Cost of living crisis.

[ozleicester]

[Trumpet]

12 hours ago, Wymsey said:

Am I the only one who doesn't really feel comfortable in getting free money?

Isn’t it a sort of loan, that will be paid back gradually in a few years time? 

[adejo92]

12 hours ago, Wymsey said:

Am I the only one who doesn't really feel comfortable in getting free money?

I get where your coming from. For people who have always worked, and always paid in to the system but never taken, its slightly strange to be given a hand out.

 

That said, when you have people that work long hours, and have to live a modest lifestyle, whilst elsewhere you have families with 5 kids,  sat watching their premium Sky package on their Premium 65 inch TV, in their designer clothes in their free house - having never worked a day in their life - I soon feel less guilty for taking some of the money back which I've paid into the broken system. 

 

Edited 18 August 2022 by adejo92

[taupe]

I think a lot of people are loathed to take what they class as handouts. It's almost a source of shame for them.

[fox_up_north]

I am more than happy to be given free money. In my experience, it's something drummed into the working class because most middle class people I know are happy to claim some sort of benefit or tax break. A friend of mine has a mum who's a solicitor and even at uni they were claiming all sorts as a single parent family, so he got housing grants. 

 

First thing I did after I came back from uni was sign on because I didn't have a job and the economic crash happened. Think I was on jobseekers for about 7 months while living at home. Didn't bother me a jot - I was entitled to it, so I took it. 

Edited 18 August 2022 by fox_up_north

[Daggers]

27 minutes ago, adejo92 said:

…elsewhere you have families with 5 kids,  sat watching their premium Sky package on their Premium 65 inch TV, in their designer clothes in their free house - having never worked a day in their life…

 

Erm, where are these people? I suspect they don’t exist.

[grobyfox1990]

38 minutes ago, adejo92 said:

I get where your coming from. For people who have always worked, and always paid in to the system but never taken, its slightly strange to be given a hand out.

 

That said, when you have people that work long hours, and have to live a modest lifestyle, whilst elsewhere you have families with 5 kids,  sat watching their premium Sky package on their Premium 65 inch TV, in their designer clothes in their free house - having never worked a day in their life - I soon feel less guilty for taking some of the money back which I've paid into the broken system. 

 

Fair play to you. I have absolutely no idea where the individual is coming from. The world is built on a renty economy. Just across the road from my office this morning many millions have already been made by being a middleman in transferring one asset between two people with no tax paid on it. And I’ve not even had my morning sh1t break yet. No one feels bad about this, £400 per household is a rounding error

Edited 18 August 2022 by grobyfox1990

[adejo92]

1 hour ago, Daggers said:

Erm, where are these people? I suspect they don’t exist.

Key word there is 'suspect' 

 

I can say for a 'fact' they exist.

Edited 18 August 2022 by adejo92

[Daggers]

2 minutes ago, adejo92 said:

You have led a very sheltered life then.

 

Having worked with many of them, they definitely exist.

Yea, that’ll be it. It’ll be me having led a sheltered life -  or the fact that you’re trotting out a laughable Tory trope about lazy people living a life of luxury on benefits. 
 

Your mythical family renting from a private landlord would be receiving total benefits of £419.51 per week. 
 

From that figure they are going to have to feed and clothe all five children plus themselves, meet their utilities bills, pay their rent in the region of £800pcm for a home large enough to house them all (with some room sharing), and their reduced council tax. 
 

They will need internet access in order to continue their claim and job applications, along with a mobile phone. Their metered utilities will be more expensive than those paying by DD mandate. 
 

There is piss all left over from that sum of money for luxuries such as your laughable suggestion they are decked out in designer apparel. 
 

As I said, you’ve made it up. Man up and admit it. 

[kyleolly]

2 hours ago, adejo92 said:

I get where your coming from. For people who have always worked, and always paid in to the system but never taken, its slightly strange to be given a hand out.

 

That said, when you have people that work long hours, and have to live a modest lifestyle, whilst elsewhere you have families with 5 kids,  sat watching their premium Sky package on their Premium 65 inch TV, in their designer clothes in their free house - having never worked a day in their life - I soon feel less guilty for taking some of the money back which I've paid into the broken system. 

