Jeremy Kyle show

#2
I really don't get that bit of it, the sensible plan is to completely do away with signing on, remove the whole infrastructure for it and the accompanying bureaucratic balls and invest a portion of the money saved (which would be considerable to say the least) in enforcement/fraud detection.

This is playing to the Daily Heil readers in gallery and feck all else "we made the scroungers go out of the house twice as often, hee-hee!!" while failing to mention that it costs more money. *shrug*

Apart from that it's plus ça change...
 
#5
I really don't get that bit of it, the sensible plan is to completely do away with signing on, remove the whole infrastructure for it and the accompanying bureaucratic balls and invest a portion of the money saved (which would be considerable to say the least) in enforcement/fraud detection.

This is playing to the Daily Heil readers in gallery and feck all else "we made the scroungers go out of the house twice as often, hee-hee!!" while failing to mention that it costs more money. *shrug*

Apart from that it's plus ça change...
0.7% of total benefits taken are through fraud
 
#10
0.7% of total benefits taken are through fraud
I don't disagree with you. The cost of administrative errors within the benefit system is higher than that of fraud.

One however is an error, the other is a crime. Ending the signing on system and providing a greater budget for enforcement from the resulting saving would reduce both costs. But plays to no political "house", so it won't happen.
 
#11
Just looking at the show now. If you ever needed proof that there's an entire strata of our society who will never work... Just watch this show.

Doesn't matter what you spend on them, what you give them, how you incentivise them. There is nobody on the face of the earth that would employ some of the creatures on there to as much as shovel shit.
 
#12
0.7% of total benefits taken are through fraud
Umm, where is this from? If it is so accurate why don't they just stop the 0.7%?
 

Legs

ADC
Book Reviewer
#13
I don't get the logic.

Make everyone who is unemployed sign on twice as often. That means that there will be twice as many people in the signing on office than previously. So are they going to have to employ twice as many signing on desk people? Where will the money come from?
 
#14
I don't get the logic.

Make everyone who is unemployed sign on twice as often. That means that there will be twice as many people in the signing on office than previously. So are they going to have to employ twice as many signing on desk people? Where will the money come from?
The money that they saved from the jiggling of some other aspect of the welfare system. The welfare budget never really changes it just goes in different pigeon holes.

The shame of it all is we could actually reduce the unemployment levels significantly, but there's no desire to do it.
 
#15
Just looking at the show now. If you ever needed proof that there's an entire strata of our society who will never work... Just watch this show.

Doesn't matter what you spend on them, what you give them, how you incentivise them. There is nobody on the face of the earth that would employ some of the creatures on there to as much as shovel shit.

The army is....
 
#18
This Government demonises anyone who hasn't a job, regardless of circumstances.

But I must admit the only question over the son of my next door neighbour is how many laws he has broken and how long he should be in clink.

He trousers full whack Disability Living Allowance. He also gets £100 a week Employment Support Allowance. And he owns 2 flats and rakes in rent. Total - £1600 every 4 weeks before getting out of bed.

This morning, he's giving me earache about having to sign on once a week, because this will interrupt his painting and decorating business.

He's not moonlighting. He's openly running around in his own white van with ladders and what not on the roof. His only apparent concession to a debilitating back injury which allegedly confines him to bed is he gets a mate to go up tall ladders if soffits need painting.

DWP are fully aware and do SFA.

My mother is 89 and has 10% vision, and must pay £50 every 2 weeks to have a taxi take her to hospital for injections in her one "good" eye.

I know what kind of injection I'd give the f***** next door.
 
#19
This Government demonises anyone who hasn't a job, regardless of circumstances.

But I must admit the only question over the son of my next door neighbour is how many laws he has broken and how long he should be in clink.

He trousers full whack Disability Living Allowance. He also gets £100 a week Employment Support Allowance. And he owns 2 flats and rakes in rent. Total - £1600 every 4 weeks before getting out of bed.

This morning, he's giving me earache about having to sign on once a week, because this will interrupt his painting and decorating business.

He's not moonlighting. He's openly running around in his own white van with ladders and what not on the roof. His only apparent concession to a debilitating back injury which allegedly confines him to bed is he gets a mate to go up tall ladders if soffits need painting.

DWP are fully aware and do SFA.

My mother is 89 and has 10% vision, and must pay £50 every 2 weeks to have a taxi take her to hospital for injections in her one "good" eye.

I know what kind of injection I'd give the f***** next door.
Then report him to the DWP or crimstoppers, he is committing a crime if he is not declaring his earnings and his income from the flats. It may only be a few quid a week saved on ESA, but multiply that by the THOUSANDS who are fiddling
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top