Welfare reform bill.

[Digit]

I wasn't asking for the dictionary version, I was asking for yours.
A further question for you.
Before moving here I lived in a massive 5 bedroom 18C ex-coaching inn, with the mortgage, plus repairs, which were considerable, plus the heating costs, I could not afford a car and used a motor bike in all weathers and shopped using buses. My salary was paid direct into our joint account, my wife worked from home and gave me pocket money.
Were we 'poor?'

Roy.

 

[DIY Stew]

Yep. Using the argument that the Children will suffer is flawed. Of course the Children will suffer if welfare including child benefit is capped. But that is life. I only had one Child as I know how expensive they are to bring up, and I would never dream of expecting the state to support my Children.

But as others don't think in the same way and will always use the excuse 'my Children will suffer' then unfortunately you have to adopt a hard line approach

I had two children, have had only three jobs in my working life and it has been a struggle at times. We had children because we wanted to share our love and pass on what we believe are honest, fair values. We never thought of the expense, to state that you only had one child because they are expensive is unbelievable, I cannot and would not put a price on my family.
You never sign your name after your posts, I think I know why, your George Banks the banker.

Stew

 

[Digit]

to state that you only had one child because they are expensive is unbelievable,

I'm sorry to disagree with you Stew, but it seems OK to me. My wife wanted four children, we had two, we had two 'cos two was the number that we could afford to give a reasonable standard of living to. When my eldest was born I was working such hours that I only saw her awake at week ends, thus we decided that she would not be an only child but it was not really OK that I saw little of them and they little of me.

Roy.

 

[DIY Stew]

to state that you only had one child because they are expensive is unbelievable,

we had two

Roy.

Roy as you can see selective quoting can be misleading!
I look forward to a reply from Flanajb to my comment.

Stew

 

[Digit]

I'm glad we only had two, I've just been bouncing one grandson on my knee, I knackered!

Roy.

 

[DIY Stew]

Roy

Snap, his mother has just taken him home which is amazing because she usually stays for tea!!
Wouldn't swap either of them though.

Stew

 

[Digit]

Wouldn't swap either of them though.

Me neither! But I do some odd looks chasing him down the road at my age! :lol:

Roy.

 

[RogerS]

Yep. Using the argument that the Children will suffer is flawed. Of course the Children will suffer if welfare including child benefit is capped. But that is life. I only had one Child as I know how expensive they are to bring up, and I would never dream of expecting the state to support my Children.

But as others don't think in the same way and will always use the excuse 'my Children will suffer' then unfortunately you have to adopt a hard line approach

I had two children, have had only three jobs in my working life and it has been a struggle at times. We had children because we wanted to share our love and pass on what we believe are honest, fair values. We never thought of the expense, to state that you only had one child because they are expensive is unbelievable, I cannot and would not put a price on my family.
You never sign your name after your posts, I think I know why, your George Banks the banker.

Stew

I think that's a bit unfair and is a value judgement based on your own beliefs. You know nothing about the personal circumstances of flanajb nor where he puts his value judgements.

 

[Lons]

We also had 2 children for similar reasons to Digit and struggled sometimes in the early years. We decided that it was the responsible thing to do, influenced somewhat by the fact that I am one of nine
We have both worked all our lives (apart from a short term when my employers went bust), a time incidently when because my wife worked part time, and I had managed to build up a small savings account, I received no benefits and have no issue with that.

I very firmly believe that every adult must be responsible for his or her actions and that definately includes having children. As a nation, we have allowed standards to slip and changes have to happen to put it right as it is not acceptable for anyone to expect the state/taxpayer to provide them with a "living". As I said previously - short term help for those who need it is what the system was designed to do and quite rightly as well.

It's no good just stating that the "poor" will suffer or the children either;

Children of the dregs of our society (and by that I mean a hard core of wasters - not all benefit claiments or unemployed people) will suffer whatever happens as from the considerable experience I have of some of these people, their children are often neglected whilst they spend whatever cash they can get on drink,drugs,cigarettes and gambling letting their kids go without basics.

Poor - exactly what the hell does that mean these days? If kids share a bedroom, don't have a mobile phone, computer or games console their peers view them as deprived. Bulls**t. Poor is having nothing to eat (not just the latest advertised products), dirty shabby clothes, shoes with holes and possibly abused and mistreated. Throwing money at their parents without direction and control does not work and never has.
Let those who advocate otherwise, give their own salaries to the "poor" I say (hammer).

We were I suppose poor when I was a kid, never enough money, could never find dinner money either so I had to cycle a 6 mile round trip every lunchtime and we ate a lot of rubbish food - especially chips :lol: but not once did my parents ask for or expect handouts. They would have been far too ashamed. As my dad said, "we decided to bring you lot into the world and that's our responsibility". We all had our chores to do though :roll:

The really poor people in the world do not live in the UK and significantly get much of their support via their extended families.

