I don't have ANY problem with whatever punishments the Government impose on benefit cheats. It's become endemic, & folks justify it buy saying well others do it, so I will too.
Or "those foreigners come here & claim benefits, so I will too".
I don't have ANY problem with whatever punishments the Government impose on benefit cheats. It's become endemic, & folks justify it buy saying well others do it, so I will too.
Or "those foreigners come here & claim benefits, so I will too".
What happened to honesty, & pride? Meh.
Honesty & pride? For a large percentage of the population that went out of the window some years ago. We have generations now who have never worked and will never work and we, the honest taxpayer, have to support them.
One thing that is becoming more common now is that when people get caught and taken to court they play the autism/ADHD/stress card as an excuse or mitigation, it's pathetic.
We have one of the most generous benefits systems in the world and although it 'helps' the individual (it doesn't actually it makes them dependent on it), it certainly doesn't help us as a nation. Darwin's survival of the fittest and evolution are being reversed pretty swiftly and it won't end well.
Ah well that's the end of my rant, now off to see some clients, I'm working on a Saturday as someone needs to keep the country going.
Have a good weekend @Tikay10, I'm certainly looking forward to watching the rugby later.
I don't have ANY problem with whatever punishments the Government impose on benefit cheats. It's become endemic, & folks justify it buy saying well others do it, so I will too.
Or "those foreigners come here & claim benefits, so I will too".
What happened to honesty, & pride? Meh.
I am surprised that any of our governments have not yet targeted pro gamblers/poker players. I am not advocating this, because that would be a really stupid thing to do on a poker site. When I was a youngster you either had a bet in the bookies, or at the course. If you had a win, you left with a wad of untraceable cash. I am sure the vast majority now bet/play poker online. An online account is an undisputable record. I believe poker winnings are taxable in the USA, as are casino/lottery wins. They surely must have thouight about it.
I don't have ANY problem with whatever punishments the Government impose on benefit cheats. It's become endemic, & folks justify it buy saying well others do it, so I will too.
Or "those foreigners come here & claim benefits, so I will too".
What happened to honesty, & pride? Meh.
Honesty & pride? For a large percentage of the population that went out of the window some years ago.
We have one of the most generous benefits systems in the world and although it 'helps' the individual (it doesn't actually it makes them dependent on it), it certainly doesn't help us as a nation. Darwin's survival of the fittest and evolution are being reversed pretty swiftly and it won't end well.
Ah well that's the end of my rant, now off to see some clients, I'm working on a Saturday as someone needs to keep the country going.
Have a good weekend @Tikay10, I'm certainly looking forward to watching the rugby later.
That is a GREAT post Tuney, especially the emboldened bit.
Because of my job here I often have to bite my tongue on the Forum, so I can't say what I think when I see folks who have never worked, have no wish to work, drawing benefits & playing pretty much full-time poker & saying "it's OK because I've seen others do it, especially all those folks with brown skin". Which is a bit like saying "I joined in the looting because I saw others looting".
Those that have genuine cause not to work - illness, disability (physical or mental) give them more if needed, I've no problem with that. But the benefit cheats, expose them, humiliate them, shame them.
I play a lot of live poker these days. There's 2 regulars - both mid-twenties, both female - neither of whom have EVER worked. Arrive in a taxi every night, stump up £50, £100 or whatever to play the Tourney, go home in a Taxi. Openly admit they've never worked as "it stresses them out".
Maybe, just maybe, instead of telling his cabinet friends, Mr Lammy should be telling the benefits department.
I may have told this story before, so apologies if I have, but we once knew someone who was claiming benefits, whilst working as a builder and playing tennis virtually every day, he was claiming because he had a bad back.
One of the other tennis club members worked in the benefits department and pulled him aside one day and told him that unless he stopped claiming for his 'bad back' he would get his claim stopped. So he did, he stopped claiming for his bad back but changed it to stress, it was too stressful to work if someone wanted him to build a brick wall in a certain time!
As far as I'm aware he is still claiming, still working cash in hand and apparently once boasted in the bar that he had never paid a penny in tax in his life. Despicable man.
We also used to know someone who worked in the housing department, she boasted how she was proud that she 'helped people get the most out of the system and if they had to tell a few lies then so what!' Despicable woman.
Think most of us know a family member that games the system.
Returning to the Motability scheme.
I'm one of those lefty liberal do-gooders. Soft touch, me.
I completely understand and appreciate that various people, with various disabilities, should get help with vehicles.
What I do not understand is why these people all have to have a brand new car, and not (say) a 3-5 year old one. Because that is the normal choice for people who are paying for their own car. Why should a PIP claimant on taxpayers' money be placed in a better position than the rest of us?
I have always naively assumed that these vehicles needed to be new, because various major modifications were necessary. Turns out that in most cases that is not necessary (and, if it is needed, then a new car often seems fair).
Think most of us know a family member that games the system.
Returning to the Motability scheme.
I'm one of those lefty liberal do-gooders. Soft touch, me.
I completely understand and appreciate that various people, with various disabilities, should get help with vehicles.
