I've had enough of it I am still young and have many years yet before I get to retiring age I am fighting with my health at the moment to get back to my career I don't feel guilty being on benefits because I have paid enough tax over the years to last me another 10 years on benefit.

 

My response is not for people that are off work or cannot work because they are ill it's for people that has nothing wrong with them and can work but will not and prefer to scrounge off the state.

[Helen2264]

I don't want to pick up on any one persons posts. But can I just say that all this 'life on benefits is a bed of roses' malarky is beginning to irritate? It isn't.

I've had to accept the kindness of the taxpayer for the last year and half. Whilst I appreciate it and understand it is just a safety net, it really does not provide a quality of life.

Don't get me wrong, I am gratefull and appreciative. But let us get one thing straight. Anyone who chooses to live on benefits and can easily negotiate financially from monday to sunday are doing something very dodgy indeed. No question.

I get ESA at the assessment rate, full HB and CT. I can rarely afford clothing and rely on the charity of friends. Luckily I don't like TV so I don't have to worry about Sky or the suchlike. [instead, I worry about how the heck I can buy a TV licence for the few hours use I get out of the old moving picture machine...]

I can't even afford the fuel to visit my elderly stepmother 60 miles away. And how many times did I have to turn my heating off in the winter? Oh, a life on benefits is a life led high on the hog indeed!

Get real people and stop believing everything you read in the press.

Rae

 

I agree with you there I am struggling to do most things haven't been on holiday or outing since off work can't afford it I only have two sets of clothing I wear all the time if and when I can get out to pay my bills I don't have the money to have fun or night out I don't have a car my life is very basic I only have one heater on in the winter I don't even have a chair to sit on but it always surprises me seeing people driving big cars, go on holidays yearly and outings and I know they are on benefits they usually let it be known they are not intelligent enough to keep their mouth shut how they are able to keep to certain way of life is unmentionable. I am only receiving the basic of JSA as for me I am trying my hardest to go back to work what I am getting fortnightly on benefits I can earn more in a day so life is a big struggle if you are receiving the basic of benefit.

[ee-bee]

i think just about everyone on this forum agrees that there are people that live off benefits that can clearly work ,but just dont want to.but there are millions of sick/disabled people that cant work for various reasons,and these are the people that are being unfairly targetted,why? because we dont know how to play the system,

[PriorityOne]

I might upset some people but I have to agree with you 100% that's because I have seen with my own eyes where I live how some people has never ever worked nor do they intend to one woman she is in her 40s she keeps having children her latest is just under 2 her eighth the other seven children are all in care they all seems to have children until the last child reach to certain age then the mother won't need to work because she would reached retiring age. They keep having children they don't care about nor want the reasons for that is because of the benefit money they receive from what I see it doesn't even go on the children as some of them are in rags, dirty and looks malnourished because mum are busy drinking or drugging the money and the men are the same they are either druggies or alcoholic who have no intention to better themselves or to do an honest days work.

 

This situation has been going on for years and the kids that these people churn out end up in mainstream schools (like where I work) with a range of "special needs" that make a mockery out of what the SEN register was first set up for.

 

One of the lads in my class lives with his brother, partner and their child. His own mother lives in London with a range of other children but he's been sent up here. The mother still claims for him in London but sends money up.... his brother and partner both smoke 20 a day and keep 3 dogs in the house.... yet there is never any food. He came into school last week, told me he hadn't eaten for 24 hours and nearly passed out.... and that's just one example of a system that is crazy beyond belief!!

 

Most of the kids from the type of families you describe are normally dirty and stink as well.... there's a boy of 14 who's still in nappies (I kid you not). Yet these kids are rewarded with freebie trips out because they're "disadvantaged" or at risk of being NEET (not in education, employment or training). One recent trip cost £11K to take 11 kids up a mountain in Wales for a week... Would you emply them? I know I wouldn't...

 

i think just about everyone on this forum agrees that there are people that live off benefits that can clearly work ,but just dont want to.but there are millions of sick/disabled people that cant work for various reasons,and these are the people that are being unfairly targetted,why? because we dont know how to play the system,

 

Precisely right.... because you don't know how to play the system.

Edited May 16, 2010 by PriorityOne

[Allwood]

Hi Rae, I agree with you completely. Yes, I up until recently had to survive on Assessment Rate ESA & CT benefit, and know that it does not stretch beyond Wednesday! What my little beef is, why on earth just because I have just turned 60, I get an increase of over £135pw! This only came about because someone told my wife that it is not worth working beyond 60 because, never mind being 60+. Also how can it be that the State say you need more to live on when you reach 60?

 

The UK government pays the lowest pension in the Europe.

I could not survive on £95 pw to pay all my bills such as rent and utilities bills and council tax. As like millions of others, I was not in a well paid job before retirement to fork out for a private pension. When I give up my little part-time job (BTW I pay tax on that as well), I would have to go and fill-in reams of forms to get what very little so I will work for as long as I am able to and perhaps if I am luckily I will die of heart attack, as I would rather be shot then to have to go into one of these care homes that makes money for the greedy home owners. Or indeed to have to go into hospital and die there as the professionals treats elderly people as third class citizen ie do not care if you live or died.

 

BBC - Panorama - Britain's Homecare Scandal

 

Care home scandal: Deprived of water | Mail Online

 

Care homes scandal: Abused. Bullied. Confined. Drugged. - Health News, Health & Families - The Independent

 

Staffordshire hospital scandal: the hidden story - Telegraph

Mid Staffordshire NHS hospital 'routinely neglected' patients | Mail Online

 

The basic pension is lower than the income support threshold, so if they have no other income, state pensioners can top up with income support. This comes in the form of a means-tested Pension Credit which brings the weekly amount up to £130 for a single person and £198.45 for a couple.

Incapacity Benefit and State Pension - MoneySavingExpert.com Forums

Why does a woman who didn't work get a bigger state pension than me? | Money | The Guardian

Why does a woman who didn't work get a bigger state pension than me? | Money | The Guardian

 

Some women that stayed at home since the 50’s to look after children (bearing in mind that the contraceptive pill did not come into existence until the 60’s) and relied on their husband’s NI contribution because the government told them that it was necessary for women to work they would be looked after by their husband NI. What the government failed to tell women that this would only be a small pension of £30 per week compared to £90 if they had paid NI contributions in their own right and anything above the state pension is mean tested.

 

The full basic State Pension in 2009/10 is £95.25 a week for a single person and £152.30 a week for a married couple. How much you will receive depends on how many years National Insurance Contributions (NICs) you've paid. From 6 April 2010, you will need to have paid 30 years' NICs for a full basic State Pension.

 

I know of a woman after taking off 7 years to look after her 2 children. When she went back to work she paid the low married woman’s NI stamp At the time she was advised that if she did not want any more children it was not worth paying the full stamp. She was also told that it would only be worth paying the full stamp in order to gain maternity allowance. She started paying the full stamp in 1988 and retired in 2004. As a result of this she only receives £40.50 per week pension. She feels bitter about this. What has happened to the NI she paid out when paying the low stamp?

Take the first, a couple aged 60 who have had a good life, paid off all but £100,000 of their mortgage, have savings of £10,000 in the bank and decided to enjoy their income and not save for any pension. What do they get - Guaranteed Pension Credit & Savings Credit in excess of £200 per week. In addition, the mortgage interest is paid and they have no Council Tax to pay. To my way of reckoning that comes to approx £385pw. What would you have to earn to have that left after all work expenses? So why not retire early and let the State pay. Of course thay could work - whether they should is another matter!!

On the other hand we have people who are genuinely sick and/or unable to hold down a job. Should the State provide for them and expect nothing in return - of course it should, most would want to work if given half a chance. - there by the grace of God go I!!!!

There is no retirement age, do you mean when people can take their state pensions, that is also going up but the government should do something about age discrimination in the work place as it is rife in the work place.

 

Tory plans to raise retirement age 'unfair' | This is Money

 

BBC NEWS | Business | Q&A: Pension Credit

 

What do mean looking after people after retirement age, people who purchased their home many years ago it would have been a bed of roses for them, if they were on the average joe public income. As it is today, it would quite different for a couple that worked in a well paid job with a good income and pensions.

 

By the way it was only in the late 1960’s that a woman could get a mortgage on her own she need a husband signature on the form before they would even look at it.

Edited May 16, 2010 by Allwood

[Conniff]

One of the lads in my class lives with his brother, partner and their child. His own mother lives in London with a range of other children but he's been sent up here. The mother still claims for him in London but sends money up.... his brother and partner both smoke 20 a day and keep 3 dogs in the house.... yet there is never any food. He came into school last week, told me he hadn't eaten for 24 hours and nearly passed out.... and that's just one example of a system that is crazy beyond belief!!

 

So perhaps they should stop giving money and give vouchers instead, vouchers that can be exchanged for utilities, food and clothing. But then again, the likes of the supermarkest take money off coupons in exchange for other than what the coupon is for.

 

It is in a way an equivalent to overseas aid which is spent on big cars and weapons when they should be sending the things required instead.

[PriorityOne]

So perhaps they should stop giving money and give vouchers instead, vouchers that can be exchanged for utilities, food and clothing. But then again, the likes of the supermarkest take money off coupons in exchange for other than what the coupon is for.

 

It is in a way an equivalent to overseas aid which is spent on big cars and weapons when they should be sending the things required instead.

 

It makes you want to cry for all kinds of reasons.

 

1... because of the neglect

2....because these people keep churning out children to stay in the system.

3....because the SEN register is now heaving with kids with behavioural "disorders" because they haven't been brought up/socialised properly.

4....because most of the parents I see are very quick to jump on the "disability" bandwagon to explain this behaviour as opposed to taking responsibility for being a cack parent (which is not PC to say, by the way).

 

Vouchers would be a step forward but as you say, some stores would still exchange them for fags anyway. I knew stores who used to do this with milk tokens years ago...

[ANDYANDFLO]

Ummm!! I seem not to be getting my point over to ALLWOOD. At 59, I was living off the basic assessment rate. I am married and had it not been for the help given to us by our children, we would not have survived. I am having to go through the appeal process for ESA just to prove that I am not fit for work. Then when I am 60, it all changes, we now receive £202.40pw from Pension Credit. Why?? I then find out that there is no need to claim ESA anymore, it doesn't matter whether they think I am fit or not. I do not have to claim JSA and sign on every week. Whatever the circumstances are, I would still get £202.40pw. That is wrong!!! I AM still trying to prove that I am not fit for work, AND I will go back to work when I am able. My earnings before I was sick were £235pw.

What I believe is that Pension Credit should only kick in AFTER the date the Retirement Pension becoming payable. Yes this is happening very slowly as the age for a woman increases, so does the age the Pension Credit becomes available.It is not happening quickly enough!!

What good reason is there that allows a man (aged 60 - wife aged 54) to receive £202.40pw without either proving too sick for work or taking action to find a job. I strongly believe that if someone IS fit for work, no matter what age - subject to a retirement age of say 68, when it would not apply, then they should work for their benefits.

If I was fit, and being paid £202.40pw I would and should do something for it at 60 years of age!

Would someone enlighten me as to why this increase is given just because I reach 60 - are my living costs greater?????

And finally, what was saved by NOT paying the Pension Credit until retirement age should be used to increase the level of ESA for those that do not have any choice whatsoever!!!!!

[ee-bee]

i`m a bit lost with what your saying,i`m 56 years old,i get income support,plus disability premium,taking me up to around £93 per week,are you saying when i reach 60 all this will change?

