Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to be fed up of George sodding Osbourne and his Knobbish Ideas

999 replies

avivabeaver · 08/10/2012 11:04

The economy is proving harder to fix than he first thought

Solution- suggest cutting £10bn from the benefits budget and "limit the number of children people can claim for". So- are you supposed to choose your 2 favourite and just feed them then? Or what?

OP posts:
Flicktheswitch · 08/10/2012 15:57

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Prarieflower · 08/10/2012 15:59

But bia most people I know not on benefits don't have Sky,expensive phones(£10 Tesco PASYG here) or spend that much money in the pub(£5 bottle of wine on a Friday seems the norm).I bloody resent my taxes going on these things that I don't have for somebody who doesn't work.It's not fair.

usualsuspect3 · 08/10/2012 15:59

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

usualsuspect3 · 08/10/2012 16:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Prarieflower · 08/10/2012 16:02

.....and how do any of those things benefit their children?Confused

bialystockandbloom · 08/10/2012 16:03

When are they gonna bring back the workhouse, that's what I say.

Alurkatsoftplay · 08/10/2012 16:05

Nobody enjoys being on benefits? You are joking, aren't you?

Half of my town/family are on benefits (by choice) and they have a much better time than those in work.

usualsuspect3 · 08/10/2012 16:05

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

usualsuspect3 · 08/10/2012 16:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Bellbird · 08/10/2012 16:07

A lot of people here are in total agreement with the observations made by Stephanie Flander's programme about capitalism. Basically, the economy is in crisis until everyone has disposable income after all the necessary things have been paid for.

The situation for lower and middle income families is becoming more and more dire where there is nothing left over after paying for the basics. Therefore, it is no surprise that the tourism industry in the Uk is suffering along with high street shops and many other businesses that rely on all of us having spare cash.

Politicians need to stop worrying about their core voters. They need to address the balance of wealth. It needs a completely objective approach and should not be aimed at 'easy targets' or the worst off.

CelineMcBean · 08/10/2012 16:07

I would like to see some actual figures rather than anecdote and rhetoric.

How many people who are fit for work and claiming benefits for more than 2 years (say) are there in the UK?

Of those how many have more than 2 children? 3 children? 4 children or more?

How much in actual pounds would be saved by capping the amount of benefits paid that directly relate to the number of children a person has?

What is the maximum amount a family of 3 (2 adults, single parent) can claim in benefits in Newcastle, Bridgend, Tower Hamlets, Fife and Derry for example?

Then let's have a sensible debate based in facts not "I can't afford Sky it's not faiiiiiiir!" sweeping statements.

Prarieflower · 08/10/2012 16:08

That's slightly hysterical bia.

How exactly is the state not funding Sky,unnecessary phone tariffs and expensive pub bills akin to bringing back the work house?

It's such a cop out.Utterly hate the way the answer to anybody who even remotely suggests touching benefits is hysterically accused of wanting work houses and being Daily Mail readers.

Just looks a bit silly tbh.

CelineMcBean · 08/10/2012 16:09

Bellbird I quite agree about the distribution of wealth.

expatinscotland · 08/10/2012 16:09

'But bia most people I know not on benefits don't have Sky,expensive phones(£10 Tesco PASYG here) or spend that much money in the pub(£5 bottle of wine on a Friday seems the norm).I bloody resent my taxes going on these things that I don't have for somebody who doesn't work.It's not fair. '

I resent my taxes going to pay fat megabucks pensions and multiple homes to over-prilvedged, clueless, independently wealthy prats stupid people voted for and who think nothing of screwing over millions of us by allowing energy companies to gouge us, big business to take away our jobs and job security and bleed us for every spare penny we've got.

usualsuspect3 · 08/10/2012 16:10

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bialystockandbloom · 08/10/2012 16:11

Who said the benefits were for the children? Confused

In any case: £1000 a year at the pub works out, say for two adults having two drinks each at £3 a drink, as 80 visits a year. Less than two times a week. That a conservative estimate. If one of them had 3 drinks in one night, it's 66 times a year, so just over once a week. And we have no idea how many adults there were in that household - there could have been 2, 3, 4 or 5.

TV used by everyone in the house no doubt. Mobile phones prob used by everyone over 12.

"Free healthcare and education". What, a GP and school? People on benefits shouldn't be allowed access to these? Hmm

It's all in the presentation, don't you see?

Nancy66 · 08/10/2012 16:12

When the country is dishing out more in benefits than it collects in taxes, something has to be done.

I just wish the tax dodgers at one end of the problem were pursued with the same dogged determination as the benefits claimants at the other end of it.

CelineMcBean · 08/10/2012 16:12

I resent my taxes going to private landlords. They are the ones benefiting from housing benefit, not the person living in the rented home and not the tax payer paying for it.

More social housing would help. As would tighter rent controls and making the energy companies not for profit.

There are so many things that are better than taking money away from the poor.

Alurkatsoftplay · 08/10/2012 16:13

I resent them too, Expat, I've got plenty of resentment to share around!

ksrwr · 08/10/2012 16:14

if any child suffers as a result of his policies, its a bad policy. end of.
it breaks my heart to think of an innocent child having to struggle along without food and clothing they need just becuase MPs need to save money. its just so unfair.

bialystockandbloom · 08/10/2012 16:14

A family of 8 living on £30k a year to include rent, food, bills, clothes, and all the other necessities. I don't think I'd fancy that much.

ToastedTeacakes · 08/10/2012 16:15

Divide and conquer:

Circulate propaganda in an effort to turn the employed poor against the unemployed poor. When neither are having a good time of it, in reality.

A marvelous ruse to poison minds, which seems to be working.

grovel · 08/10/2012 16:16

You can get Housing Allowance at 16.

Prarieflower · 08/10/2012 16:16

PMSL Nobody needs SKY to have access to a tv,it's an extortionate luxury.

If you don't have a job you shouldn't be squandering other people's hard earned cash on mobile tariffs-you can get a £10 Tesco PASYG phone like we(and thousands of others do).

We and most other middle income families I know can't afford to go to the pub once a week let alone twice,it's a luxury.If you like alcohol get yourselves a bottle of Sainsbo basics wine a week at £3.50 to share like we and many others do.

Sky,mobile tariffs and pub trips are all luxuries,don't benefit kids and are a waste of tax payers money. However if you don't fund such luxuries you don't care do you.

expatinscotland · 08/10/2012 16:18

'You can get Housing Allowance at 16.'

For a room in a shared house now if you are single.