The state benefits system mega-thread.

[Will21st]

Originally Posted by Damien

Again this further convinces me that cooking should be a core subject at school from year 7 until you leave. The Government loves the idea of everyone learning to program at school but surely cooking is far more beneficial. Nowhere near everyone needs to know how to program but nearly everyone would benefit from being able to cook.

Totally agreed,I'd go so far as to say being able to cook is the biggest cost-saver there can be in a household.... cooking from scratch isn't expensive at all.The cost of one Takeaway can feed one person for 3 days easy,if not 4.

Unless you're getting some Indian,then you could feed yourself for a week!

[Jimmy-J]

petition for the resignation of David Cameron and George Osbourne.

[Will21st]

Originally Posted by Jimmy-J

petition for the resignation of David Cameron and George Osbourne.

Load of Rubbish.... they don't speak for the whole country.It's also funny how those who contribute least to society are those who scream the loudest for money they don't have to earn.

Originally Posted by Phillip Bateman, citizen, petitioner and (probably) Labour hack

Their sole solution to every embarrassment and failure has been to blame the previous government, who left office over two years ago, since that time there has been no improvement and it is an affront to people's intelligence that we be expected to believe that the last government are still responsible for the current situation two years down the line.

If you're going to complain that your intelligence is being insulted Mr Bateman, please:

1. Learn to spell the name of the person you're complaining about. It's O S B O R N E.
2. Learn to use grammar correctly. The Government is a singular, not a plural. It is an it, not a they; also, you are expected, not be expected. Unless you're a pirate, in which case you be correct after all. Arr.

[Osem]

So let me get this right, Labour spent 13 years in power virtually bankrupting the country whilst blaming the Tories (and even Thatcher) to one extent or another and this guy thinks that after 2-3 years in office the current govt. should be held responsible for not sorting it all out? I dare say he doesn't even acknowledge that SameOldLabour did anything wrong. Is he related to Arthur by any chance? The fact that these people still can't see the scale of the mess we're in truly baffles me.

Originally Posted by martyh

No ,it's what some of the correspondence says ,it depends on the benefit and the actual wording is (and it is very important) "The law states this is the minimum amount you need to live on" .The wording is important because the law changes every year when inflation is taken into account .In all cases and all benefits the money is given and the recipient is free to dispose of it how they see fit if they choose to have a few cans once a week then that is up to them but that is not included in what the law says you need to live on .Simply put what the law says you need to live on is exactly what you get


JSA wording is different because by law the claimant has obligations it reads

"by income based job seekers allowance we mean the money you can get based on how much the law says you are allowed based on your means"

The devil is in the detail

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...xuD5kPx7QBTIEA

---------- Post added at 20:33 ---------- Previous post was at 20:25 ----------




LOL no you can't and you know you can't .you have completely back tracked on your reply to Chris .

You know perfectly well that IDS or anyone would be able to live on the same money that bloke has because thousands do it every single day and they will continue to do it ,not easily i accept ,but they will do it

lol yes I can because I got freedom of choice please do not tell me what I can and can not do you do not have that power although you seem to think you do.

I have not back tracked I have made a compromise perhaps you should try it sometime

IDS made his claim based on £53 per week that is fact and you know it is all the rest is semantics

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Chris

If you're going to complain that your intelligence is being insulted Mr Bateman, please:

1. Learn to spell the name of the person you're complaining about. It's O S B O R N E.
2. Learn to use grammar correctly. The Government is a singular, not a plural. It is an it, not a they; also, you are expected, not be expected. Unless you're a pirate, in which case you be correct after all. Arr.

Calm down Chris.
as long as he gets his message across. we don't care about the spelling and grammer.

I trust you signed?
everybody else is

Originally Posted by Chris

Learn to use grammar correctly. The Government is a singular, not a plural. It is an it, not a they; also, you are expected, not be expected. Unless you're a pirate, in which case you be correct after all. Arr.

Really? I've always used it as a plural. It's a collection of people and departments. I thought it was like a team where we traditionally refer to them as a plural (Arsenal are) whereas it's more American to refer to them as a singular (Arsenal is).

