Author Topic: Surely, scroungers should be removed, wherever they come from?  (Read 1317 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline stephen25000

Re: Surely, scroungers should be removed, wherever they come from?
« Reply #15 on: July 13, 2016, 08:37:57 AM »
This is a dumb thread but I don't hold Stephen responsible for it as it's clear it wasn' meant as a realistic suggestion.

*can't believe I'm defending Stephen*

No worries Alf, I have defended and agreed with some of your comments on the referendum and associated issues.

 8(0(*

However, it does raise a point.

If a thread is started in someones name, shouldn't they be agreeable first ?
The McCanns were solely responsible for their childcare arrangements and there is no one else to blame.

S and S, two more amateurs making money from a disappeared child, and clearly without a clue.

Offline Carana

Re: Surely, scroungers should be removed, wherever they come from?
« Reply #16 on: July 13, 2016, 09:03:21 AM »
No worries Alf, I have defended and agreed with some of your comments on the referendum and associated issues.

 8(0(*

However, it does raise a point.

If a thread is started in someones name, shouldn't they be agreeable first ?

Well, it's a means of spinning of discussions when the original thread has gone off-topic. A problem, however, is that the new OP sometimes seems out of context.


Offline stephen25000

Re: Surely, scroungers should be removed, wherever they come from?
« Reply #17 on: July 13, 2016, 09:14:57 AM »
Well, it's a means of spinning of discussions when the original thread has gone off-topic. A problem, however, is that the new OP sometimes seems out of context.

Indeed Carana. What I typed, was in response to another posters comments.
The McCanns were solely responsible for their childcare arrangements and there is no one else to blame.

S and S, two more amateurs making money from a disappeared child, and clearly without a clue.

Offline Carana

Re: Surely, scroungers should be removed, wherever they come from?
« Reply #18 on: July 13, 2016, 09:36:36 AM »
Some interesting reading...



UK benefits for low-income workers (and the unemployed) do indeed seem higher than in many other EU countries.

An issue is that the way the system works at the moment in the UK is that you don't have to have worked or paid into it before being entitled to benefits.

That can indeed encourage scroungers (in the sense of making little effort to actually find work), both amongst UK nationals and those from other EU countries.

Although I believe that the situation has evolved, unemployment and other social benefits can add up to 80% of previous income. That's laudable for those in genuine difficulty while actively seeking ways of becoming financially more independent, but some may feel quite happy not bothering when the incentive is only 20% more for actually getting up every morning to do what may be less entertaining than playing video games. In Ireland, people are actually better off not bothering.

In terms of non-UK EU citizens, the now-scrapped February deal with the EU (posted further up somewhere) addressed those issues (one for a 7-year period) and was set to be adopted.

If the UK had a system in which people had to have worked and paid contributions in order to be entitled to some of the extra benefits, plus more active schemes to get people back into work, then the situation might be different.

Out of the EU, there may be ways of doing so for non-UK citizens.... but then who's going to do the unpleasant jobs that keep the economy running?


Ease of Access to Unemployment Benefit in the EU15

10. There is a significant difference between the UK and the rest of the EU15 in the accessibility of unemployment benefit. In other countries unemployment benefit is conditional on social insurance contributions and the amount paid out is linked to previous earnings. Moreover, the length of time that unemployment benefit can be claimed is linked to the length of time previously in work.

11. For example in every other EU15 country an individual can only claim unemployment benefit when they have worked for a specific amount of time and thus contributed to the system or made a certain number of social security payments. This ranges from 4 months in France to one year in many countries, including Austria, Denmark, Germany, Italy, and Spain. In Portugal an individual has to have worked for at least 450 days in the previous 24 months. All other countries require a certain number of payments or that a certain number of days/weeks/months be worked before an individual qualifies for unemployment benefit. The level of benefit paid is generally linked to previous earnings and often capped at an upper limit only in Ireland and Finland is unemployment benefit paid at a flat rate. Moreover, in all countries except Belgium, unemployment benefit is paid for a period of time related to the amount of time previously spent in employment or it is capped for a period ranging from a few months to a maximum of 38 months in the Netherlands; it is capped at two years in Denmark, France, Portugal and Spain. In Belgium it can be claimed for an indeterminate period of time.


http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/284

Offline Carana

Re: Surely, scroungers should be removed, wherever they come from?
« Reply #19 on: July 13, 2016, 09:37:09 AM »
Indeed Carana. What I typed, was in response to another posters comments.

I know, it's happened to me before now.  8(0(*

Offline G-Unit

Re: Surely, scroungers should be removed, wherever they come from?
« Reply #20 on: July 13, 2016, 10:20:12 AM »
Some interesting reading...



UK benefits for low-income workers (and the unemployed) do indeed seem higher than in many other EU countries.

An issue is that the way the system works at the moment in the UK is that you don't have to have worked or paid into it before being entitled to benefits.