What I do not understand is why these people all have to have a brand new car, and not (say) a 3-5 year old one. Because that is the normal choice for people who are paying for their own car. Why should a PIP claimant on taxpayers' money be placed in a better position than the rest of us?
I have always naively assumed that these vehicles needed to be new, because various major modifications were necessary. Turns out that in most cases that is not necessary (and, if it is needed, then a new car often seems fair).
Comments
I don't have ANY problem with whatever punishments the Government impose on benefit cheats. It's become endemic, & folks justify it buy saying well others do it, so I will too.
Or "those foreigners come here & claim benefits, so I will too".
What happened to honesty, & pride? Meh.
One thing that is becoming more common now is that when people get caught and taken to court they play the autism/ADHD/stress card as an excuse or mitigation, it's pathetic.
We have one of the most generous benefits systems in the world and although it 'helps' the individual (it doesn't actually it makes them dependent on it), it certainly doesn't help us as a nation. Darwin's survival of the fittest and evolution are being reversed pretty swiftly and it won't end well.
Ah well that's the end of my rant, now off to see some clients, I'm working on a Saturday as someone needs to keep the country going.
Have a good weekend @Tikay10, I'm certainly looking forward to watching the rugby later.
I am not advocating this, because that would be a really stupid thing to do on a poker site.
When I was a youngster you either had a bet in the bookies, or at the course.
If you had a win, you left with a wad of untraceable cash.
I am sure the vast majority now bet/play poker online.
An online account is an undisputable record.
I believe poker winnings are taxable in the USA, as are casino/lottery wins.
They surely must have thouight about it.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/minister-blasts-young-people-on-benefits-because-work-is-stressful/ar-AA1yyqi0?ocid=msedgntp&pc=W230&cvid=b874d25174654b30f7e9b0c413ff1fd4&ei=54#fullscreen
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/disgrace-as-minicab-driver-uses-wife-s-pip-funded-car-to-pick-up-passengers-kelvin-mackenzie/ar-AA1BksGR?ocid=msedgntp&pc=W230&cvid=69865fd3c30c45d39e6f98ae612b7138&ei=57#fullscreen
That is a GREAT post Tuney, especially the emboldened bit.
Because of my job here I often have to bite my tongue on the Forum, so I can't say what I think when I see folks who have never worked, have no wish to work, drawing benefits & playing pretty much full-time poker & saying "it's OK because I've seen others do it, especially all those folks with brown skin". Which is a bit like saying "I joined in the looting because I saw others looting".
Those that have genuine cause not to work - illness, disability (physical or mental) give them more if needed, I've no problem with that. But the benefit cheats, expose them, humiliate them, shame them.
I play a lot of live poker these days. There's 2 regulars - both mid-twenties, both female - neither of whom have EVER worked. Arrive in a taxi every night, stump up £50, £100 or whatever to play the Tourney, go home in a Taxi. Openly admit they've never worked as "it stresses them out".
FFS...
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/david-lammy-told-cabinet-he-has-family-member-on-benefits-who-probably-shouldn-t-be/ar-AA1Bl6Xm?ocid=msedgntp&pc=W230&cvid=0af41293ddb046f8a80073b4dba6b2b3&ei=68#fullscreen
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/dwp-axing-major-benefit-claimed-by-over-90-000-households-within-weeks/ar-AA1Bmgy8?ocid=msedgntp&pc=W230&cvid=0af41293ddb046f8a80073b4dba6b2b3&ei=102#fullscreen
There are over four thousand replies and it's safe to say people are not happy with him.
I may have told this story before, so apologies if I have, but we once knew someone who was claiming benefits, whilst working as a builder and playing tennis virtually every day, he was claiming because he had a bad back.
One of the other tennis club members worked in the benefits department and pulled him aside one day and told him that unless he stopped claiming for his 'bad back' he would get his claim stopped. So he did, he stopped claiming for his bad back but changed it to stress, it was too stressful to work if someone wanted him to build a brick wall in a certain time!
As far as I'm aware he is still claiming, still working cash in hand and apparently once boasted in the bar that he had never paid a penny in tax in his life. Despicable man.
We also used to know someone who worked in the housing department, she boasted how she was proud that she 'helped people get the most out of the system and if they had to tell a few lies then so what!' Despicable woman.
Returning to the Motability scheme.
I'm one of those lefty liberal do-gooders. Soft touch, me.
I completely understand and appreciate that various people, with various disabilities, should get help with vehicles.
What I do not understand is why these people all have to have a brand new car, and not (say) a 3-5 year old one. Because that is the normal choice for people who are paying for their own car. Why should a PIP claimant on taxpayers' money be placed in a better position than the rest of us?
I have always naively assumed that these vehicles needed to be new, because various major modifications were necessary. Turns out that in most cases that is not necessary (and, if it is needed, then a new car often seems fair).
https://uk.yahoo.com/finance/news/benefits-claimants-free-electric-car-130000125.html
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/benefits-claimants-still-subsidised-bmws-205830110.html
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/mum-no-incentive-benefits-her-091948206.html