salsa-king

chavs and young girls and the lower 'classes' and sit on my back side everything gets given to me... also illegal visitors & immigrants to keep having kids as its then allows them not to work and put into 'the pot' but allows them to keep taking outta the pot?


just to me the government's always helping (with tax credits etc etc and everything else they get given) to this sector of society.

where as hard working 'working+middle sector' class.. seem to miss out on the helping hand outs.

+Doc+

I think the fact young single chavlets get a home given to them makes a lot of difference.

salsa-king

oh.. also bring back marriage tax allowance too

Timwinner

iTrader: (3)

My girlfriend and I work, we work so hard. We own a house (mortgage anyway) and the likelyhood we can afford a baby in the next two years is very remote.
Even though between us we contribute more the 20k in tax a year

I sometimes wonder if giving up work and just knocking one out would be the answer..... Then I watch the Trisha show..........My god.......

Tam the bam

Makes me wonder if we're the stupid ones, working day in, day out, paying morgages, council/income TAX, NI blah de blah, yet these ******* sit on their ***** all day receiving benefit after benefit and basically live life free of charge! This country really is a scroungers paradise!

nixxon

Reading the Telegraph this morning.
Shocked to see , if a couple have one kid, one earner, then increasing their income from £10,000 to £20,000 would result in an extra £3000 in their pocket
A marginal taxation rate of 70%!
What's the point in working harder?
The more brats they have, that £3000 gets even less.

salsa-king

work harder earn more money.. over £100k and pay out even more, so why bother trying to earn more or why even go to uni to get the better paid jobs?

Terminator X

iTrader: (7)

If the system can be "played" so that there is more benifit in having a large family vs working for a living then it will always be abused by some. If just 1% of the poulation play the system though then it's hardly worth the effort of changing it (how many people really do this though)?

IMHO benifits should give people just enough to survive hence they'd be better off working. It's a tough one though as a babysitter might be £5 p/h so to be better of at work you'd need to be earning at least £10 p/h wouldn't you?

TX.

salsa-king

TX do you mind explaining your saying above please, as my wife reads it totally different to the way I read it.









we all know why we go to work.. so we don't end up like this..

PeteBrant

Of course your taxes go on other things than benefits. The total tax take is £600 billion or thereabouts, and £200billion is welfare - Half of that is pensions. Around £100 billion is benefit payments. Of course there will be a lot of genuine cases in that £100 billion.

Its all about the common good - It would be utterly unfair to expect someone on £20,000 to contribute the same amount as someone on £200,000 to the running of the country.

kingofturds

iTrader: (1)

Cring back milk tokens and fod vouchers, and if there is such a stigma attached to vouchers then get a job.

ronjeramy

iTrader: (1)

There's no incentive for them to work, working for say min wage @ approx £6.50 an hour for 37 hours a week there going to get £240.50 a week BEFORE tax and NI where on income support they'll get anything like £200 a week if they have a couple of kids, plus cheaper council tax and rent, so why would they want to work for same money?

pitcha44

what i want to know is how the f**k do they get all this money
i have just finnished work on medical grounds after 16 years with the same company. my wife works 16 hours a week and we have a 2 year old son we get £80 a month for are son and £17 a week for me. with my wifes wages we are cutting into are savings

salsa-king

but why shouldn't we all pay the same % rate?

ronjeramy

iTrader: (1)

Probably being too honest, or saying too much to the Dss

pitcha44

i dont want to lie to them it will be just my luck to get cought. ill be the 1 in there next tv add

Lisawrx

iTrader: (1)

Well I do, purely because I am not of the nature to be on the take. Until my circumstances change, I will continue in my crappy job, and pay my way.

I do agree that it must be appealing to some when you look at the figures, and going by what I've heard from some, it's no surprise some people take this route.

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

Actually that's a bloody good idea. Whilst I don't especially begrudge providing food and shelter to those who cannot provide for themselves, I certainly do begrudge providing them with booze, **** and plasma televisions.

Indeed - what possible reason can there be for allowing what is essentially public money to be used for non-essentials?

ScoobyWon't

Phil, I seem to remember you making money out of chavs by selling them neons to stick onto the bottom of their chav-mobiles. At least some of the benefits you've paid out to them have made their way back in to your pocket by selling them tacky lights, plus you should take pride in making them look even stupider than they already did...

The Zohan

Yes it is a good idea - 99% sure it will not happen as it will be seen as a human rights issue, making them appear different, bit like the hi viz stuff for those doing coimmunity service.


About time child benefit was limited to up to 2 children and above that then no more - se how this affects the scrounger baby-machines, they might have to give up ****, cider, dope and Sky TV - God forbid!

About time dole type benefits where time limited so those on long term unemployemnt where encouraged to find work...

About time immigration was capped until all those UK unemployed have jobs or only those roles that cannot be filled are filled by those from outside the UK


However, my three 'about times' are never gonna happen now are they, europe will see to that...

Timwinner

iTrader: (3)

You couldnt be more right, But you know what will happen, European court will decide they should have booze vouchers, *** vouchers, bright house the weekly payment store vouchers...........

Whenever I drive past the job centre and I see people smoking I just feel so disappointed that my tax money has paid for that, and that £5 could have gone on bus fare to a job interview...... god forbid!

PeteBrant

Because if you had a flat rate, it would in all likelyhood be around the 27% mark.

Now, is it fair to ask someone on £15,000 to pay more tax, so that the person on £300,000 can pay less?

kingofturds

iTrader: (1)

It would definitely provide more incentive for the lazy buggars to work.

OllyK

Yes, the welfare state and apathetic parents have a lot to answer for.

Illegals can't claim benefits. They may be working illegally and not contributing to the tax take though.

fatherpierre

Illegals can.

They either use a fake ID to get registered, or become legal by handing themselves in.

They then get leave to stay, and access to benefits.

I had a guy hand himself in about a year ago who had been here for 7 years using fake documents and he'd never worked, was living in a council flat and had been claiming benefits for all the time he'd been here.

He had reasons to hand himself in - it was not by choice.

Oh, and he had 5 kids all under 6. They are all legal here by default.

salsa-king

that doesn't make sense.

a % is on what ever you earn.

Those on £15k pay 27%
those on £300k pay 27%.. which will be more TAX than those on £15k!



the more you earn the more tax you pay.

Terminator X

iTrader: (7)

Meant that when supported you can look after your kid(s) = no child minder; when working you'll pay at least £5 p/h for childcare so when you work & earn £5 p/h you're effectively working for no pay. Anything over a fiver has to be "significant" to make it worthwhile. For a lot of people (albeit probably a minority vs entire UK population) that means there is no benifit to them working.

TX.

unclebuck

does 'child support benefit' from the government...encourage 'Chavs'..


Do bears sh*t in the woods?

c_maguire

'common good'......I'm sick to the back teeth of hearing that crap. This government's interpretation of that is one hell of a lot different to mine, and most other people's I would suggest. It's very 'common' but 'good' doesn't figure in it very often.
Never mind, Public Sector pensions will bankrupt this country soon enough.
Kevin

Lisawrx

iTrader: (1)

Yes that is true, but for someone who is only on say £15k or less, 27% would leave them with very little, with similar bills to pay as someone earning way more than that.

Of course someone on £300k would still be paying more, in terms of amount, but relatively they would be less affected by that %/amount, than someone 'worse off'.

I hope I'm making some sense here, I know what I mean though, even if nobody else does.