It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Benefits System Attacks Families

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler

I wasn't talking about wal-mart subsidies, clearly you didn't understand

www.forbes.com...

read on




posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 04:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: ZIPMATT
Let's clear this up - you can get housing benefit help easily , if you're not paid enough , or jobless

but the only real rule is

You dont get to live with your family and claim it . You must live alone if you require monetary assistance for rent .
How on earth is that fair ? If that is not a direct attack upon family cohesion , I'll eat my hat !



Lets put it this way....

There are people working long hours, maybe even two jobs and paying tax to

support themselves. Not large salaries Just Able to Manage (JAM's)


The taxes of these jams get paid in housing benefits (sometimes paying off some

ones mortgage and improving the standard of living ) of those who think work

is slavery.

NOW IS THAT ^^^^^^ FAIR. ............ Not in my book.



posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: SummerRain

Work yourself to the bone till the day you die - pretty much the situation for taxpayers right not,
not so much for the scammers, but believe what you want.



posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 05:08 PM
link   
a reply to: ZIPMATT

I'm assuming you are in the UK, correct me if I'm wrong.

If so your example doesn't work read below:



www.citizensadvice.org.uk...


"The Housing Benefit you can get may be reduced if another person lives with you who could be expected to pay towards their accommodation, even if they do not."

Another example is Jeremiah and Suzy have twelve kids. They are all adults now and all apply for housing assistance but they all "live together". In reality they really don't but they just say so to get more money.



posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 05:14 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

There is something wrong when the system penalizes a couple over a single person by assuming a couple will automatically be more financially capable.

It incentivizes bad behavior like cohabitating which is much easier to walk away from and breaks the family unit down. The state effectively replaces daddy.

Things don't automatically get easier because there are two of you in the family as husband and wife. Your costs also increase.



posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 05:15 PM
link   
Personally speaking, if they're the kind of family I'd even consider charging rent to, I'd be thankful for this rule.
As a taxpayer aka the guy footing the bill I'm also thankful.
Agree to disagree I guess...



posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

If you read the link I provided I took it very differently.

As I understand it

A: Husband and wife apply for assistance, husband gets 600 a month in
b: Husband and wife and adult kids apply for assistance, any one adult may get 600 a month

B: Joe and Schmoe friends apply for assistance, Joe gets 300 Schmoe gets 300

C: Joe applies for assistance himself, he gets 600



posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

That may be the UK system, but the system works a bit differently in the US.



posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 05:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
it makes perfect sense to me

stop all the handouts and the market will have to actually pay wages that lift people out of poverty or no one will work for those companies

as it stands right now a company like Wal-Mart relies on these subsidies to continue to pay it's employees the lowest wages. take away the subsidies and suddenly Wal-Mart has no employees

see how that works?


You know i'm all for everyone working and taking care of themselves but how does this work in towns, like many I went through in america, where the entire town consisted of nothing but several fastfood restaurants, a couple gas stations, maybe half a dozen churches and then houses and nothing else for at least a hundred miles in any direction. What options do people who live in these places have other than low paid #ty work?

Or even the town I lived in as a teenager. You could maybe get a job at one of the few grocery stores, the canadian tire, or again fast food places, maybe one of the bars or few restaurants there, or landscaping. The only other options were applying at the pulp and paper mill and hoping you can get on the waiting list where you may get an interview in a couple years, the ferries where again you go on a waiting list or maybe if you're lucky enough to have medical training you can get on the waiting list to apply at the hospital.

When I lived there my choices were keep working at the grocery store, like the middle aged dudes I worked with who'd been there since they were teenagers or leave town. I chose the second option. That's not always option for people living there though.

It'd be nice if we lived in a magic world where you could just stop helping people and there would be all these livable jobs that suddenly exist everywhere for everyone. Not having handouts won't make companies pay more. Look at countries with abysmal wages and no government assistance or fair wage laws. Companies don't raise pay and people don't refuse work because the wage is unlivable. It's the same kind of magic thinking that people advocating universal basic income live on. That somehow just giving everyone money will fix things. That won't work any more than just stopping all assistance.

I do agree companies need an incentive to pay a livable wage though. In the end there will always be people who are unable to do more than low skilled work...that doesn't mean that work is unnecessary or that the people doing it deserve to be paid a wage they can't survive on though. Giving money to people isn't the answer but taking away the only safety net people have isn't either.
edit on 17/7/2018 by dug88 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 05:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: schuyler

I wasn't talking about wal-mart subsidies, clearly you didn't understand

www.forbes.com...

read on


You certainly were. Here is what you said:


originally posted by: toysforadults

as it stands right now a company like Wal-Mart relies on these subsidies to continue to pay it's employees the lowest wages. take away the subsidies and suddenly Wal-Mart has no employees

see how that works?


