David Cameron calls benefit claimants - welfare scoungers.

[hornofplenty]

I was told by a friend that he had said this but I could not believe it was true

The friendly cover is slipping.

But not to worry he is not going to make "welfare scroungers" or the rich pay, oh no it is up to public sectors to pay us out of recession.

oh and if you look at some of the website the "jobs" are things such as "Avon Represenative" (or other such company) (no kidding - I've just found 6 of them just on the first page of results for a search for my area! - oh but a closer look none of them are even round here

Riven, on the other thread people were saying there's particularly strong competition at the moment for retail jobs.

There were unemployed people before the welfare state. They suffered slow starvation on poor relief or in the workhouse, if they were lucky.

Taking away benefits doesn't abolish unemployment.

Only read OP, and I dont see the problem... there are many many benefit scroungers out there and I personally WOULD like to see them help pay us out of the recession like we've all been paying for them for goodness knows how long.

He didnt say ALL benefit claiments are scroungers... no one has ever said that to my knowledge.

I would also say that I find it sad that some on this board who ARE genuine benefit claimants come on here defending the use of nasty words to describe those who do take the piss and 'scrounge' as though they're in the same group because they all claim benefits..

toccanfudge - I really dont want to be rude but if you were unemployed why would you turn your nose up at being an avon rep? I have a list of money making ideas for if the worst happened to me..! and being an avon rep certainly isnt the least appealing of them!

I would sooner do that than get stuck in the benefits trap.

"I really dont want to be rude but if you were unemployed why would you turn your nose up at being an avon rep? I have a list of money making ideas for if the worst happened to me..! and being an avon rep certainly isnt the least appealing of them!"

Because being an Avon rep doesn't always provide a steady income. People who have rent/mortgage and bills to pay need to be sure that they'll make a certain amount each and every month to cover their living expenses. It's a gamble many people are unwilling to take, especially if they are the sole earner and everything counts on their wage. The benefits system finds it difficult to take into acount this sort of work in claims, so people worry that if they take such jobs there will be some months where they'll be left unable to pay their bills.

It's like being a domestic cleaner - on paper, many cleaning jobs pay very well, but it's rarely full-time work with an unvarying income you can count on.

Well if that list in the Daily Mail i wat s really going t happen I AM NOT IMPRESSED.

It is just a tinkering and fiddling list. We need something serious.

Uniform flat income and capital gains tax at 40% over and above a generous £10 tax allowance for adults an £5k for children to attract people back to work.

Tax property capital gains like other capital gains.

A 20% VAT on all goods and services except life essentail products fresh food, energy, water, clothes and pubic transport.

If we must have an energy tax make it a uniform tax on carbon set at £30/tonne of CO2 emitted.

Get rid of airport tax and tax jet fule properly.

Get rid of insurance tax and put VAT on it like every other service.

Stop fiddling with a £1 billion here and a £1 billion there. Take £100 billion of cost out of the economy in one go. There will never be a better time to do it. Slash every public service that is not essential for defence, education, health and welfare.

Do it now.

I've been an Avon rep - in the days before you were lucky to get just one street. I had a whole "patch" that was mine. Wasn't bad pin money - used to make £200-300 every 3 or 4 weeks.

Now - you're lucky to be given a single street, and I certainly wouldn't go from benefits to being an Avon rep! Too many reasons to list when I should be cooking dinner.

but I think only a fool would seriously contemplate leaving benefits to become and Avon rep.......

Job creation starts with entrepreneurship unless you are talking about the public sector.

That means freeing up small businesses and not doing the CGT thing.

I think we need micro financing initiatives as in thr Third World, I really do.

If benefits pay more than the minimum wage then benefits need to be cut. Because the jobs are not going to arrive by magic however much one wishes it. The only sectors to be protected should be carers (I have a thing about carers) and cared for -- children, the elderly, the disabled.

They do pay more.. I know a woman on minimum wage.. works 3 days a week (could work more but doesnt) she gets her salary doubled plus £200 with benefits... theres something wrong there hey?

youre right backtotalkaboutthis, carers and cared for.. sould be protected. Everyone else has to man up and muck in to sort this problem out.

I suspect there'll be a few vacancies in the public sector when people head off to the private sector in favour if they do a pay freeze.

if you think that by totally cutting benefits to the genuinely work shy you'll "force" them to find work I think you'll sadly find you're mistaken.

Scroungers will still either scrounger off other people, turn to crime to continue to live, or starve.

My BIL is a perfect example of this - hasn't done more than 6 months paid work in his life, there are no benefits at all where he lives. He's survived, and still finds the money to get p*ssed regularly.

Interesting view. But they won't get public money though.

just personal experience that's all.

The point is that Cameron was merely saying that we can't just take from the scroungers and the super rich and sort the problem out.

So even if you took the public money away from the scroungers the country would still be f*cked up financially.

and those that go back to work on low wages will stll get public money in the form of tax credits, council tax benefit, housing benefit (yes even working people get those), and the elderly will still continue to receive their state pension.

All true, but basically I still don't get the point of paying benefits over the minimum wage.

so in actual fact, DC DIDN'T call benefit claimants welfare scroungers. he called welfare scroungers welfare scroungers, and if you read the article, it looks like a reference to the fact some people think an end to benefit fraud would tackle the defecit (with him denying that would be anything like sufficient).

backtotalk - thing is how many hours minimum wage are you talking about?

10hrs a week minimum wage work is going to give you a lot less money than 40hrs a week minimum wage.

I know exH would have to work 28hrs a week at minimum wage to get paid the same as he's entitled to in housing benefit, council tax benefit and JSA..and that's before tax.

I'm not clever enough to work out how many hours he actually have to work to end up with the same amount of money after tax is taken off.

England - yep - that's about it

EAP, that's it.

re. job creation - the coalition programme is full of policies for it - here

also exemptions from NI contributions for start-ups outside the South East:

"there will be a three-year £900m scheme to exempt start-up firms outside the South East from paying NI for the first 10 people employed." (FT)