Bob

 

[Digit]

Bob, your life pretty much mirrors mine, plus my father did time, and I have to say that I disagree with not a single word you have posted!
It was based on events such as you describe that I asked Jacob to define 'poor,' which I'm still awaiting an answer to as I think it is a 'relative' description rather than a precise one, after all, I suspect that Tamara Ecclestone considers us all as being poor!

Roy.

 

[Lons]

Bob, your life pretty much mirrors mine, plus my father did time, and I have to say that I disagree with not a single word you have posted!
It was based on events such as you describe that I asked Jacob to define 'poor,' which I'm still awaiting an answer to as I think it is a 'relative' description rather than a precise one, after all, I suspect that Tamara Ecclestone considers us all as being poor! Roy.

To be fair to Jacob, I don't think it's possible to defend poor as people overuse the term these days. Unless they've have been to Cambodia for instance and seen the real difference between the rich resorts and the orphanages or even the "black townships" on the outskirts of Cape Town in South Africa they will never really know what it's like. Whilst there I got to know a guy from Zimbabwe and found the photos he showed me distressing. I was shocked also many years ago to see the ghetto in Funchal, Madiera and the state of some of the old folk in particular.

My upbringing did me no harm Roy despite the odd clip around the ear by the local bobby before being marched home where my dad would give me a clout around the backside and that just for scrumping apples
What it did give me was an understanding of independance, loyalty and moral values as well as motivation to make something of my life and provide for my family and from your many posts, I suspect you did likewise.

Bob

 

[flanajb]

Yep. Using the argument that the Children will suffer is flawed. Of course the Children will suffer if welfare including child benefit is capped. But that is life. I only had one Child as I know how expensive they are to bring up, and I would never dream of expecting the state to support my Children.

But as others don't think in the same way and will always use the excuse 'my Children will suffer' then unfortunately you have to adopt a hard line approach

I had two children, have had only three jobs in my working life and it has been a struggle at times. We had children because we wanted to share our love and pass on what we believe are honest, fair values. We never thought of the expense, to state that you only had one child because they are expensive is unbelievable, I cannot and would not put a price on my family.
You never sign your name after your posts, I think I know why, your George Banks the banker.

Stew

In my eyes thinking about the expense of having Children before having them is the responsible thing to do. I liken it to buying a dog, if you could not afford the vet bills, food ... then eventually your dog would end up being taken off you. Actually, I may be wrong. Does the welfare system provide dog benefit for those that have too many dogs that they can't afford?

 

[Digit]

Yeah! I remeber laying flat on a wooden foot bridge tickling a Trout only to be caught by the local bobby!
No I agree on the 'poor' point, which was I asked Jacob for his definition so that I knew if we were all using the same datum.
I remember a few years ago that there was a programme on TV about poverty amongst black Americans.
The lady in question claimed that she was 'dirt poor'.
The Brit interviewer expressed surprise and pointed out the large car in the drive.
The lady looked astonished. 'But it's a last year's model!' she bleated.

Roy.

 

[Lons]

My brother lives on a council estate and in his "court" of around 20 odd 3 bed terrace houses there are only him and 7 others who are gainfully employed and one of those owns his house :roll:
There are loads of kids, a number of single mothers ,and a lot of dogs (no benefit Flanajb - just animals allowed to stray). You would be surprised at some of the cars always parked there and clearly belong to the residents.

One of these mothers doesn't send her son to school and has been fined several times, doesn't pay of course and now her son is collected by taxi every morning and returned after school. Guess where the money comes from! The same woman drinks and smokes and runs up bills on catalogues who then sue her and she pays off at a few bob a week. She has 4 children by different fathers and her 2 teenage daughters now both have kids and their own little house all on benefits..... No doubt her grandchildren will be taught to follow the same path. She has a live in lover, also on benefits with his own L A house and who regularly moves back out every time she is reported. the authorities slap her hands and tell her not to do it again :lol: :lol: :lol:

She is far from being an exception but of course she is "poor" is she not and therefore entitled to be kept in the style to which she has become accustomed.

I've got to stop posting on this thread before I get even grumpier :?

Bob

 

[devonwoody]

Perhaps this would be a good idea for some.


Subject: Irish Birth Control ( UR GONNA LUV THIS )]































Mrs. Donovan was walking down O'Connell Street
in

Dublin when she met up with Father Flaherty.
The Father said, 'Top O' the mornin' to ye!

Aren't ye Mrs. Donovan and didn't I marry ye and yer hoosband two
years
ago?'



She replied, 'Aye, that ye did,
Father.'



The
Father asked, 'And be there any wee little
ones
yet?


She replied, 'No, not yet,
Father.'


