+ Post New Thread
Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 7891011121314 LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 197
General Chat Thread, The Big Benefits Row in General; ...
  1. #151

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    18,530
    Thank Post
    527
    Thanked 2,648 Times in 2,049 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    925
    Interesting statistic - for every £100 of benefits claimed, only 70p is fraud...

  2. #152

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    6,069
    Thank Post
    902
    Thanked 1,013 Times in 825 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    350
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Interesting statistic - for every £100 of benefits claimed, only 70p is fraud...
    or £1.1 million out of £159 billion (if my maths is correct).

    Very interesting statistic.

    So the problem is more the method and ratios of allocating funds - not who the funds are allocated to.

  3. #153

    Garacesh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,428
    Thank Post
    1,310
    Thanked 503 Times in 369 Posts
    Rep Power
    240
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Interesting statistic - for every £100 of benefits claimed, only 70p is fraud...
    Fraudulently claimed != misappropriated.
    They may be entitled to it, but my issue is with them spending it on things that it's not intended to be spent on.
    Which I guess brings us back to @tmcd35's question about what is eligible? Is the flat rate sometimes giving too much to those that are deemed eligible?
    Last edited by Garacesh; 5th February 2014 at 04:23 PM.

  4. #154

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    18,530
    Thank Post
    527
    Thanked 2,648 Times in 2,049 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    925
    Quote Originally Posted by Garacesh View Post
    Fraudulently claimed != misappropriated.
    They may be entitled to it, but my issue is with them spending it on things that it's not intended to be spent on.
    Which I guess brings us back to @tmcd35's question about what is eligible? Is the flat rate sometimes giving too much to those that are deemed eligible?
    Who are you to determine what someone spends their money on? Is it because its taxpayers money going to them? How about you extend that to other people who receive taxpayers money? Us.

    Morally, to me, you simply don't have that right to determine how someone else lives their life.

    It is intended to allow someone to live a life without being out on the street. That's about as far as it goes in my view.

    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    or £1.1 million out of £159 billion (if my maths is correct).

    Very interesting statistic.

    So the problem is more the method and ratios of allocating funds - not who the funds are allocated to.
    £1.13 billion out of £159 billion.
    Last edited by localzuk; 5th February 2014 at 04:29 PM.

  5. 2 Thanks to localzuk:

    ButterflyMoon (5th February 2014), tmcd35 (5th February 2014)

  6. #155


    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,236
    Thank Post
    151
    Thanked 243 Times in 168 Posts
    Rep Power
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by Garacesh View Post
    Nope, I don't like any of those things either. You seem to think I only dislike people misappropriating their benefit money. I don't. I dislike all misappropriations. Like I've said to you previously, I'm keeping in context with this thread, which is about benefits. Please stop dredging this up.
    That's the impression your posts give.

    Why shouldn't these things be mentioned in the same context?

  7. Thanks to Earthling from:

    ButterflyMoon (5th February 2014)

  8. #156

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    6,069
    Thank Post
    902
    Thanked 1,013 Times in 825 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    350
    This is an interesting, if slightly outdated (2010) Beeb article on the subject...

    BBC News - Guide to most costly UK benefits

    Biggest Welfare spend goes to Tax Credits - propping up crap wages
    Followed by Housing Benefit - money paid directly to Land lords
    Then Child Benefit - available to all, even the super rich

    Finally we get down to disability, income support, and incapacity benefits - the big three this thread is targeting appear quiet low down in the total UK Welfare budget...


    EDIT: child benefit was stopped last year if one parent earns more than £60,000 (tappered after £50,000). But I think they still get it if both earn less and the total is more (eg. Both earn £49,999 per year - £99,998 + full child benefit) - go figure!
    Last edited by tmcd35; 5th February 2014 at 04:39 PM.

