To wonder what the govt has planned to punish those NOT on benefits?

[Glitterknickaz]

News link

This is not the first time cutting benefits has been suggested as a punishment. How are the government proposing to punish parents who don't tackle truancy efficiently that aren't on benefits exactly? Just like the assertion that the rioters should lose benefits, yes because they were ALL on benefits weren't they?

Once again the government fuels the totally untrue daily mail esque belief that all of society's ills lie at the feet of benefits claimants. Apparently they are the root of all evil, eh?

Not one of the policies publicised has said what would happen to those who do not claim benefits.

Money designed for basic sustenance should not be removed imo. At the end of the day it is the children that will suffer from these measures.

I'm sorry. I can't help but be suspicious kidz

"in the 1930's parents provided for their own children - disabled or not. Maybe because they had morals and values? Oh and no benefit system to allow them to sit at home feeling sorry for themselves??"

Actually, there were benefits in the 1930s. Did you not even know that?

Don't call me 'peeps' or 'tethers' when you know nothing about the absurdities you are bandying around.

Nothing you have 'revealed' has made me respect you any more. You are still completely and utterly wrong.

How odd that you would think adopting a disabled child would change that. It's almost like you're bidding for martyrdom.

Omg this government really are dumb, I played truant for the last 6 months of school because of one simple factor, both my mum and my step-dad were at work during school hours, so I just didn't go, they would ask how school was and I would just say boring as usual. Again parents on benefits are scum of the earth according to them, when my mum was on benefits I wouldn't dare play truant for the simple fact that she would hunt me down, slap my backside and frog march a very embarrassed me back to school, to be fair i would also do that to my children!!

Mmmm, even more suspicious. I would say that having to prove to SS you could support said child by working was very unusual...... I'd hazard a guess they were looking more closely at the care YOU could give as YOU were the one asking to adopt. I doubt their main interest will have been how you could pay for someone else to look after them!!

Plus SS would have wanted to know that you knew of any benefits/ support available to you and would have needed to know you'd access them for your child.

I think your last post convinced me......

That's very sad

Anyway will be going to watch Eastenders. It's more real than some of the shite on here.

See no-one picked up on Cameron going on about us competing with India and China (FFS) in the education stakes, when he has cut funding for HE to put the burden on our DC's! They did indeed put the N in CUTS.

Also the problem with the benefit system as I see it is the lack of affordable homes, thanks to Maggie for selling off most of the council houses.

If rents were reasonable then more people would go out to work as they would be better off paying their own rent rather than claiming housing benefit for high rent and not being any better off working.

I agree, adamschic, if In-Work Poverty weren't so acute and widespread in this country we would have a better economy and social environment in general.

You seem woefully misinformed freaky

In the 1930s the majority of disabled children were cared for by the state not their parents, in large asylums built for that purpose.

Unemployment benefits were paid in the 30s it was called 'the dole'

And more garbage about ''I had to prove ..........financially support throughout his minority'' You forget other ''peeps'' here are well informed about adoption.

Still ignorance is bliss.

Yes Tethers. Being Welsh I know that Lloyd George introduced a welfare system - one that declared that those who put into the pot can take from the pot - allowing them a short time to find work.

The system as it was then was absolutely fair. Now it seems people believe they can take from the pot without ever having put into the pot. After all "Why work when others will keep me and mine?"

I wonder when posters on NM will ever be able to come up with a feasible excuse as to why they cant work. Sorry but being a single parent is about the most laughable excuse ever considering the Government pay the majority of child care costs. Don't try to argue this point. I know. I am there!

Yes, I try.

Oh kidz.

Did it take you that long to google? You should have just asked!

You won't be getting any more argument from me. It would be like kicking a lost kitten.

Don't try to argue this point.

And your point is Noddy?