Benefits capped at £26,000.00 - Poll

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Sixty, Jan 23, 2012.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Yay

    310 vote(s)
  2. Nay

    18 vote(s)
  3. Ambivalent

    9 vote(s)
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Sixty

    Sixty LE Moderator Book Reviewer
    1. ARRSE Cyclists and Triathletes

    Evening all.

    I know we've done this one before but just for my own curiosity; are you pro or anti the proposed benefits cap currently sailing through the choppy waters of the upper chamber?

    My own view is that no one should really be taking home more than the average wage in benefits and this cap also provides a safety net for those who find themselves suddenly unemployed (while acknowledging that cloth would have to be cut).

    The reason for the poll though is that the person chosen by the BBC to represent the anti cuts point of view just asked (paraphrased) "why should I have to give up on a good standard of living?" "why should I have to move to somewhere less expensive?" and I wondered if anyone was against the cap but could offer a better reason than whining self-pity.
  2. BiscuitsAB

    BiscuitsAB LE Moderator

    invisible poll?
  3. Where's the poll then?
  4. Sixty

    Sixty LE Moderator Book Reviewer
    1. ARRSE Cyclists and Triathletes

  5. I would have liked a lower cap at £20K.
    • Like Like x 6
  6. This won't make me popular, but my personal view is that the schemes as they are should be closed to new claimants. It's hard to rationalise, but I am uneasy about children being taken away from homes, schools and friendship groups because something which used to be legitimately claimed by their parent(s) is to be removed.

    It also goes completely against my free-market attitudes, but I would bring a fair rent act in again and consider some kind of punitive taxation for any rental property beyond the first*. It's rather saddening to see nearly all the just-about-affordable new-build property in the papers being advertised in terms of the buy-to-let income it would attract rather than how suitable it would be for first-time buyers.

    *I'd allow one rental property to allow people who have had to up sticks for work or suffered a bereavement to sell at a time which is convenient to them, rather than as soon as possible and losing a big chunk of the fruit of their labours.
    • Like Like x 8
  7. Why the hell should the rest of the country subsidise some randy gits who decide to drop a sprog every year or so, particularly those that have never worked & have no intention of working?

    If they want big families they should make sure they are capable of providing for them themselves.
    • Like Like x 20
  8. Just saw the news with some single parent immigrant on there moaning about how it was cruel. Obviously her gravy train has hit the buffers and if she feels so strongly about it she should return to her native country.

    Should have been capped as suggested at 20k. The question we must ask though, is why did it take so long for the government to finally come to it's senses. I see no reason why honest hard working people have paid a wad for their houses and then find some dolies living across the road. Almost certainly they will attract the wrong elements of society, parties etc.
  9. You could add to that as well, by chopping child benefit.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. I am all for capping it. Maybe it will stop the hordes of immigrant scavengers coming here and we may even see some of them **** off back to their own country to take advantage of their countries benefits. Well...maybe not.
    • Like Like x 4
  11. I think the government are on a winner with this one and I suspect they know it too. Even Labour are being careful on how they spin their opposition. Ashdown and his ilk in the Lords are, hopefully, hammering the final nails into the LibDem coffin.
  12. I have noticed that quite a few people are now in the proses of moving out of our country's rich areas .... To the new "Warsaw Ghettos" that are now being created mostly up north .... That's just where our government wants them to be.

    Now more of Camerans fellow toff's can now move into London and all our other posh parts of the UK.

    A classic case of Conservative = Preservative (of the rich only.)
  13. Labour agree with idea, just not the details, and as usual fail to provide an alternative.
  14. By the time you have paid tax , council tax , travel to work costs and child minding you need to be earning a good £40k to match the lifestyle of people netting £26k in benefits.
    With such a large comfortable safety net to fall on , there is no real incentive to go out and find a job . As other posters have said , why should those in work subsidise the feckless and foreign opportunists ?
    Make them work for their benefits , even if it's area cleaning and gardening , or whatever. No work , no benefits .
    • Like Like x 10
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.