Tax credits - congratulations to the House of Lords

[mr.hobblesworth]

Mr H, the times of helping each other have long gone but their shadow remains, communities are no longer the same. There is little option now but to accept handouts.

 

Erm, yeah, I know.

[Howjy04]

Whilst I agree with what you say (albeit with the proviso that I believe the amount of people misusing food banks to be a miniscule minority, certainly in relation to the amount of press and attention they get), I do wonder what has gone wrong when people have so little self respect and self-worth to resort to accepting hand-outs. I used to work in a really impoverished area of Manchester and it felt like the whole town had just given up. Literally hopeless.

Mr.h,I'll give anyone my last and those people who really know me will vouch for that.At some stage in one's life a decision has to be made.Stay in 'little self respect and self worth' or do something about it.There are too many in the first category I'm afraid and don't want to get out of it.

[Howjy04]

...whilst managing to cram in a few minutes to sneer at those on the breadline.

 

 

Even I have to let off steam.

[geosname]

Erm, yeah, I know.

 

The point being that this is what the welfare state has created, there is no longer shame for getting handouts, its accepted and acceptable.

[JOHNNYAITCH]

The stigma has gone and that is a good thing but there are significant numbers who for me have such little self worth (maybe I am being generous there) that they are happy to take from the tax payer and from the pot meant for those in genuine need without feeling any 'shame'..a sense of entitlement if you will. There will always be some but it still needs to be minimised..but without hurting the genuine

 

I guess we have to ask ourselves are we OK with some 'getting away with it' as long as it means the genuine get help

[geosname]

The stigma has gone and that is a good thing but there are significant numbers who for me have such little self worth (maybe I am being generous there) that they are happy to take from the tax payer and from the pot meant for those in genuine need without feeling any 'shame'..a sense of entitlement if you will. There will always be some but it still needs to be minimised..but without hurting the genuine

 

I guess we have to ask ourselves are we OK with some 'getting away with it' as long as it means the genuine get help

 

We have to be OK with it, no system is bullet proof.

[mr.hobblesworth]

The point being that this is what the welfare state has created, there is no longer shame for getting handouts, its accepted and acceptable.

 

Ah, you see, I am not sure if I agree with you on the former, i.e. that it is accepted. Over the last few years, those on benefits and those receiving bags of provisions from food banks have been met, by many people, with suspicion and judgement. Whether it be from the likes of Katie Hopkins or posters like howjy on here, people think it acceptable to sneer, judge and question those at their lowest ebb. Why are they deemed game for this? If I refused to buy a poppy as there have been isolated cases of sellers behaving fraudulently, I would rightly be called out on it. Yet, when isolated and extreme examples of people fraudulently claiming benefits or using food banks are brought to light, it seems fair game for some to issue a blanket snub to them, the poorest and most in need. The anger expressed by some at those portrayed on Channel 5's ****ty exploitative programmes and the tory press' agenda-ridden articles is so much greater than any indignation that, in the 6th or 7th wealthiest country in the world, people are forced to grovel for charity donations so they can feed their children. The true shame should be that we as a country accept that this is the case.

[geosname]

Ah, you see, I am not sure if I agree with you on the former, i.e. that it is accepted. Over the last few years, those on benefits and those receiving bags of provisions from food banks have been met, by many people, with suspicion and judgement. Whether it be from the likes of Katie Hopkins or posters like howjy on here, people think it acceptable to sneer, judge and question those at their lowest ebb. Why are they deemed game for this? If I refused to buy a poppy as there have been isolated cases of sellers behaving fraudulently, I would rightly be called out on it. Yet, when isolated and extreme examples of people fraudulently claiming benefits or using food banks are brought to light, it seems fair game for some to issue a blanket snub to them, the poorest and most in need. The anger expressed by some at those portrayed on Channel 5's ****ty exploitative programmes and the tory press' agenda-ridden articles is so much greater than any indignation that, in the 6th or 7th wealthiest country in the world, people are forced to grovel for charity donations so they can feed their children. The true shame should be that we as a country accept that this is the case.