Now you say you weren't talking about Wal-Mart?????



posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 05:45 PM
link   
a reply to: dug88

Forcing companies to "pay a livable wage" is the same magical thinking as UBI though. It is artificially setting a wage floor and somehow expecting that nothing else in the economy will adjust itself to that new reality.



posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 07:52 PM
link   
It has been that way in America for a long time. In fact, a few years back they relaxed those rules since so many adult kids had to move back in with their parents because of our crummy economy. But they still cannot get housing money but they can get food stamps and medical assistance.



posted on Jul, 17 2018 @ 07:53 PM
link   
a reply to: dug88





What options do people who live in these places have other than low paid #ty work?


There are a few companies that can help them. One is called Uhaul. If you move to where the work is, that will solve the work problem. If you don't and are satisfied with how your life goes, then don't complain about it, you chose it.



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: ZIPMATT

Its extremely important to the Progressive Elites to destroy the family unit and that's why you have laws like that. By weakening the family structure you weaken societal bonds and create victims dependent upon handouts from the Government. Once received, those handouts assure loyalty to the Party that dispenses them.

Its a brilliant ploy and one that's worked quite well. Atomization.



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 02:29 PM
link   
a reply to: ZIPMATT

by your opening post I suspect you have been affected by this rule.

I witnessed in the nineties a massive abuse of this system and it saddened me to discover the monies were split and converted to beer tokens/temp means to oblivion.

I would say that enriching family members through others taxes is quite wrong.

options for living with relatives could be--

1. get a job
2. do the housework or anything that creates added value.
3. get a job
4.get another job

in my teens I shared a house with three others. two of us worked whilst the other two just ate our food and burned through the gas/electricity tokens/toilet roll in fact anything they could pilfer whilst we were away. come housing benefit day no sight nor sound of them two scumbags as they were out on the lash somewhere. things got heated until we bailed somewhere else with clean everything. it sure gives you a unique perspective on lazy asshats and the lifestyle they expect.

by signing on the line you agree to their terms and conditions otherwise follow options 1 through 4.
f



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 02:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: fakedirt
a reply to: ZIPMATT

I witnessed in the nineties a massive abuse of this system and it saddened me to discover the monies were split and converted to beer tokens/temp means to oblivion.
options for living with relatives could be--
1. get a job
2. do the housework or anything that creates added value.
3. get a job
4.get another job
in my teens I shared a house with three others. two of us worked whilst the other two just ate our food and burned through the gas/electricity tokens/toilet roll in fact anything they could pilfer whilst we were away. come housing benefit day no sight nor sound of them two scumbags as they were out on the lash somewhere. things got heated until we bailed



Lol!! There's nothing quite like a flat share to throw up the workers

from the entitled.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 04:14 AM
link   
a reply to: eletheia

lol 2up2down and I even resorted to keeping the toilet roll in a small safe it was that bad. the two shirkers even found out our new address and came round with a plea for--

1. one potatoe.
2. tin of beans.
3. 50p to top up the gas.

the straw that broke the camels back was when I discovered all the milk bottles and cartons they had amassed in their bedrooms were full of piss. we both decided to enter their rooms before bail-out to retrieve missing items. the smell was rank and I still get a little nausea decades on!
f



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 08:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: fakedirt

the straw that broke the camels back was when I discovered all the milk bottles and cartons they had amassed in their bedrooms were full of piss. we both decided to enter their rooms before bail-out to retrieve missing items. the smell was rank and I still get a little nausea decades on!



Yuk!! I thought I'd heard everything but thats a new one to me


Must be a male thing?



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: fakedirt

the straw that broke the camels back was when I discovered all the milk bottles and cartons they had amassed in their bedrooms were full of piss. we both decided to enter their rooms before bail-out to retrieve missing items. the smell was rank and I still get a little nausea decades on!



Yuk!! I thought I'd heard everything but thats a new one to me


Must be a male thing?


up to now, fingers crossed!

on topic I do hope zipmatt is ok post-rant.

many of the 'geezers' (workshy) round these parts in the eighties were claiming housing benefit. they would live at their mothers/fathers house and claim for another address where they would give the landlord/owner £20 a week and keep the rest.
I lost my job and house in the early nineties and tried claiming housing benefit. I got booted-out twice due to no payment and gave up on the third room for rent after wading through the bennies, superkings and old holburn haze. never received a penny.
f



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join