  9. 2 Thanks to tmcd35:

    jbailey (5th February 2014), Theblacksheep (5th February 2014)

  10. #157

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    6,069
    Thank Post
    902
    Thanked 1,013 Times in 825 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    350
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    £1.13 billion out of £159 billion.
    Bloody crap iPhone - doesn't support numbers bigger than 999,999,999 - obviously missed off 3x0's when I did the sums

  11. #158

    featured_spectre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    12,505
    Thank Post
    1,684
    Thanked 2,054 Times in 1,491 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    464
    I have reported people for fraudulent tax credit and housing benefits claims, you want to know what happened? Nothing. After a year, nothing happened too them. They were having a lodger in their house, not declaring and thus getting an extra £16 a week from the council for the duration he has been there, and they claim separately for tax credits and use separate addresses for the tax credits, gaining around £25 a week each from the central government.

    By my estimate they have been overpaid for nearly 3 years, and nothing has happened. I even phoned up a second and third time to ensure they got the report that they were fraudulently claiming as well.

  12. #159

    teejay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,260
    Thank Post
    290
    Thanked 796 Times in 605 Posts
    Rep Power
    348
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Interesting statistic - for every £100 of benefits claimed, only 70p is fraud...
    So, that works out roughly as the Income Tax and NIC of 1 million people on the national average wage, another interesting statistic.

  13. #160

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    18,530
    Thank Post
    527
    Thanked 2,648 Times in 2,049 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    925
    Quote Originally Posted by teejay View Post
    So, that works out roughly as the Income Tax and NIC of 1 million people on the national average wage, another interesting statistic.
    Don't think so. National average wage is £26.5k. More like 200,000 taxpayers on national average wage.

  14. #161

    teejay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,260
    Thank Post
    290
    Thanked 796 Times in 605 Posts
    Rep Power
    348
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Don't think so. National average wage is £26.5k. More like 200,000 taxpayers on national average wage.
    Lesson to self, never do back of fag packet calculations while dealing with a support call. Yes its 200,000 or so.

  15. #162

    Garacesh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,428
    Thank Post
    1,310
    Thanked 503 Times in 369 Posts
    Rep Power
    240
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Who are you to determine what someone spends their money on? Is it because its taxpayers money going to them? How about you extend that to other people who receive taxpayers money? Us.

    Morally, to me, you simply don't have that right to determine how someone else lives their life.

    It is intended to allow someone to live a life without being out on the street. That's about as far as it goes in my view.
    Who am I? Nobody, in the eyes of the government. But we're not talking about what I do or don't have the right to do. Isn't this thread for voicing our opinions on what we, Avg. Joe Bloggs, think should be going on? So in the eyes of this thread, I have every right to say how I think the money should be used. Just as you have the right to say how you think the money should be used. Which is the point of a debate, is it not? Please, attack my proposition, not my character. Besides, I'm not dictating 'how they live their life', you're being rather melodramatic. I'm saying that the government should be allowed to dictate explicitly how the money they are being given is spent, because that money is being given for an explicit purpose, and providing my opinion on an infrastructure that would allow that to be possible. Luxuries are not essential to living and finding work, therefore JSA/Housing/Etc should not be used to fund these by logical definition. Please tell me what's wrong with that?

    Quote Originally Posted by Earthling View Post
    That's the impression your posts give.
    Why shouldn't these things be mentioned in the same context?
    My posts give the impression that I don't care about MP's misappropriating money because I'm sticking within the context of this thread and not derailing it onto a separate (albeit linked, but still separate) topic? If this thread was "Benefit cheats and MP's expense fiddling" I'd gladly discuss them both, but it isn't. Divulging into MP's expenses will only throw this discussion off into two different tangents, making it non-chronological to read (by that I mean you'll end up with 3 benefit posts, 2 expenses, 3 benefits, 5 expenses, 1 benefit, 1 expenses, a page of benefits, 6 expenses posts.. etc, I'd rather keep the debate to the one topic and keep it streamlined)