 

To be fair I got me tv from Tone down the Royal standard proper cheep, my designer clobbers off Donny market mate and I ain't got sky TV anymore Dodgy Dave loaded up my fire stick thingy with all the channels I need don't be jel pal, have a good day at work just on my 3rd Stella of tge day down the tavern x

[Leicester_Loyal]

'Cost of living: Iceland to offer interest-free loans to customers'

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-62560997

 

 

 

[RoboFox]

2 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

'Cost of living: Iceland to offer interest-free loans to customers'

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-62560997

 

 

 

 

That's it. That's the moment. 

 

We're actually living through an Orwellian dystopian nightmare, aren't we? Fvcking hell. 

[Charl91]

1 hour ago, Daggers said:

Yea, that’ll be it. It’ll be me having led a sheltered life -  or the fact that you’re trotting out a laughable Tory trope about lazy people living a life of luxury on benefits. 
 

Your mythical family renting from a private landlord would be receiving total benefits of £419.51 per week. 
 

From that figure they are going to have to feed and clothe all five children plus themselves, meet their utilities bills, pay their rent in the region of £800pcm for a home large enough to house them all (with some room sharing), and their reduced council tax. 
 

They will need internet access in order to continue their claim and job applications, along with a mobile phone. Their metered utilities will be more expensive than those paying by DD mandate. 
 

There is piss all left over from that sum of money for luxuries such as your laughable suggestion they are decked out in designer apparel. 
 

As I said, you’ve made it up. Man up and admit it. 

Oh ye of little faith. 

 

Personally I see no reason not to believe what he said; there are well off people out there that have never worked a day in their lives, and he would know because he has worked with them. 

 

Makes perfect sense 

Edited 18 August 2022 by Charl91

[HighPeakFox]

19 hours ago, adam said:

Complete waste of money. Surely we can use that money better.what difference is 66 quid going to be when your bill has gone up 300 quid. 

In the region of £66, I think... 

[Footballwipe]

7 hours ago, Daggers said:

Erm, where are these people? I suspect they don’t exist.

They don't, but they don't need to. Because you push this ridiculous trope that everyone in a council house is living life like a Championship footballer and bit by bit it chips away at the benefits system, so when they make more cuts which actually do so much harm are made, people don't care. The demonisation of poor people continues unabated, it seems. Are Channel 5 still making money and entertainment programmes off of poor people, still?

[adam]

48 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

In the region of £66, I think... 

I knew someone would write that. 😆 

[HighPeakFox]

22 minutes ago, adam said:

I knew someone would write that. 😆 

Apologies  

[Daggers]

1 hour ago, Footballwipe said:

They don't, but they don't need to. Because you push this ridiculous trope that everyone in a council house is living life like a Championship footballer and bit by bit it chips away at the benefits system, so when they make more cuts which actually do so much harm are made, people don't care. The demonisation of poor people continues unabated, it seems. Are Channel 5 still making money and entertainment programmes off of poor people, still?

I suggest you go back and re-read my posts. I most certainly haven’t pushed any trope about people on benefits being wealthy. The exact opposite. 

[FoxesDeb]

8 hours ago, adejo92 said:

Key word there is 'suspect' 

 

I can say for a 'fact' they exist.

 

9 hours ago, Daggers said:

Erm, where are these people? I suspect they don’t exist.

They do exist, I knew many of them when my children were at primary school. I have been laughed at for working  and told I would have been better off at home.

 

Universal credit for a family of 3 children is around £1500 net per month, plus £200 per month child benefit, plus free school dinners, council tax reduction to around a third, free prescriptions, free school trips...

 

When I was a single parent to 3 children my gross salary was less than the net benefits I could have claimed, and I needed to run a car to get to work, pay for childcare, and wasn't entitled to free school meals nor the reduction in council tax. I was certainly left with far less than £1700 net!

 

The problem is with the system, but to think people are always better off in work is naive, and to think some families on benefits don't have a larger disposable income is also naive.

[adejo92]

1 hour ago, FoxesDeb said:

 

They do exist, I knew many of them when my children were at primary school. I have been laughed at for working  and told I would have been better off at home.

 

Universal credit for a family of 3 children is around £1500 net per month, plus £200 per month child benefit, plus free school dinners, council tax reduction to around a third, free prescriptions, free school trips...

