No one 'wants' to be on benefits!

D

diy_fun_uk

Joined
16 Sep 2006
Messages
5,026
Reaction score
993
Location
Fife
Country
United Kingdom
That's what the do-gooders say, right? It's never a lifestyle choice, right? 100% of people on benefits would rather work, right?

Emmm, not Chris ...

Chris Patient, 36, told MailOnline he had no desire to work and was happy on his benefit payments, which includes £393 a month of Universal Credit. He said: 'It is plenty to live on for me. I enjoy my life. 'A job might be nice but not at the moment. Maybe if a supermarket was open I could get something.'

And yes the story is from the DM, how dare I ;)

www.dailymail.co.uk

Benefits scroungers in town boast they 'chill out and enjoy life'

EXCLUSIVE: The unemployed in Jaywick, Essex are claiming 'thousands of pounds' a month of taxpayer's cash - while locals complain there are jobs, people just don't want them.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk
 
diy_fun_uk said:
That's what the do-gooders say, right? It's never a lifestyle choice, right? 100% of people on benefits would rather work, right?

Emmm, not Chris ...

Chris Patient, 36, told MailOnline he had no desire to work and was happy on his benefit payments, which includes £393 a month of Universal Credit. He said: 'It is plenty to live on for me. I enjoy my life. 'A job might be nice but not at the moment. Maybe if a supermarket was open I could get something.'

And yes the story is from the DM, how dare I ;)

www.dailymail.co.uk

Benefits scroungers in town boast they 'chill out and enjoy life'

EXCLUSIVE: The unemployed in Jaywick, Essex are claiming 'thousands of pounds' a month of taxpayer's cash - while locals complain there are jobs, people just don't want them.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk
Click to expand...
It is of course true there are some people who do not want to work.

Nobody disputes that


What we need to know is what % of people on benefits are lazy scroungers.

What is that %?
 
Notch7 said:
It is of course true there are some people who do not want to work.

Nobody disputes that


What we need to know is what % of people on benefits are lazy scroungers.

What is that %?
Click to expand...
It's probably unquantifiable tbh. I suppose my underlying point is, simply through applying some logic, it is nonsensical to say no one is happy to remain on benefits. When folk dare to suggest it e.g. on political tv progs etc, there will always be a counter argument of 'rubbish, no one would choose to be on benefits!' which is a stupid thing to assert, regardless of your views on the matter.

Some people in this theatre won't be enjoying the performance.
Eh? Shut up, they all bought tickets, of course they're all enjoying it!
 
I would have loved to have been on benefits. 12 years in the army and then another 20 odd as a civil servant conditioned me to the work ethic. Gladly now retired and claiming what assholes say is a benefit but I paid in a hell of a lot of money over the years for my old age pension.
 
Fred Blogs said:
Gladly now retired and claiming what assholes say is a benefit but I paid in a hell of a lot of money over the years for my old age pension.
Click to expand...

This started about fifteen years ago, when George Osborne and chums wanted to turn the electorate against people on benefits. So they lumped pensions in with benefits, to make the "benefits bill" look really big.
 
diy_fun_uk said:
When folk dare to suggest it e.g. on political tv progs etc, there will always be a counter argument of 'rubbish, no one would choose to be on benefits!' which is a stupid thing to assert, regardless of your views on the matter
Click to expand...
Do they say that?

I’ve never heard anybody say that as a statement.


What we do have is the Daily Mail, The Daily Express, The Sun, The Telegraph, GBnews, Conservative MPs all busy talking about benefit scroungers, not one of them ever talks about qualifying it.

Why? A = because they want to create the impression everybody on benefits is a scrounger.
 
diy_fun_uk said:
It's probably unquantifiable tbh
Click to expand...
It is certainly possible to take the number of people on benefits then remove:

A) people who are disabled
B) people with a progressive illness
C) people who can’t work because they are awaiting NHS surgery
D) people suffering a mental health illness that has been fully diagnosed
E) people who are unemployed


Once you’ve taken that lot out, you are left with a small %
Benefit scroungers are a subset of those.


I would ask why is Rishi Sunak trying to make a major policy about a group that is a small subset, ie a tiny %

A = because it’s another R/W culture war.
 
diy_fun_uk said:
That's what the do-gooders say, right? It's never a lifestyle choice, right? 100% of people on benefits would rather work, right?

Emmm, not Chris ...

Chris Patient, 36, told MailOnline he had no desire to work and was happy on his benefit payments, which includes £393 a month of Universal Credit. He said: 'It is plenty to live on for me. I enjoy my life. 'A job might be nice but not at the moment. Maybe if a supermarket was open I could get something.'

And yes the story is from the DM, how dare I ;)

www.dailymail.co.uk

Benefits scroungers in town boast they 'chill out and enjoy life'

EXCLUSIVE: The unemployed in Jaywick, Essex are claiming 'thousands of pounds' a month of taxpayer's cash - while locals complain there are jobs, people just don't want them.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk
Click to expand...

The Wail says that claimants are getting "thousands of pounds a month", so why quote the claimant who isn't? ;-)


And there will always be some who are happy in benefits, not "no-one" as the OP is using for his strawman.
 
JonathanM said:
This started about fifteen years ago, when George Osborne and chums wanted to turn the electorate against people on benefits. So they lumped pensions in with benefits, to make the "benefits bill" look really big.
Click to expand...
Probably the most boring conspiracy theory I've ever heard.
 
Being lazy, contributing nothing and being a net taker from the public purse must be removed from the table as an option, except for the severely disabled or elderly who've paid in over their working lives. This is the morally and financially sound approach and it will benefit everybody in the long run, even the lazy scroungers whose fake and dishonest lives are being enabled by a misguided and unfair idea of "charity".
 
berty3000 said:
Being lazy, contributing nothing and being a net taker from the public purse must be removed from the table as an option, except for the severely disabled or elderly who've paid in over their working lives. This is the morally and financially sound approach and it will benefit everybody in the long run, even the lazy scroungers whose fake and dishonest lives are being enabled by a misguided and unfair idea of "charity".
Click to expand...
Berty is easily brainwashed by the Daily Mail

Poor chap
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top