[PriorityOne]

You want a retirement age of 68 AndyandFlo?! You've got to be kidding!! You work away until you drop if that's what rocks your boat but please don't suggest it should be compulsory for those of us who still have a level of energy with which to enjoy life with...

[ANDYANDFLO]

i`m a bit lost with what your saying,i`m 56 years old,i get income support,plus disability premium,taking me up to around £93 per week,are you saying when i reach 60 all this will change?

 

Yes is the answer to that! Pension Credit is currently claimable by anyone over 60. It is also a means tested benefit and the current figure is £202.40 for a couple and £132.60 if you are single. That is the MINIMUM that the State say a person of that age needs to live on. There are additions to that figure of up to another £107.30 for a couple and/or £53.65 if you are single and you have severe disability needs. In addition also, there is extra money if you have savings up to £10,000. On top of that they will pay the interest on up to a £100,000 mortgage taken out to buy your home from the first day of the claim and/or full CT & HB if applicable.

Now the 'funny' part of it is that they don't ask you to be ill, pass any medical or indeed by registered with the JC+ looking for work to get this money! It is given purely because you are over 60!

Obviously if like me you want to claim ESA and prove that you are unfit for work and receive ESA, then all they will do is deduct the ESA payment away from the £202.40 and pay the difference - no better no worse off!!!

And actually if you are claiming JSA and you pass the 60 mile stone they will cancel the JSA (Income Based) payment and put you on Pension Credit. That is because you can't claim JSA (income Based) if you are over 60!!! So you need no longer sign on or look for work as a condition of receiving benefit.

This can't be right?? I am ill but I do want to work when I feel able. I would want help to look for a job. and yes surely in exchange for this benefit and you are fit, should you not be working even if only for the community???

[ANDYANDFLO]

You want a retirement age of 68 AndyandFlo?! You've got to be kidding!! You work away until you drop if that's what rocks your boat but please don't suggest it should be compulsory for those of us who still have a level of energy with which to enjoy life with...

 

Hey, you have taken it the wrong way!!!

I have never suggested that anybody should be made to retire at any age. The State are saying that 68 is a reasonable age to receive the Retirement Pension with which I agree. If however you by your own past endeavours have made it possible to retire at say 55 and can support yourself financially all well and good.

What I am saying is that those who are fit and able to work AFTER 60 and continue to receive benefits to support them should be considered to be able to work until the normal State given retirement date when the State Pension becomes payable - is to be 68, or even the current age of 65. Why should they be transferred from JSA at 60 onto Pension Credit which does not require them to be looking for work or claim ESA and not need to prove their illness.

Yes if State money is paid to those that are fit for work up until the 'normal' retirement age they should, if they can't find employment, be required to carry out community work. Surely you would be expected to work to receive your wage if employed?

Or is it that you think that at 60 you have done enough in your life, paid enough into the State when working, that would entitle you to 'paid' time off at the expense of the State to enjoy your time until the State Retirement Pension comes into play.

Being sick is something totally different. We have no choices of working or otherwise!!!

[PriorityOne]

Hey, you have taken it the wrong way!!!

I have never suggested that anybody should be made to retire at any age. The State are saying that 68 is a reasonable age to receive the Retirement Pension with which I agree. If however you by your own past endeavours have made it possible to retire at say 55 and can support yourself financially all well and good. Oh ok... I see...

What I am saying is that those who are fit and able to work AFTER 60 and continue to receive benefits to support them should be considered to be able to work until the normal State given retirement date when the State Pension becomes payable - is to be 68, or even the current age of 65. Why should they be transferred from JSA at 60 onto Pension Credit which does not require them to be looking for work or claim ESA and not need to prove their illness. No idea actually.... .... but the Gov. must have had some self-serving interest at the time. To capture the grey vote perhaps? I'm fairly sure this will be phased out in time though, otherwise what's the point of raising the retirement age?