[mertle]

Originally Posted by Osem

So let me get this right, Labour spent 13 years in power virtually bankrupting the country whilst blaming the Tories (and even Thatcher) to one extent or another and this guy thinks that after 2-3 years in office the current govt. should be held responsible for not sorting it all out? I dare say he doesn't even acknowledge that SameOldLabour did anything wrong. Is he related to Arthur by any chance? The fact that these people still can't see the scale of the mess we're in truly baffles me.

Yet those who guilty dont seem to being punished for this fiasco of out of control banking practises. The ones punished by this coalition those who innocent.

Crazy drugged up policies like bedroom tax rather just get councils build 2/3 bedroom properties or partnership building programme where private/councils share profits.

Always hurt the end user than solving the solution. With short term kneejerk policies that dont solve anything.

96% apparantly cant move due to so few nationally 1 bedrooms places. Whats left usually high rise flats that government looking to knockdown in the towns as there ending there lifespan. Some towns already have. Why build 1 bedroom properties anyway if they got green light. They give little scope for a person to move on in life get married have a family. Realistically we should just build 2+ bedroom properties. If we cap rental to X amount minimum wage we then have years and years sustainable rental properties.

Hopefully drag the private rental down to sustainable level.

On the economy Like always said labour there was mistakes one worst was deregulation off banks. They did not bankrupt nation. Bankers real blame with there insashable greed. We should never bailed them out I feel took the hit. then labour been accused not protecting the investors/savers.

How many times does people need to post that debt shot up AFTER 2008. Rightly or wrongly they tried to protect UK from very bad impact from usa useless sub prime fiasco that collapsed the banking system. Yet those parasite never got jailed. Coalition still protecting banking system today with policies which not good long term like the one trying keep housing bubble going. Creating even more corporate welfare too which adds to debt.

What happened in USA caused world panic deep recession which brown and darling shielded us from. UK suffered less than others. Historically this nations debt been much higher even under thatcher government. What is biggest and by far issue is PRIVATE DEBT. Our private debt thats mortages, student loans, credit cards, corporate Debt, corporate loans, leveraged buyouts. This biggest issue yet we still making policies under coalition to INCREASE private debt which MADNESS. We need to bring Banks under Strict regulations and stop loaning to those high risks but nope coalition brought in idea help support risky mortages.

Its remarkable we not worse mess with the way coalition handling things currently. Most there policies not touching the debt but ideolgy driven mantra.

Originally Posted by Damien

Really? I've always used it as a plural. It's a collection of people and departments. I thought it was like a team where we traditionally refer to them as a plural (Arsenal are) whereas it's more American to refer to them as a singular (Arsenal is).

Conversationally, you often hear corporate entities referred to as plural, but the correct usage is singular. A corporate entity is a singular thing, even if it comprises more than one person.

The petitioner has set out text which he intended to be taken as a formal proposition (the resignation of the PM and his Chancellor) and his sentence construction attempts to reflect that formal tone. Under those circumstances, especially as he complains about having his intelligence insulted, correct spelling and grammar shouldn't be too much to ask.

---------- Post added at 11:28 ---------- Previous post was at 11:25 ----------

Off topic comments removed. Please don't try to play the rules, it won't end well.

[Osem]

I wonder if this guy ever petitioned for Blair and Brown to resign in respect of all the lies, spin, sleaze, negligence, ineptitude and cronyism they presided over.

Originally Posted by Gary L

Calm down Chris.
as long as he gets his message across. we don't care about the spelling and grammer.

I trust you signed?
everybody else is

At this time, 27,352 people have signed it - that is approx 0.0434% of the 63,200,000 people who live in the UK, or 1 person in 2303.

New definition of 'everybody else' I hadn't come across before....

btw, I wonder if this is the same Philip Bateman who started the petition - philbateman.com.

[Osem]

I won't be signing it.

[danielf]

Don't worry, I'll be signing it on your behalf.

[Osem]

Good for you, hope it makes you feel better.