How wicked of you, David Cameron.

[vivizone]

So we're going back to Victorian notions of the 'undeserving poor'. Time to re-open the workhouses.

How this man and his cronies are getting away with so much damage done to the ordinary man and woman, I do not know.

Help us all.

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/nov/09/deserving-families-council-housing-priority

Of all the people Ive known who were involved in work within their community and volunteering etc, doing really useful, helpful stuff for those around them that no one else would bother with, all of them were on benefits.

Right rough and common most of them were too, lots would probably not want anything to do with them, but they were the ones 'doing'

So where would they fit in this?

They were right old benefit scrounging scum by those definitions, but they were giving back and amazing amount.

Hmmm what would you say niceguy?

*an amazing amount

"So what about the homeless? Well even the rather biased article points out that the families will be housed in the private sector."

Oh of course, silly us, the private sector!

The govt is going to force private landlords to take HB tenants is it? Bearing in mind the reasons given (higher insurance/insurance companies not insuring if tenants are HB/harder to evict/etc) How exactly are the govt going to achieve that?

Are they going to incentivise(sp?) that? Paying the LL's extra? That'll get the deficit down wont it?

Good luck with it all Charlie.

I come froma poor country with no welfare state, so I understand outraged's comment about feeling fortunate.

I think it is brilliant that there is a safety net for those who are too ill to work, but my everyday experience suggests that we just haven't made hard work worthwhile any more. I think it is really important that if you can work you do. I know unemployment is high, but the number of immigrants doing service jobs is astonishing. If you live in London, can you remember the last time ou were served by someone who spoke English as a first language? I assume that employers would prefer to give the jobs to people who speak English first if they are hard working and competent, and this suggests to me a real lack of decent candidates. Equally where I work we regularly get people refusing overtime, pay rises etc as it will affect their benefits - something has gone wrong when this is happening. I appreciate this is anecdotes rather than statistics.

These things always make me laugh, there are NO council houses, haven't been for years, whats the debate exactly ?

Mosman Do you mean no empty council houses? Or none at all?

What do you mean Mosman?

Mosman, at the risk of getting into a silly argument, yes there are, there are lots. They don't become vacant very often, and so there's a waiting list, the argument is about how they proritise the empty ones. ( some council houses were sold off previously, but not the bulk of them)

Amber, my experience of volunteers is very different to yours, and I do have a large amount of experience in the charity sector and of volunteers.

In my experience, over 8 national and local charities, volunteers tend to be working people who don't have young children (often people in services such as nursing, teaching or policing) working people whose children are old enough to have left home, retired people, people who have a personal reason to work with a particular charity, such as having a family member who is one of the charities intended beneficiaries, and people who are disabled and unable to work regular hours.

Not even one of the many people I regularly have contact with through volunteering lives on non disability related benefits.

Sorry I meant available council houses, a friend of mine has been on the list for a god forsaken area, 2 beds would be lovely, for 12 years.
You've more chance of being hit by a bus no doubt.

Yes I have experience of that kind of volunteer too outraged, my post though was talking about the sort of work that no one else wants to do as outlined in my first paragraph.

Your friend must be adequately housed then?

I guess you could say that, but she's also up to her eyes in debt because the numbers don't work, rent is more than HB by a long chalk, food goes on the credit card etc, what she'll do if the TC's are reduced further I don't know.

Horrible position to be in.

One of the worst thing Thatcher ever did was bringing in right to buy.

Mosman - that's the point, the list isn't one where you keep the same point and eventually rise to the top, it's a list where new people who are added adn viewed as a greater priority will go to the top. Your friend is obviously well housed so she will never get to the top of the list. This argument is about which groups should get to jump to the top. this could be good for your friend if she does voluntary work and prove she's a good tenant, it might mean she one day gets to the top.

My friend is a TA on her own with three kids, shove a broom up her arse and she'll sweep at the same time where and when would she be able to volunteer ?

Without wanting to change the course of the thread completely, what type of voluntary work are you referring to Amber?

I'm not trying to be picky or argumentative by the way, I'm genuinely interested in what you think the sort of voluntary work is that no one else wants to do.

No problem outraged.

The sort that is generally within the community in which people like that live, the kind that others may be scared to do due to their own misconceptions about certain groups of people and because it goes on the whole unrecognised.

Let me just say I'm not knocking those that volunteer in the more recognised areas as my Mum does exactly that and fits your experience to a tee!

Ive known people that set up club type things for teens, most of which don't get any gov help [for the clubs] fund raise off their own backs, put in long hours and hard work.

One lovely woman who started off running erands for her aged father and ended up caring for about 15 other elderly people who had no one, good few of them were cantankerous old gits that were probably on their own of their own doing! but she did it all the same.

Lots of that sort of thing.

Our ultimate goal is to ensure they support people when they need it, but also allow and encourage people to move off benefits and into full-time work when they can. With that in mind, we will, for the first time, place conditions on people who are working part-time and claiming benefit on top. If someone can't work full-time because of an illness or caring responsibilities or simply because a full-time job isn't available, then we will not place additional expectations on them. But if there is no reason why someone can't work full-time, we will ask them to take steps to find that full-time work. This is a reasonable move.
www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/01/universal-credit-debunking-myths

So let us be crystal clear shall we: Working people, those that have jobs part time, self employed or even full time but under 25 hours will be considered just the very same, no diffrence at all from those recieving benefits. If your not working hard enough, it will be the same as your not working at all. A civil servant or more likely someone from a private company can and will tell you that you are not doing all you can to get a full time job, or another part time job. And so you will be sanctioned in the same way as those who are unemployed. Before the slavering masses start pounding away at their keyboards, I draw your attention to the huge number of those who have been found falsely found fit for work, and the massive cost and disruption caused. If anyone is left thinking the effects of this will be minimal I suggest they start looking at how the housing policy change and Universial credit will work together. Then add the growing numbers of disabled people being made homeless as a result of the new bedroom tax, add those who will fall in to rent arrears leading to eviction as a result of moving to monthly benefits, and finally the loss of even more jobs due to families being forced to move, take on careing roles, being sanctioned for choosing not to work every hour that they can stay awake. We do not need the workhouses, they are here and we are paying to live in them.

Thanks Amber

You make a good point about people who make a valuable contribution to society in a way that can't be recognised because its not affiliated to a particular charity. There are also lots of very worthy causes that can't be a registered charity because they are simply too small (you have to have a bank account turnover of £5000 before the charities Commission will consider giving you a number) and not being registered severely limits avenues of fundraising and the ability to recruit new volunteers.

It's a wonder anyone actually contributes anything to society these days because you get more if you don't.

That article by Lord David Fraud (sic) is full of lies and half truths. What he doesn't say is approx. 80% of housing benefit is paid to those in work, and hard working people have to get their wages topped up with tax credits. All his policies are going to do is force more already poor people into destitution.

Rollout of Universal Credit delayed by computer glitch.

I contribute absolutely nothing to society, of course.
Other than savings on an approximately £150k care bill per annum, of course.