 

The other logical reason for doing this is the lack of jobs, of course... and because the Gov. would look extremely bad if DWP started hounding 60 years old into work like they try and do to the rest of us.

 

[Bookworm]

Jobs that pay a living wage for everyone able to work....

 

..

Well, a good start was made on that with the introduction of the minimum wage, and look how popular that was with employers!

 

Secondly, for families on low income, Working Tax Credits often make the difference between below subsistence levels and appropriate ones.

 

As regards benefits in general, I am sick and tired of seeing everybody tarred with the same brush.

 

There is an ugly pattern of because we all know at least one person/family who seems to be abusing the system, the assumption is made there are sooooo many of them.

 

I'm sorry, it doesn't add up.

 

Do your own personal survey: Compare the number of employed people that you know. Then the number of unemployed that you know. Out of these unemployed, work out the ones you know are unemployed with good reason (redundant, disabled, too young, too old, carers, parents of young children ,etc...), and the ones you know are just layabouts happy to sit on their backsides and apparently living the life of Riley at our expense. Work it out. Go on. Unless you are coming from particularly under-privileged areas, you will see for yourselves the myth that is "the huge amount of scroungers" society we get fed through the media.

 

It is however vital that this myth gets perpetuated. Why, you may ask? Well, the reasons are manyfold. First, it gives us someone else to look down on when we are already the dispossessed. Let's face it, no-one likes to be the bottom of the pile, and if you think they are people worse than you, that helps keeping the focus off where the real cause for your misery stems from. In the current days of political unease, of corporate greed which we pay for, of politicans with their noses in the trough, the last thing "them" upstairs want us to do is start really looking as to may be to blame for the financial mess we're all in. Because if we start thinking about it, maybe we will see that it's not Miss Single Parent aged 16 who's the drain on our society, but Mr Millions in bonuses Golden handshake employer of illegals tax-dodging upper manager or boss who's actually fattening by draining us.

 

So we mustn't be allowed to think for ourselves, oh no. Instead, we get brainwashed day in day out that it's them scroungers, them illegal immigrants, them fake disabled, them single parents etc who don't want to get off their backside and do an honest day's work who are the real parasites.

 

Bullsh*t.

 

Anyone who has been through the mill of benefits, whether be disability, employment or council tax etc... knows what a soul-destroying, depressing, difficult, unpleasant and humiliating process it is. Endless forms repeating themselves at infinitas, and woe if you skip one tick or made a mistake! You will have to crawl through holes and jump through hoops just to get "what the law says you need to live on", and by god, those who set the amounts can't have tried to live on those amounts or they would know that it's nowhere near.

Then, if and when you are one of the lucky ones to be allowed the pittance, it doesn't end there, oh no. Beware you shouldn't want to have a sex life for fear that you will be classed as "living together". Careful that you don't try to stave off the day you'll end up in a wheelchair for forcing yourself to do a minimum of exercise, for you will be denounced as a fraudster. You will be continuously subject to reviews at the whim of a decision maker or a denounciation by one of the SS collaborators.

 

Heaven forbid that you should have the luxury of dignity in your misfortune through the lack of a job or through disability. If you have to be on benefits, you are fair game.

 

The reality? It's that for one person who does manage to cheat the system, there'll be at least 10 who will get turned down or give up because they simply don't know how to fight or what their rights are.

 

FFS, people, WAKE UP!

 

:-x:-x

[PriorityOne]

Well, a good start was made on that with the introduction of the minimum wage, and look how popular that was with employers!

 

Secondly, for families on low income, Working Tax Credits often make the difference between below subsistence levels and appropriate ones.

 

As regards benefits in general, I am sick and tired of seeing everybody tarred with the same brush. They're not...

 

There is an ugly pattern of because we all know at least one person/family who seems to be abusing the system, the assumption is made there are sooooo many of them. There are...

 

I'm sorry, it doesn't add up. It really does...

