to truly believe that there are too many people making living on benefits a lifestyle choice?

[preparestobeflamed]

While I really do feel for people, who through no fault of their own, find themselves on benefits, struggling to bring up their children on a pittance, am I the only one who truly believes that for a large number of people, living on benefits is a lifestyle choice??

It may just be the people I know, but I have one friend who refuses to work - no children or partner, another friend who from leaving school decided she was going to have children, has had 2 children by unknown fathers so far, and all at the tax payers expense and is now planning her 3rd, to some unsuspecting man she hopes to meet on a night out, and another friend who is due her 4th baby anyday, by a man who pays her no child support whatsoever, even though he is a high earner working full time and who lives in the next town with his mum and dad. She believes he will move in one day, i think not and when he does stay with her, she makes it public knowledge that she is continuing to claim she is an unemployed single parent to continue getting all the benefits, even when he has stayed for months and all those mentioned have the opinion that they are entitled to live off of benefits for as long as they live.

They just feel so entitled it's untrue!!!!

I am beginning to believe that people who do not pay tax should not be entitled to vote, since why should these people who do not contribute a penny to the system, and possibly may never contribute a penny to the system, be able to have a say as to how the money the country generates is spent????

I also am of the belief that anybody who does not have dependents, is not elderly, sick or disabled should not receive any benefit unless it is contribution based benefit.

Am I really BU??

Am I the only one who gets so angry at these lazy people, who live off of their children for as long as they can, and in some cases, are swayed to have children because they do not want to work??

claw3, I meant a number of children per family rather than total number of children coming from poorer class.

We need more emphasis on education, and to get rid of reality tv and this celebrity culture. When I ask some of the young girls I am involved with through work what they want to do when they are older they say (depressingly) 'I want to be famous'. When I ask 'to be famous for what? acting, music, politics etc' I get a blank stare.
'Dunno, just want to be famous'

They seem to think you are only a valid member of society if you are in heat magazine every week.

Toja - Well it would be hard to reach a percentage based on how many children per family, and all different kinds of reasons then come into play. For example in Africa, they dont have much education about birth control, religion etc, so a family in Africa might well have 10 kids.

So yes a poverty stricken family might well have more kids, than a middle class family, but for different reasons.

If any middle class person would like to change places and have more kids, good luck to them.

There should be no access to social security benefits without a compulsary 2 year period of national service, of some form it doesn't have to be military. the same should go for higher education, with the exception of medicine/nursing etc.

I'm not sure I understand the argument against the benefit lifestyle that many posters produce: "oh, people on benefits don't enjoy it much either."

Surely, if that is even slightly true, that's even more reason to call a halt?

nybom is that you?

4littlelions - Has this not already been done?

I thought children had to stay in full time education until they reach 18, starting in 2012?

Do you honestly think if 'benefit scrougngers' were magically eliminated that carers/elderly/sick would be given more money?
Not a chance. The conversation on here would be 'why should we support sick people, i'm not sick myself and resent paying for the non working sroungers'
etc

yes, riven, remember the ol' 'what do these people expect, a couple of grand a month from the government'?

[rolls eyes]

"There should be no access to social security benefits without a compulsary 2 year period of national service..."

hahahahahahaha.

I don't know Smallwhitecat - I can imagine a lot of 'I'm not talking about the innocent sick, I'm talking about people who brought it on themselves by eating the wrong food/having dcs despite knowing they had a high risk of inherited illness' etc.... Of course it would not be representative of everyone on here, but I bet you anything such conversations would go on.

Whats so funny about the idea? And keeping people in school/college to 18 isn't going to change a thing

National service was hugely expensive - I doubt we could afford it tbh.

"such people deplete the resources available to those in genuine need"

The idea that there is just a little pot of money to go round to support the elderly/sick/unemployed is absolutely ridiculous.

We are one of the world's richest nations.

4littlelions - Sorry im confused you stated 'There should be no access to social security benefits without a compulsary 2 year period of national service, of some form it doesn't have to be military. the same should go for higher education, with the exception of medicine/nursing etc.'

I thought you were suggesting that it should be compulsory for 2 years?

It doesn't have to military like it used to be but 2 years of public service of some sort which would lead on to people having practical skills that could be taken forward into the employment market

What's so funny about that?

It's just a bit of a cliche isn't it? I mean, this thread has a bit of a theme going.

I'm waiting for someone to trot out something about immigrant-asylum seeking-single-parent-hoodies-benefit-scrounging-muslims. Oh and Princess Diana's Nazi Victoria Beckham TROUSERS.

That's it. I've lost the plot.

whoisasking-You just pre-empted my next post... bugger

you think those on benefits live lavishly

and did I read correctly that you think that people should be forced to do public service before entering higher education??

Absolutely astounded.
You know, I always find it amazing that this 'work-shy lazy scrounger' label gets slapped on so many people by those without the insight to look into WHY people choose to claim benefits rather than work.
I've posted something along these lines on a similar thread, but I shall do so again.
Before the election of Thatcher's government, it would have been seen as entirely unacceptable for anyone to simply choose not to work. It was not the 'done' thing; there was a strong sense of pride amongst the working classes that they worked for what they had. There was also a sense of community and people would help each other. I'm not saying it was some kind of utopia, but people's attitudes were different.
Along comes Thatcher and merrily snatches thousands upon thousands of woking class jobs. Whole communities are destryed; the jobless sink into depression and grow to despise the system that put them into this situation. Alcoholism, drug taking, divorce, crime and violence levels shoot up.
So, these people that have lost their jobs are utterly disillusioned and pass this onto their kids. They think 'sod it' because if you actually try and make something of your life the powers that be will just stamp you down again. So people get pregnant at a young age and claim benefits because there's no other choice. There is no pride or work ethic because that was taken 2/3 generations ago. Look at where the highest rates of teen pregnancy, pre-recession unemployement, drug taking, crime, alcoholism and depression are. I can bet its former working class communities destroyed inder Thatcher.
So it's far more complicated then it might appear. But it's easy jsut to blame the feckless poor and say they're all jsut lazy parasites. Otherwise we might have to admit it might've been the fault of some rich people, and who would want that? As they're all so bloody wonderful

Well said ElieRM

what I want to know is, right, where's my plasma screen TV and lavish holidays and designer trainers? I hear all scroungers get them.