 

I wasnt talking specifically about food banks.

[mr.hobblesworth]

Neither was I! People on benefits generally seem to be fair game to many who want to sneer or condemn, (particluarly those in government!). Even that woman who got upset on Question Time had her finances scrutinised in newspapers and was mocked and scoffed at.

[Howjy04]

Ah, you see, I am not sure if I agree with you on the former, i.e. that it is accepted. Over the last few years, those on benefits and those receiving bags of provisions from food banks have been met, by many people, with suspicion and judgement. Whether it be from the likes of Katie Hopkins or posters like howjy on here, people think it acceptable to sneer, judge and question those at their lowest ebb. Why are they deemed game for this? If I refused to buy a poppy as there have been isolated cases of sellers behaving fraudulently, I would rightly be called out on it. Yet, when isolated and extreme examples of people fraudulently claiming benefits or using food banks are brought to light, it seems fair game for some to issue a blanket snub to them, the poorest and most in need. The anger expressed by some at those portrayed on Channel 5's ****ty exploitative programmes and the tory press' agenda-ridden articles is so much greater than any indignation that, in the 6th or 7th wealthiest country in the world, people are forced to grovel for charity donations so they can feed their children. The true shame should be that we as a country accept that this is the case.

 

And yet again,Mr.bigbollards is right and no one can have an opinion.These people were bragging and taking the **** out of people who are in genuine need.Why the **** should I give a **** about a bloke on £1400 per month,who doesn't work and spunks his money in a bookies and then gets his weekly shopping from a food bank.Why should I care about a life long shoplifter who gets benefits to top up her vouchers when she takes the goods back that she stole?.You live in a ****ing dream world.Of course there is only a miniscule amount of these scrotes.BTW that bloke is coming to your food bank for his shopping this week because he's done his brains in again .Please give generously.When wages go up people cheer,when tax gets reduced people cheer,when tax allowances go up people cheer.When people have their benefits reduced they squeal like pigs.Its a lifestyle choice ,work more and have a better life or work very little and struggle.That Mr.h has always been the way.How many people will actively look for extra work iF there benefits get reduced.I suggest,not many.Just sit in their armchairs( provided by the tax payer) and ****ing moan.

[Howjy04]

Neither was I! People on benefits generally seem to be fair game to many who want to sneer or condemn, (particluarly those in government!). Even that woman who got upset on Question Time had her finances scrutinised in newspapers and was mocked and scoffed at.

 

£550 in benefits and small amount of work per week.And because she works at home she will probably have a load of bills paid for,petrol,light, heating etc.Her benefits will not be affected,IFS stated.No wonder she was sneered at.

[geosname]

Neither was I! People on benefits generally seem to be fair game to many who want to sneer or condemn, (particluarly those in government!). Even that woman who got upset on Question Time had her finances scrutinised in newspapers and was mocked and scoffed at.

 

The woman in question brought most of it on herself I feel. Perhaps she should get her boss to pay her a living wage and let her work full time.

Its the people who mock the system that are highlighted [as they should be], sadly the general public cant seem to distinguish between them and the genuine needy.

[geosname]

Perhaps the system would work better if it helped people as opposed to carrying them, enabling them instead of just giving them.... How?... not a clue, its late and Im tired

[Howjy04]

The woman in question brought most of it on herself I feel. Perhaps she should get her boss to pay her a living wage and let her work full time.

Its the people who mock the system that are highlighted [as they should be], sadly the general public cant seem to distinguish between them and the genuine needy.

She is self employed geosname.

[Bycarsbill]

Corbyn and McDonnell have both been quite open about the need to get rid of the deficit. They just think that there are other ways to do it other than with cruel ideological austerity which punishes the poorest and endangers the most vulnerable.

 

McDonnell made a complete u-turn and they have both stated that they will increase public spending--they are still completely in denial about the need to reduce the deficit and that's precisely the reason they will never get elected to government. Not a clue between them!