Private companies checking benefit claimants

[Hammy02]

David Cameron is going to work with Experion to check that benefit claimants are not spending money that they should not have. I think it's a great idea. Why should taxpayers pay for someone who doesn't work to have Sky TV, a car or a huge TV? If they can afford these, either the benefits they are receiving are too high or they have another source of income. Surely benefits are to keep people out of poverty and that is all?

tethersend - my bias makes me want to see my taxes spent as efficiently as possible (hardly a bad thing).

You pay taxes and have a different point of view? Well done you

This is a liberal democracy - we're entitled to express differences of opinion.

I was simply saying that for the purposes of discussions like this, the views of net welfare recipients are of less importance in my view.

Others may take a different viewpoint.

Sheesh...

It isn't YOUR money though Barmy - it's the Govt's money to do with as they see fit. Taxpayers have no say over it (rightly or wrongly).

There are people on benefits who want to work - a difficult concept for the Daily Mail readers to grasp but it's true. I work with a single Dad who is studying and desperately trying to gain some qualifications in order to support his son and get out of the one bedroom council flat they are living in. He will work as he wants to - yes he has a flat screen TV - he bought it when his old CRT one finally gave up the ghost and because he could afford it as he had finally finished paying for the washing machine. As a tax payer I begrudge people like him nothing as he is focused and positive.
He would probably have much to say about the benefits system and has a right to be heard - regardless of whether he is or is not currently a tax payer - he WILL be a future tax payer.
I also work with people who are not focused or positive because their life experiences have not been good and getting yourself up and out of those situations is hard for some. They would have nothing to say about the benefit system because as far as they are concerned they get their payment and life continues to be as crap as always.

The you get people like me with SN children who work part time and have increased tax credits and DLA. I receive far more than I pay out in tax but I still feel I have a right to comment on the benefits system. Including the fact that I would back detection of those defrauding the system - and at the top end with tax avoiders too.

while we're at it dawn, lets make teachers, nurses, doctors, soldiers and the rest of the public sector disclose all their outgoings. I mean, we pay them, don't we?

It's nice to see that my being in receipt of benefits negates my opinion that a little bit more money spent in hte shortterm might bring the benefits bill down in the long term.

But hey, I guess because I was feckless enough to have poor health I'm happy to live on the edge of poverty for the rest of my life, and any opinions I have on how the benefits system could be reformed to make it easier for people to get into work without being penalised are clearly just biased.

Barmy, I know I don't matter to you because I'm one of the "underclass", but don't you think the situation is a little less black and white than 'I'm on benefits, whahey I'm making other people pay for my shit life and why on earth would I want to improve myself?" People on benefits are the best ones to talk to. We know what help we actually need to get back into work if we are able to.

I have been told I have a 'limited capacity for work'. But there isn't really any work out there for me, or at least, no one willing to take a punt on a known epileptic when there are plenty of normal people out of work too. So what do you suggest I do? I'm sure you hate paying for me to be stuck at home, and since I obviously don't know enough, or am too biased to know any better, perhaps you have the answers?

How can you tell Barmy .do you assume all tax payers have the same opinion as you?

Some are Barmy. Its how you get a new job. If someone wants your CV right away you are going to look a right numpty if you have to tell them that they can have it, but that you need to get the bus to the local library and see if they have a PC free first?

No hand wringing here!

DP works in IT so seriously, if he did not have internet access when he was job hunting he would have been laughed at!

I don't know what he, BarmyArmy, means by net recipient of benefits Do you mean non tax paying even if your spouse pays tax? or do you mean benefits being your sole income.

I am not sure if I am allowed to have an opinion you see. Though I do work, I just don't earn enough to pay tax.

I work ,and some months I pay tax ,some I don't depending on overtime ..am I allowed an opinion only on my tax paying months?

only if you eat roadkill

Labour's biggest mistake, in my view, was to increase the welfare net ever higher and higher, to such an extent that people who had hitherto had to rely on their own efforts (and struggle thereby, admittedly), became inured to the concept of state aid.

From the initial payments of tax credits being jolly useful, they quickly became essntial/vital a "lifeline" as people's spending expectations increased and they became unable (or unwilling) to imagine life without such "support".

In other words, the safety net had become a trap - with concomitant reductions in incentives to work, save and provide for one's own family through one's own efforts.

It was all part of the plot to bribe as many people as possible with their own money and buy as many votes as they were able.

The thing is - it didn't work, other than to give us a massive great deficit and inhibit self-reliance.

Ah - then my opinion possibly counts for nothing with Barmy - sad. Definitely receiving more than I am paying out thanks to DLA. I spend more on my son though and he's worth it. The special needs support he has is excellent and includes some groups which I have to pay for. I thank the taxpayer (including me) that I am able to support my son in this way. I hope so much that he will work as an adult and will do all in my power to support him.

Barmy - the reason tax credits are so heavily relied on is not so that people can have a tits up at the state's expense, but because even the average wage in this counrty is low enough for people to really struggle to live on. People are often destitute without those credits.

The problem is not the fact that they exist. It's the fact that for a lot of people there's no alternative other than going on benefits completely. Which would you prefer?

dinosaur - "You have to have a pretty good household income for this to be the case, iirc."

You demonstrate my point (above) nicely - welfare has been dished out to people who for years would not have received any...it's an outrage that a household income of ~£55k entitles someone to benefits.

Tbh Barmy I think your last post is a whole thread on it's own. I only became a parent after Labour were in power so cannot comment on what was around before. For much of my parenthood I was only ever entitled to the minimum tax credits as I worked full time. I would not have missed the £40 if it had been taken away and would have managed without it. Yes I would find it harder to lose the increased tax credits I receive now I am part time but would manage. If I increased my work hours though my son would suffer - pure and simple - he is autistic and needs his Mum at the school gate at the end of the day to sort out any issues and to maintain his routine. Finding the right child care would be very hard.

Most people already aware of these facts already Barmy. This is old news, you sound a bit patronising TBH.

Tottwriter - and wages will remain low for as long as we continue to interfere with the market by (a) paying out benefits to those above the poverty line and (b) setting a minimum wage.

Livingbytheriver - I was wondering how long it would take for someone to move from attacking the argument to attacking the person articulating it.

Not long, in your case.

So then Barmy - am I worthy of an opinion by receiving more in tax credits and DLA than I pay in tax?

CB should be abolished...hopefully it's being frozen will amount to the same thing, albeit over several years.

The state should not subsidise the private decisions of couples (or individuals). If you want kids, fine...but pay for them yourself.

"This is a liberal democracy - we're entitled to express differences of opinion."

So, as BA rightly paraphrases Jeremy Kyle, we can all express an opinion, but only some of us are entitled to be listened to by BA.

I'm one of the lucky ones

"It was all part of the plot to bribe as many people as possible with their own money and buy as many votes as they were able."

Arf at this. So tax cuts for higher earners funded by removing benefits/tax credits and changing the constituency boundaries is... err...?