That can indeed encourage scroungers (in the sense of making little effort to actually find work), both amongst UK nationals and those from other EU countries.

Although I believe that the situation has evolved, unemployment and other social benefits can add up to 80% of previous income. That's laudable for those in genuine difficulty while actively seeking ways of becoming financially more independent, but some may feel quite happy not bothering when the incentive is only 20% more for actually getting up every morning to do what may be less entertaining than playing video games. In Ireland, people are actually better off not bothering.

In terms of non-UK EU citizens, the now-scrapped February deal with the EU (posted further up somewhere) addressed those issues (one for a 7-year period) and was set to be adopted.

If the UK had a system in which people had to have worked and paid contributions in order to be entitled to some of the extra benefits, plus more active schemes to get people back into work, then the situation might be different.

Out of the EU, there may be ways of doing so for non-UK citizens.... but then who's going to do the unpleasant jobs that keep the economy running?


Ease of Access to Unemployment Benefit in the EU15

10. There is a significant difference between the UK and the rest of the EU15 in the accessibility of unemployment benefit. In other countries unemployment benefit is conditional on social insurance contributions and the amount paid out is linked to previous earnings. Moreover, the length of time that unemployment benefit can be claimed is linked to the length of time previously in work.

11. For example in every other EU15 country an individual can only claim unemployment benefit when they have worked for a specific amount of time and thus contributed to the system or made a certain number of social security payments. This ranges from 4 months in France to one year in many countries, including Austria, Denmark, Germany, Italy, and Spain. In Portugal an individual has to have worked for at least 450 days in the previous 24 months. All other countries require a certain number of payments or that a certain number of days/weeks/months be worked before an individual qualifies for unemployment benefit. The level of benefit paid is generally linked to previous earnings and often capped at an upper limit only in Ireland and Finland is unemployment benefit paid at a flat rate. Moreover, in all countries except Belgium, unemployment benefit is paid for a period of time related to the amount of time previously spent in employment or it is capped for a period ranging from a few months to a maximum of 38 months in the Netherlands; it is capped at two years in Denmark, France, Portugal and Spain. In Belgium it can be claimed for an indeterminate period of time.


http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/284

Of course other countries, like ours, don't let those who haven't contributed starve. In Germany, for example they can claim using the Hartz IV programme, which doesn't rely on contributions. Their workers have 12 months on the contribution-based benefit, which is better than the UK.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_in_Germany

We have contribution-based job seeker's allowance just like they do, which isn't means tested and lasts for six months. Claimants then get income-based job seeker's allowance, for non-contributors or those on very low incomes.
http://www.totaljobs.com/careers-advice/money-and-legal/how-to-claim-jobseekers-allowance

Their highest contribution-based payment is lower than the UK's but it lasts longer and our cost of living is higher than theirs.

[That's a surprise, actually, as their food prices were much higher than ours when we joined the Common Market in the 1970's]
http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_countries_result.jsp?country1=United+Kingdom&country2=Germany
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline sadie

Re: Surely, scroungers should be removed, wherever they come from?
« Reply #21 on: July 13, 2016, 10:37:17 PM »
No worries Alf, I have defended and agreed with some of your comments on the referendum and associated issues.

 8(0(*

However, it does raise a point.

If a thread is started in someones name, shouldn't they be agreeable first ?
I agree with you on this Stephen.

Threads have been opened in my name and I don't like it.   I cant remember the exact circumstances, but once I was very upset with the way it was done .... and made a fuss

We should be consulted first


Please John.
Darren Osbourne  IDIOT

Only in my opinion, of course

Offline Miss Taken Identity

Re: Surely, scroungers should be removed, wherever they come from?
« Reply #22 on: July 14, 2016, 04:50:33 PM »
Scroungers are scroungers what ever nation they come from

For a contracted period I ran an ordinary job club.  We provided a very pleasant environment with tables and chairs for each member.   Newpapers, computers, telephones if needed, writing paper and stamps.  Also volumes of Trade Directories etc for members use .  As well as warmth, tea and coffee and biscuits.  Plus moral support and help with producing a CV and presenting themselves at interview etc..   It was a positive, welcoming place and I encouraged rather than disparage them.  I watched them blossom, when they picked themselves up and realised their worth.
 
Now I will mention two anonymous members;

1)  An Asian man in his mid 50's, who was an experienced sheet metal worker ***.  A job he had done for a good number of years.  He became redundant, but found a job which was a quarter of a mile further away from his home than his previous job.  Both were within easy walking distance of home.   He refused to take it because of this extra distance.

I didn't think much of his apathy, but he had previously worked hard, was still trying for jobs, so I kept him on


2)  A strong looking white lad, a Brit, of 18 years.  He had never really worked at all.  He had been in the Club for about 2 months and despite encouragement, hadn't applied for a single job.  I eventually told him that I was excluding him from the Job Club and would have to report him to the Employment Services.  This was something that I did not like doing ... and only was forced to do on this one occasion.