  16. #163

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    18,530
    Thank Post
    527
    Thanked 2,648 Times in 2,049 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    925
    Quote Originally Posted by Garacesh View Post
    Who am I? Nobody, in the eyes of the government. But we're not talking about what I do or don't have the right to do. Isn't this thread for voicing our opinions on what we, Avg. Joe Bloggs, think should be going on? So in the eyes of this thread, I have every right to say how I think the money should be used. Just as you have the right to say how you think the money should be used. Which is the point of a debate, is it not? Please, attack my proposition, not my character. Besides, I'm not dictating 'how they live their life', you're being rather melodramatic. I'm saying that the government should be allowed to dictate explicitly how the money they are being given is spent, because that money is being given for an explicit purpose, and providing my opinion on an infrastructure that would allow that to be possible. Luxuries are not essential to living and finding work, therefore JSA/Housing/Etc should not be used to fund these by logical definition. Please tell me what's wrong with that?
    I'm not attacking you as an individual, I'm attacking the idea that an individual such as yourself can say that someone else can't spend money they're given to live their life as they see fit. The government does not specify an explicit purpose for benefits.

    And regarding luxuries - what do you define as a luxury? Is entertainment a luxury? IIRC the EU doesn't think it is... How about broadband internet? Finland has put that down as a human right in their country.

    People are not intended to only live and find work, even when they don't have a job. We aren't just slaves to work.

  17. #164
    mthomas08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,670
    Thank Post
    142
    Thanked 184 Times in 154 Posts
    Rep Power
    66
    Last I spoke to my sister she was getting £400 a week and her place paid for.

    If I remember rightly this was Housing benefit, Child benefit, income support and Council tax benefit.

  18. #165

    Theblacksheep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In a house.
    Posts
    1,964
    Thank Post
    139
    Thanked 291 Times in 211 Posts
    Rep Power
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by Garacesh View Post
    Government should be allowed to dictate explicitly how the money they are being given is spent, because that money is being given for an explicit purpose, and providing my opinion on an infrastructure that would allow that to be possible. Luxuries are not essential to living and finding work, therefore JSA/Housing/Etc should not be used to fund these by logical definition. Please tell me what's wrong with that?
    Basic human decency and common sense.


    JSA is £50 a week.

    Having a room where you don't freeze to death helps you find a job. Having electricity and a computer (that you need for government websites) helps you find a job. Having just enough food to get through the week helps you get a job. Having some suitable clothes for an interview, some shampoo and soap helps you get a job. Everyone circumstances are different, so they are given a tiny amount of monetary freedom to do this....

    If you have benefits for each aspect of heating, clothing, toothbrushes, soap, food, water or transport the government would spend more on the bureaucratic system of control than it would cost to simply provide a bank transfer for the small sums we are talking about. MPs can claim more expenses on a single lunch than the government provides for a single person to live in a week.

    As someone who has been out for work for 18 months (could not claim housing benefit as mortgage) and didnt claim anything (wasn't worth it) you don't get luxuries: its embarrassing, utterly depressing (to the point of worthlessness) and totally dehumanizing even without communistic foodstamps or whatever stupid idea people throw at a distraction. Even worse when deluded right wing press readers tell you that you're sponging off them and how you should be forced into even more dehumanising process.

    These threads are great for working out who to ignore.

  19. Thanks to Theblacksheep from:

    Earthling (6th February 2014)



SHARE:
+ Post New Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Anyone Attend any of the big Lan Events?
    By ChrisH in forum Gaming
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 17th October 2011, 06:18 PM
  2. Recycle the big Konica Minolta cartridges
    By dgsmith in forum How do you do....it?
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 15th November 2008, 10:03 PM
  3. The Big Bang Machine
    By beeswax in forum General Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 1st July 2008, 07:53 AM
  4. The big 300
    By Dos_Box in forum General EduGeek News/Announcements
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 6th February 2006, 02:19 AM
  5. The big debate?
    By StewartKnight in forum Hardware
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 3rd August 2005, 03:15 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •