£26,000 Benefit Cap

[fred quimby]

So he's less of a leech on the state than you are with your one kid. You actually demand the right to child benefit for your rich self - there's a thread here you started with the proof of that.

[eFestivals]

I am not a Christian...

true. You're a self-righteous self-absorbed selfish church going c**t.

[eFestivals]

I worked and paid for them... You didn't give me the money for them...

there's no end to your lies.

The state benefit you claim helped pay for them.

Meanwhile my cousin with eight kids doesn't claim that benefit. Seems he's less of the leech than self-righteous you.

[kaosmark2]

I haven't got much to say if you want to quote out of context of the whole post and want to create a conversation around it.

[kaosmark2]

The point is... We have to expect less spoon feeding...

[fred quimby]

in the case of my cousin, it's certainly the result of him adhering to the teachings of the faith he and his wife follow.

And unlike Barry the moron, he has real Christian principles. I detest the organised faith he follows, but have nothing but admiration for the way he lives his life and the values he not only speaks buts acts on. His faith and actions because of his faith put a whole new look for me on how religion can be done. If every Christian were like him I'd never have a bad word to say about Christianity.

[kaosmark2]

We are skint

[eFestivals]

Simple question. Why do you think this policy should go through?

We are skint

How many fucking times?

This benefit cap will cost money, not save it.

And if we need to so desperately save the £127M this benefit cap will save from the benefits budget, how come there's £250M - twice as much - to restore weekly bin collections? Are they more important than housing and feeding children?

[eFestivals]

far dos. Wonder why he stopped at eight then (yes I know kids are the best contraception)

Anyway off topic so don't reply

I think them having a second set of twins scared them off sex.

[kaosmark2]

Oh it goes much further than just cost... It comes down to the fact you can get more on benefits than a working family down the road.... Many more reasons but they have all been said in this thread already. No point going around in circles...

As for weekly bin collection... Yeah, what a fucking joke... but like I said, its only you presuming I am tory supporter...

[fred quimby]

there's no end to your lies.

The state benefit you claim helped pay for them.

Meanwhile my cousin with eight kids doesn't claim that benefit. Seems he's less of the leech than self-righteous you.

[eFestivals]

But, just to clarify you are happy for Barry to claim the benefit yes? although you keep calling him leech.

It depends on circumstances.

In the current circumstances, where support for the poorest is being cut left and centre, then no, I don't think that those whose income is (barry's words) in the top ten percent of incomes should get child benefit.

I assume you are also happy that if Barry with his eight bedroom mansion was to fall on hard times, as he over streched himself and say lost his job, the state would pick up the cost of this.

Once again no judegement just wanted to understand.

Again, proportionality.

If his "eight bedroom mansion" is fully occupied then I've little problem with him getting state support for a while at least.

If it's him, his wife, and one kid then the system should encourage them to downsize asap.

[kaosmark2]

Where did I ever say any of that stuff ?

Welfare should keep people feed, housed and supported to a reasonable point... It shouldn't be a offering a comfortable alternative to work. Otherwise where is the motivation to work ?

[eFestivals]

Welfare should keep people feed, housed and supported to a reasonable point...

then why penalise those who need more than £26k so that they can be fed, housed and supported to a reasonable point???

'Reasonable' is dependent on need, not an arbitrary cut-off number that someone has plucked from the air.

If someone has a large family then they need a larger amount to do all of the things you say they should be supported for.

To expect them to somehow do the impossible or magic their children away is an idea of low intelligence or an evil mind, nothing else.

The simple fact is that too many of the highly paid - you, in the top 10% - are taking all the money away from others, so they are unable to have jobs themselves. What you do creates their situation, and now you want to further penalise them for it.

The idea of a trickle down effect has been discredited in all sensible economic circles for over 20 years. It's only the stupidly dogmatic who keep claiming it works - and only because they need to give a reason for why they stealing all the money and opportunities.

[fred quimby]

It depends on circumstances.

In the current circumstances, where support for the poorest is being cut left and centre, then no, I don't think that those whose income is (barry's words) in the top ten percent of incomes should get child benefit.

Again, proportionality.

If his "eight bedroom mansion" is fully occupied then I've little problem with him getting state support for a while at least.

If it's him, his wife, and one kid then the system should encourage them to downsize asap.

Edited February 23, 2012 by fred quimby

[eFestivals]

So I should be forced "downsize" which ultimately sees me moving miles away from my support base...

The exact same thing you said was unacceptable to ask of people at the other end...

Oh dear...

fuck me, you really are too stupid for this conversation.

Downsizing from a mostly-unused mansion to something more fitting of your family's needs does not require you to move very far at all.

It's fuck all like re-locating people from London to Hull. And it's fuck all like forcing a large family with large needs into an unsuitably small property for those needs.

fuck me, you really are too stupid for this conversation.

[eFestivals]

So we are looking at means testing of some sort. So you would be happy for a family to be moved to a cheaper area (close to where they are, but not maybe in the same school area) or downsize, a family of eight can live in a 3 bed house then why not a family of 5 who currently live in a 4 bed. I sadly can't see where these divideds should be and who decideds on this.

e2a so you are in favour of a benefit cap, it's just where that should be, right?

Means testing is based on need. It's fuck all like any arbitrary benefit cap with no regard of need.

How the line is drawn on needs is something else to that. As long as the line is equal for all against their needs then that is fair to all.

[abdoujaparov]

We are skint

[Rufus Gwertigan]

I have just read Barry say people can get more money on benefits than if they work. That is just total shit. People are still entitled to all the tax credits and housing benefits when in work. If a single mum with 4 kids has all her benefits capped at 26k and starts work at 16 hours for minimum wage pie would still get 26k or more in benefits. I fail to see a cost saving.

[eFestivals]

Barry talking shit? Who'd have thought it.

[Paul ™]

People are still entitled to all the tax credits and housing benefits when in work. If a single mum with 4 kids has all her benefits capped at 26k and starts work at 16 hours for minimum wage pie would still get 26k or more in benefits. I fail to see a cost saving.

[Paul ™]

Yeah sorry, just kinda hijacking this thread

[abdoujaparov]

As you correctly point out though, this bill will have little impact on most people... Its just adding some reasonableness into the system...

[eFestivals]

As you correctly point out though, this bill will have little impact on most people... Its just adding some reasonableness into the system...

the benefit cap effects 67,000 claimants according to the govt.

There's nothing reasonable about trying to make a large family survive on less money than it's possible to live on. For some the cap won't even cover their not-unreasonable rent.

Benefits should be paid on the basis of need, not limited via an arbitrary cap that has nothing to do with a family's need.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

Not totally true...

There are lots of example where a working family would get less than a benefit family...

As you correctly point out though, this bill will have little impact on most people... Its just adding some reasonableness into the system...