He swore at me and was abusive, but left

Just a very simplistic example.  The white boy was definitely a scrounger.  Was the Asian?


*** The Asians job has been changed for total anonymity, but he was a skilled worker.

Of course just one look at this as you see rascist slur on the white person. Many uk citizens are lazy and are a burden on our state welfare and NHS due to their lifestyle choice.These are the people whom we would call scroungers. Most uk citizens claim benefit for short periods due to work change etc. Some claim benefit due to ill health. these citizens are not referred to scroungers. Illegal immigrants are scroungers becaus ethey are protected- they are housed, fed, clothed, and have immediate access to our 'free' NHS health service. If they wanted to come and work here and contribute they would apply first for a job and seek housing for themselves like the American, Australian, and New Zealanders do- who are being sent home!

Offline G-Unit

Re: Surely, scroungers should be removed, wherever they come from?
« Reply #23 on: July 14, 2016, 07:52:40 PM »
Scroungers are scroungers what ever nation they come from

For a contracted period I ran an ordinary job club.  We provided a very pleasant environment with tables and chairs for each member.   Newpapers, computers, telephones if needed, writing paper and stamps.  Also volumes of Trade Directories etc for members use .  As well as warmth, tea and coffee and biscuits.  Plus moral support and help with producing a CV and presenting themselves at interview etc..   It was a positive, welcoming place and I encouraged rather than disparage them.  I watched them blossom, when they picked themselves up and realised their worth.
 
Now I will mention two anonymous members;

1)  An Asian man in his mid 50's, who was an experienced sheet metal worker ***.  A job he had done for a good number of years.  He became redundant, but found a job which was a quarter of a mile further away from his home than his previous job.  Both were within easy walking distance of home.   He refused to take it because of this extra distance.

I didn't think much of his apathy, but he had previously worked hard, was still trying for jobs, so I kept him on


2)  A strong looking white lad, a Brit, of 18 years.  He had never really worked at all.  He had been in the Club for about 2 months and despite encouragement, hadn't applied for a single job.  I eventually told him that I was excluding him from the Job Club and would have to report him to the Employment Services.  This was something that I did not like doing ... and only was forced to do on this one occasion.

He swore at me and was abusive, but left

Just a very simplistic example.  The white boy was definitely a scrounger.  Was the Asian?


*** The Asians job has been changed for total anonymity, but he was a skilled worker.

I don't know how long ago this was but job seekers sign an agreement with the job centre now. If they don't apply for a certain number of jobs each week they are sanctioned. This is particularly hard on older men who aren't computer literate because it all has to be done online.

Did you ever ask the white man why he hadn't applied for any jobs? That can be due to self-confidence issues even if people put on a good act.
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline Carana

Re: Surely, scroungers should be removed, wherever they come from?
« Reply #24 on: July 14, 2016, 08:38:08 PM »
Of course just one look at this as you see rascist slur on the white person. Many uk citizens are lazy and are a burden on our state welfare and NHS due to their lifestyle choice.These are the people whom we would call scroungers. Most uk citizens claim benefit for short periods due to work change etc. Some claim benefit due to ill health. these citizens are not referred to scroungers. Illegal immigrants are scroungers becaus ethey are protected- they are housed, fed, clothed, and have immediate access to our 'free' NHS health service. If they wanted to come and work here and contribute they would apply first for a job and seek housing for themselves like the American, Australian, and New Zealanders do- who are being sent home!


As you rarely offer cites, I find it a bit difficult to assess the reality underlying your opinions.

Offline Miss Taken Identity

Re: Surely, scroungers should be removed, wherever they come from?
« Reply #25 on: July 24, 2016, 11:03:34 PM »

As you rarely offer cites, I find it a bit difficult to assess the reality underlying your opinions.

My opinions are based on observation within my work and home community. Just because no one is taking stats of these occurences does not mean they don't exist.( you are welcolm to request freedom of information requests from many councils)!

  Police will claim crime is down but ofcourse that isn't true because they are only going by reported crime... now if there are 30 houses in your area having windows smashed every night and only 5 people report this once, then the crime fugure for that area would be low giving a false sense of security. Just like the young girl who was murdered by an illegal immigrant. she had written that even criminals amoung the 'migrant' community should be allowed to stay...little did she know...
1. WTF she was talking about- she was brainwashed by the celebs pouring fasle tears about immigrants
2. that she herself would be a victim of the people she wants us to protect against others being victims also.
3. she was agreeing to people smuggling being legalised and the horrors that brings- sex slaves-domestic slaves-crime lords-drug traffickers....but she believed they were all nice people being helped by other nice people with nice boats n stuff...
oh all cute and sparkly...