Worker v shirker.
 

I read today of a brother and sister who have differing lifestyles.
The girl works 50 hours a week to provide a home,paying the bills etc.
The non working brother,a father of four hasn't had or wanted a job since leaving school 16 years ago!
He survives on benefits,has a three bedroom council house,but would like a four bedroom home.He admits he feels sorry for those that feel they have to work to 'chase their dreams'.
By his calculation he would have to earn £20,000 per annum to make a job worthwhile.
We may be forgiven for thinking he is a free loading couch potato,but the real question is why do we taxpayers put up with the continual drain on the country's resources?
What kind of Government can encourage non production and at the same time punish decent hard working families?
We probably all know of cases where an aquaintance has said' that I would like to work more,but it will affect my benefits'.
Lets see what the General Election brings.
Though don't hold your breath.:o

Re: Worker v shirker.
 

all the same lampman, always been the case, never condonded it, but was always in the fortunate position of having a job, but can understand someone with dependants getting the best deal for em, its a big n complex problem, that does need sorting, but can't see how!:confused: though i aint paid to sort it.

Re: Worker v shirker.
 

Agreed Cashman the only way to sort it would be to return to the days of'means testing'.Then unfortunately the genuine cases would suffer along side the skivers.
Always remember years ago when I was involved in an Industrial dispute,we were' locked out' for six weeks.Having a three month old daughter at the time I enquired about benefits.
On the sixth week I received a payment of 49 pence and six milk tokens!
That was my lot,happy days!

Re: Worker v shirker.
 

Unfortunately it would take the government putting a lot more money into the various departments, providing them with more resources and manpower in order to stop a lot more of this.

And despite doing some of it, they just wont spend in order to save.

A bit like many managers/employers.

Re: Worker v shirker.
 

any goverment throwing money at it matty, will not prevent wages in many cases being less than benifits, it aint that simple.

Re: Worker v shirker.
 

I agree with you cashy, but the one thing that riles me more than anythings is the people that are being featured on the BBC each morning at 9-15, the cheats, we've talked about this cashy, maybe just maybe if the scroungers (those who are making false claims) were sorted out, then there would be more for those who really deserve it

Re: Worker v shirker.
 

Cut Benefits for the physically able and stop making hand-outs so easy for the likes of this man to obtain. We are becoming a work-shy culture.

Re: Worker v shirker.
 

We work or shirk in order to get money.
Ever thought what would happen when money is so worthless that it can't buy anything?
Ask a Nigerian :D

Re: Worker v shirker.
 

And ask a German who was around in the 1920s, if you can find one, they used Deutsch Marks as toilet paper because it was cheaper. Trouble is, they got Hitler to help them out of it. :(

Re: Worker v shirker.
 

This time around there will be no need for toilet paper manufacture worldwide

Re: Worker v shirker.
 

Why don't you just stick your head in the oven now then and be done with it?

Re: Worker v shirker.
 

this is exactly what they are doing, i regrettably am a shirker who has been on benefits as a single mum for the last 13 years, i have one child and now (rightly so) am being made to go back to work, as of November last year every single parent who's youngest child is over the age of 12 is being made to do this, as of November THIS year the age goes down to when your youngest is 7, as of next year it is going down to when your youngest is 1...so people who think they can carry on having children just to claim benefits will have a huge shock coming their way, i am not proud of being on benefits and i could have gone on to have several more children just so i could claim more money, but i didnt, since the end of last year i've applied for around 30 jobs to no avail, i've been on courses to improve my chances of getting a job and hopefully i WILL have a job by the end of the year

Re: Worker v shirker.
 

I hope you are successful soon Shaz.

Re: Worker v shirker.
 

so do i Neil, got another CV to take down to The Range tomorrow, they have a customer services vacancy going

Re: Worker v shirker.
 

Good luck Shaz.
When my daughters partner was unemployed he had to go on a course (think it was at the Globe Centre) where they got help filling out a cv and could apply for jobs from there as well. Can't remember exactly how long he had to be there but it was quite a few hours each week. If he hadn't attended benefits would have been stopped, why are these rules not applicable to everybody?
He was successful in finding a job, ok the wages aren't brilliant but they get tax credits and a bit of help with their rent. But to me it gives him a sense of pride to know that he is grafting for his money.