 

Do your own personal survey: Compare the number of employed people that you know. Then the number of unemployed that you know. Out of these unemployed, work out the ones you know are unemployed with good reason (redundant, disabled, too young, too old, carers, parents of young children ,etc...), and the ones you know are just layabouts happy to sit on their backsides and apparently living the life of Riley at our expense. Work it out. Go on. Unless you are coming from particularly under-privileged areas, you will see for yourselves the myth that is "the huge amount of scroungers" society we get fed through the media. Yes, I know about media hype and how middle class tax evaders are not pounced upon in the same way (for example)... neither are they called "scroungers" or "feckless" like Benefit recipients tend to be. Yes, there are many people who are unemployed for good reason but the minimum wage has done nothing to secure a living wage when compared to the actual cost of living; paying rent, mortgage in an inflated property market, etc.... so there's no real incentive for some people to come off JSA, etc. when the system pays them more to stay on it. Read my first post... I did it myself for years....

 

It is however vital that this myth gets perpetuated. Of course it is! It keeps the eyes of society away from more affluent fiddling, scrounging or whatever you want to call it... Why, you may ask? Well, the reasons are manyfold. First, it gives us someone else to look down on when we are already the dispossessed. Not really... Let's face it, no-one likes to be the bottom of the pile, and if you think they are people worse than you, that helps keeping the focus off where the real cause for your misery stems from. In the current days of political unease, of corporate greed which we pay for, of politicans with their noses in the trough, the last thing "them" upstairs want us to do is start really looking as to may be to blame for the financial mess we're all in. That's more like the real reason.... Because if we start thinking about it, maybe we will see that it's not Miss Single Parent aged 16 who's the drain on our society, but Mr Millions in bonuses Golden handshake employer of illegals tax-dodging upper manager or boss who's actually fattening by draining us. Thank you! Totally agree....

 

So we mustn't be allowed to think for ourselves, oh no. Instead, we get brainwashed day in day out that it's them scroungers, them illegal immigrants, them fake disabled, them single parents etc who don't want to get off their backside and do an honest day's work who are the real parasites.

 

Bullsh*t.

 

No bullsh*t about it... a lot of them are!....

 

Of course there are genuine claminants... I've not said otherwise. I have also said why I can understand why people stay on Benefits when we have a system that rewards them for churning out children regardless of their ability to raise them. The reason this subject angers me so much is because I have to help those children every day as part of my job.

 

Anyone who has been through the mill of benefits, whether be disability, employment or council tax etc... knows what a soul-destroying, depressing, difficult, unpleasant and humiliating process it is. It is if you don't really want to be part of the process... I agree. Endless forms repeating themselves at infinitas, and woe if you skip one tick or made a mistake! You will have to crawl through holes and jump through hoops just to get "what the law says you need to live on", and by god, those who set the amounts can't have tried to live on those amounts or they would know that it's nowhere near. It can be a very generous system if you know how to work it.... and many people do.

Then, if and when you are one of the lucky ones to be allowed the pittance, it doesn't end there, oh no. Beware you shouldn't want to have a sex life for fear that you will be classed as "living together". Careful that you don't try to stave off the day you'll end up in a wheelchair for forcing yourself to do a minimum of exercise, for you will be denounced as a fraudster. You will be continuously subject to reviews at the whim of a decision maker or a denounciation by one of the SS collaborators. Individuals who've made a career out of working the system have caused this....

 

Heaven forbid that you should have the luxury of dignity in your misfortune through the lack of a job or through disability. If you have to be on benefits, you are fair game. See above...

 

The reality? It's that for one person who does manage to cheat the system, there'll be at least 10 who will get turned down or give up because they simply don't know how to fight or what their rights are. Your figures have been plucked from the air, I think.... but it's a valid point nonetheless.

 

FFS, people, WAKE UP! I'm wide awake thanks...

 

:-x:-x

 

[ee-bee]

i 100% agree with you bookworm,