The Father said, 'Well now, I'm going to Rome next
week and I'll
light a candle for ye and yer hoosband.

She replied, 'Oh, thank ye, Father.' They then parted
ways.


Some years later they met again.



The Father asked,
'Well now, Mrs. Donovan, how are ye these
days?'


She replied, 'Oh, very well,
Father!'


The Father asked, 'And tell me, have ye any wee
ones
yet?'


She replied, 'Oh yes, Father! Three sets of
twins

and four singles, ten in all!'






The Father said, 'That's wonderful! How is yer
lovin' hoosband
doin'?'






She replied, 'E's gone to Rome to blow out yer
'
candle.'

If more candles were blown out perhaps welfare dependancy would be less.

 

[Jacob]

..........
I've got to stop posting on this thread before I get even grumpier :?

Bob

There are a lot of people like your woman who basically can't cope and whose life is a mess. If they could chose to live a normal life like most of us they would do. If it wasn't for the welfare state their lives would be even more of a mess and the cost to the state (us, that is) could be even higher.
The welfare state also can break the cycle of poverty and make it possible for these people and/or their offspring, to lead a different life. It doesn't always work, but often it does. After basic welfare, state education probably has more influence than anything else in improving and radically changing the quality of peoples lives, and many people can attest to this.

If it makes you grumpy maybe you should do something positive about these things instead of just moaning on!

 

[DIY Stew]

Yep. Using the argument that the Children will suffer is flawed. Of course the Children will suffer if welfare including child benefit is capped. But that is life. I only had one Child as I know how expensive they are to bring up, and I would never dream of expecting the state to support my Children.

But as others don't think in the same way and will always use the excuse 'my Children will suffer' then unfortunately you have to adopt a hard line approach

I had two children, have had only three jobs in my working life and it has been a struggle at times. We had children because we wanted to share our love and pass on what we believe are honest, fair values. We never thought of the expense, to state that you only had one child because they are expensive is unbelievable, I cannot and would not put a price on my family.
You never sign your name after your posts, I think I know why, your George Banks the banker.

Stew

In my eyes thinking about the expense of having Children before having them is the responsible thing to do. I liken it to buying a dog, if you could not afford the vet bills, food ... then eventually your dog would end up being taken off you. Actually, I may be wrong. Does the welfare system provide dog benefit for those that have too many dogs that they can't afford?

flanajb
Are you saying that parents who have children and live off the 'welfare' should have their children taken off them?

Stew

 

[devonwoody]

Hi. Stew that might work.

If they get more money for more children some are going to have more children, we had a super dad down here in the W.C. something like 18 or 19 kids, unfortunately he couldnt keep it up, he had a heart attack and died, true. :wink:

 

[Lons]

There are a lot of people like your woman who basically can't cope and whose life is a mess. If they could chose to live a normal life like most of us they would do. If it wasn't for the welfare state their lives would be even more of a mess and the cost to the state (us, that is) could be even higher.

With all due respect Jacob, the first part of your post is complete and utter cr*p. This woman as just one example, is not a drug addict or mentally challenged. She is in fact reasonably intelligent and knows exactly what she is doing which is why she has brought up her 2 daughters to do exactly the same (hammer) (if you read my post you would have noticed my comment about the daughters).

The welfare state also can break the cycle of poverty and make it possible for these people and/or their offspring, to lead a different life. It doesn't always work, but often it does. After basic welfare, state education probably has more influence than anything else in improving and radically changing the quality of peoples lives, and many people can attest to this

Yes it can make a difference but only if the help is proactive, directed and under control. Throwing more cash at it as I said, does not work. I agree about BASIC welfare but a cap of even £26k tax free is definitely NOT BASIC.
Education, I agree with and I benefitted from mine as did my kids - but it matters little if parents can't be bothered to get out of bed to send their kids to school in the first place.

many people can attest to this

Just who are these many people ?....... Statistics and lies Jacob - we can all find stats to "prove" anything if we choose to.

If it makes you grumpy maybe you should do something positive about these things instead of just moaning on!

You have absolutey no idea what I do or don't do in this area or how I have been involved in these areas, just as I don't know about you. I have read that you produce some good work in wood Jacob and in that area I've seen you post some great advice - maybe you should stick with the day job :lol: :lol:

Bob

 

[mind_the_goat]

Perhaps instead of paying people to have children the state should fine them for having kids if they don't have the means to support them.

This is hugely complex issue and it is very easy to cherry pick the examples that support either one side or the other.
I have to say I do resent paying my taxes for people who don't want to work and expect the state to pay for themselves and their families but then If i was made redundant I would struggle if my income was instantly reduced to 25K without having any time to adjust to the new circumstances, and having paid taxes all my life I would then be resenting the states hard line.
There is no right answer but at least the conservatives are making a stab at redressing the balance.