 

When I was a single parent to 3 children my gross salary was less than the net benefits I could have claimed, and I needed to run a car to get to work, pay for childcare, and wasn't entitled to free school meals nor the reduction in council tax. I was certainly left with far less than £1700 net!

 

The problem is with the system, but to think people are always better off in work is naive, and to think some families on benefits don't have a larger disposable income is also naive.

Some people are very Naive unfortunately.

 

All of what you have said is true, and very common. That's before you even consider the 'disability list' that's ever increasing. 

[adejo92]

9 hours ago, Daggers said:

Yea, that’ll be it. It’ll be me having led a sheltered life -  or the fact that you’re trotting out a laughable Tory trope about lazy people living a life of luxury on benefits. 
 

Your mythical family renting from a private landlord would be receiving total benefits of £419.51 per week. 
 

From that figure they are going to have to feed and clothe all five children plus themselves, meet their utilities bills, pay their rent in the region of £800pcm for a home large enough to house them all (with some room sharing), and their reduced council tax. 
 

They will need internet access in order to continue their claim and job applications, along with a mobile phone. Their metered utilities will be more expensive than those paying by DD mandate. 
 

There is piss all left over from that sum of money for luxuries such as your laughable suggestion they are decked out in designer apparel. 
 

As I said, you’ve made it up. Man up and admit it. 

You think these people rent from private landlords? 

 

Your naivety is cute.

 

 

[Daggers]

1 hour ago, FoxesDeb said:

 

They do exist, I knew many of them when my children were at primary school. I have been laughed at for working  and told I would have been better off at home.

 

Universal credit for a family of 3 children is around £1500 net per month, plus £200 per month child benefit, plus free school dinners, council tax reduction to around a third, free prescriptions, free school trips...

 

When I was a single parent to 3 children my gross salary was less than the net benefits I could have claimed, and I needed to run a car to get to work, pay for childcare, and wasn't entitled to free school meals nor the reduction in council tax. I was certainly left with far less than £1700 net!

 

The problem is with the system, but to think people are always better off in work is naive, and to think some families on benefits don't have a larger disposable income is also naive.

I’ve used the latest UI calculator to approximate the income for his mythical family.  The figures are accurate. 
 

My point remains, on that level of income they would be wholly unable to fund the lifestyle he claims - which was the point of my original response, not to argue that there aren’t those who choose not to work. 
 

Anyone claiming people on benefits alone can afford luxury lifestyles are lying and regurgitating Daily Express/Mail BS. 
 

I’ve not mentioned that people are ‘better off in work’ - and resent and reject you calling me naive based on a claim I’ve not made.

[Mike the Metal Ed]

I was offered a fix quote of £185 a month four days ago, and now I'm ready to commit, they've hiked it to £207, within a WEEK.

 

So sick to death of dealing with these sadists. Life is utterly futile, it seems.

[howie]

38 minutes ago, adejo92 said:

Some people are very Naive unfortunately.

 

All of what you have said is true, and very common. That's before you even consider the 'disability list' that's ever increasing. 

It’s crazy how many of these families have children with things like ADHD.

I know a girl who’s never worked, has two children one of which has an ADHD diagnosis. She gets £130 a week PIP for his diagnosis. 
 

The thing I don’t agree with though is that she then gets a further £70 a week in carers allowance for, erm, caring for her child.

 

[FoxesDeb]

12 minutes ago, Daggers said:

I’ve used the latest UI calculator to approximate the income for his mythical family.  The figures are accurate. 
 

My point remains, on that level of income they would be wholly unable to fund the lifestyle he claims - which was the point of my original response, not to argue that there aren’t those who choose not to work. 
 

Anyone claiming people on benefits alone can afford luxury lifestyles are lying and regurgitating Daily Express/Mail BS. 
 

I’ve not mentioned that people are ‘better off in work’ - and resent and reject you calling me naive based on a claim I’ve not made.

But your point is incorrect. People do live this kind of lifestyle on benefits, I've seen it, I know people who do. I called you naive because you told the poster that these people don't exist, and told him to 'man up and admit he is wrong'.

 

He isn't wrong, they do exist.

 

Oh and I don't read any UK daily press, so you're incorrect about that too.