For being FED UP that people are living in council houses & on benefits, yet some how can afford to go on a holiday every year??

[cleo43]

I have had it with lazy shites that sit in the house that I & my dh ( the tax payer) pay for , living on money that I & my dh ( the tax payer ) make possible, having more than I have!!

Perhaps it's a little bit of a green eyed monster going on here ,but, this evening my neighbour that lives in a council house & on benefits has been round to show me her new car and ask me to look after "her" house when she and her husband ( plus the two children and a grandchild) go on holiday next week!!
I am sick of it. It was only last month that she was dragging me in to see her new giant flat screen tv!!
We can't afford these things yet we have to pay for these idiots to have them??

Everyone has a choice as to how they live their lives, we don't have to be good, or moral, or trustworthy, or fair, and getting asngry or fed up with peopole who choose dubious lifestyle choices doesn't actually make any difference, personally I choose not to let it bother me, if I get angry it will only affect me negatively.

Benefit cheats are nothing compared to corrupt multinational corporations and governments, including our own. And yet people are more quick to judge individuals

As taxpayers our money goes towards financing a hell of a lot of immoral stuff, not just people on benefits.

agree with KM and zippi too.

I don't thibnk that they could get afford this on benefits either
As someone said, they must be mired in debt
I think you should decline their offers to go round and see the new things. iT sounds like she's showing off

I agree novice.But, If they are running up massive debts, who picks up the bill? We do.

OP if you don't pay taxes (from your OP, your husband may pay some tax but you don't pay any), to what extent are you funding this person's life?

no we don;t ! if they default on their loans or debts, they don;t get extra to pay it!

Of course there are people on benefits who are honest and in need of support.
There are also a lot who claim sickness benefit who don't need it and a lot of people living with a partner who claim single parent status
I have a feeling the people don't realise how wiodespread this corruption is

I think we shouold be a bit more annoyed by the £1.25bn the Iraq war has cost taxpayers (so far) than about some people getting too much on benefits.

I agree beansmum

cleo people on benefits don't get their debts payed for them.

Can't we be angry about everything

The iraq war nessecery

I'll go and read the DM now

that figure is per year btw. Iraq war necessary? In what way.

At the risk of kicking off a whole new argument - why do you think the Iraq war was necessary, cleo?

I have lived in the same council house for 19 years, in that time i have struggled on benefits, put myself through university and got myself a very well paid job, i keep myself to myself so my neightbours dont know what i do, for all i know they may still think i claim benefits and see me driving my nice car and my ds wearing nice clothes and us going on nice holidays each year but i just hope that they are not as judgmental as some of the people on here.

People claiming benefits cannot afford luxuries, they must get the money from elsewhere, and that is nobody elses business but their own.

its all on credit cards, I shouldnt worry about it

Tax payers don't pay for debts run up by those on benefits..

another problem is places like BrightHouse etc and all these place prepared to lend money with extortinate interest, people see thay can afford something, a treat for themselves.. and then they're screwed because it's so much harder to pay back 3*the value of an item.. it's more expensive for those who need it to borrow money and this is yet another issue that should be addressed by the government.

there is a real problem with people who lend to people and then claw back an extortionate amount of money.. it makes the debt cycle so much worse.

It alwasy boggles me that whenever people whine about benefits as a 'lifestyle choice' and criticize the people who won't work for crappy wages, no one ever seems to point out that there's a fairly huge moral problem with the companies that won't pay a living wage. Companies who use illegal migrants as a workforce rarely get criticized for their slave labour policies (underpaying desperate people and threatening them with what will happen if they don't suck it up is pretty much slave labour after all), the migrants get criticized for taking the jobs that could be done by the lazy benefit scroungers etc, etc, etc. It's always somehow the fault of poor people that they are poor, never the fault of companies that have deliberately caused this poverty in the pursuit of profit.

illegal migrants?

at the Iraq war being necessary!

MadameZ I agree with you and think there is a huge issue around profit Vs poverty and one which is deserving of it's own thread I think.

and we are all the cause of this also by consistantly expecting more for less.

Squonk, In short, I think the war was nessecery to take that murderer down.

Generally I think that we are very fortunate in this country to have a benefits system that does support people in times of need. But unfortunately there is a minority of people who will abuse that system and of those some will get away with it. Whether or not you choose to believe those people exist depends on your interpretation of abusing the system. At the moment I work part time and recieve tax credits. I have applied for a full time job which, if I get it, will mean I will actually be about £20 a week better off...but I really want to do job so will take it. Whether you like it or not there are some people out there who WOULD NOT take the job because they are not going to work fulltime for £20. And that is what bothers me. And i am taking in to account childcare etc. And this is a generalised post and not a dig at specific posters on here who I know nothing about.
I have had a conversation with someone who has a problem with people who continue to have more children when they are relying on benefits to support them. She said that anyone could find themselves unemployed, disabled or whatever through no fault of their own and that she believed there should be benefits in place to help them but after that point if they then decide to continue having more children the state shouldn't have to support them. Trouble with that is it is the children who would suffer. She believes they wouldn't have the children if the state wasn't going to pay for them.This then comes down to whether or not you believe that people have the right to have children even if they are relying on the state to support them. I'm not sure on that one .....probably opened a whole can of worms there!!!!BTW this is just a thought not my opinion .....I'm not sure what I think and can see both sides of argument. Thought I'd add that before the backlash begins!!!