paulv

Where in any official stats is 'shirkers' a category?

When you consider facts to be 'twisted riddles' I know you're going to struggle. As a proportion of their number more migrants claim working benefits - so a higher proportion therefore must be in work. Simples! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10426202/Migrants-more-likely-to-claim-work-benefits-than-Britons.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10547750/Britain-is-in-desperate-need-of-immigration-from-the-EU.html

That the 'story' is yet more political point scoring. There is no information on those claiming this benefit. They may all be on the dole - but I doubt it as EU Migrants are 50% less likely to be claiming job related benefits in comparison to UK born shirkers. It's conceivable these people are all higher earners paying a lot of tax that far outweighs this £35 pw. It it just says everything about the state of our political system that support for children is used as such a divisive issue.

And how many people would seriously think its a good idea to move to another country without their kids in order to claim a maximum of £35 a week go free?

UK citizens can claim support in eu countries - so it's reciprocal. Where does 'nanny state' come into it? (Apart from as a pun!)

Thems are the laws . If you don't like them you can always move elsewhere? It's classic right wing tub thumping though innit - blame foreign born children for the countries ills. I wouldn't expect anything less.

To be fair Andy, I am not in the same trade but my wages until recently were lower than I was earning 7 or 8 years ago. I think it's a cost of living thing as well, although it's widely documented that migration affects the low waged more than any other section of society.

Do you have a problem with people making a profit Simmo?

Hold the front page!

This decision throws up the possibility of more social cleansing as is going on in London. Only 1 in 5 private landlords take tenants who claim HB, so If you are on housing benefits you cannot get decent private rentals so you have to uproot to a more affordable area. These will inevitably be areas with poor housing stock, social problems etc. Tenants from one large social housing company wee sent rent reminders with a note that if they had children and are made homeless the social services would be informed. Read into that what you will... How far do we want the vulnerable to fall?

I just asked a question

How do you know they are genuinely needy?

But this saves us taxpayers millions in pounds per year. Isn't that a good thing?

It's obviously a good thing. Housing benefit costs the UK taxpayer more than JSA, Incapacity Benefit, council tax benefit and employment support allowance combined. Buy to let is nothing more than a right wing backed scheme to rinse the UK taxpayer of benefits payments, and this family have obviously relied on the UK taxpayer to amass their fortune. What are your thoughts on it, Simmo?

"One of Britain's best-known landlords has issued eviction notices to every tenant who is on welfare, and told letting agents that he will not accept any more applicants who need housing benefit. Fergus Wilson, who with his wife Judith owns nearly 1,000 properties around the Ashford area of Kent, has sent the eviction notices to 200 tenants, saying he prefers eastern European migrants who default much less frequently than single mums on welfare. He says the move is purely an economic decision and points out that private landlords are running a business" http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/jan/04/buy-to-let-landlord-evicts-housing-benefit-tenants

Well like durr!

Do you have a problem with the Mail, Simmo?

It's a public forum mate, you can always chose not to read if you can't handle an informed opinion that's different to your own:cool:

"After working in the catering industry for 16 years – many of those as a manager seeking to employ staff – I have come to the sad conclusion that many young people simply do not want to work.Of course they say they want a job. They send off job applications and turn up for interviews. But when it comes down to hard graft, they are simply not interested. The truth is that young people think the state owes them a living. Underpinning everything is a welfare state which creates a culture where no one worries whether they have a job or not because there’s always free money from the Government to fall back on. Also, brought up in school and home environments where criticism is practically non-existent, when they face the tough, challenging world of work, they are unable to cope. To hear them complain about the shortage of jobs you would think they are desperate to work, willing to walk over hot coals to get a job. However, nothing could be further from the truth. During my career, I have interviewed and employed many young people. And it shames me to say this but it was often easier to teach English to foreign applicants than it is to try to instill the right work ethic in our own English-speaking youth." http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2062504/UK-unemployment-Meet-British-bosses-say-foreign-workers-time.html

It's difficult isn't it? When it suits their purposes the government slashes benefits and support for the young, and talks about trying to change a culture of generations of people happy to live on welfare. Yet when people from other countries come and do service industry jobs to a higher standard than their UK counterparts the right then complains that migrants are in effect 'job blocking' and stopping young people getting on the career ladder. Can it be both cases at the same time?

Back to the OP here's a great piece about a kid who was written off at 13 but went on to win a BAFTA and is now up for a possible Oscar as well. Simmo best not look, he's the successful son of an immigrant http://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/jan/04/steve-mcqueen-my-painful-childhood-shame

That bastion of free speech, fact checking, and unbiased opinion

No one mentioned her. I suggest you need to address the economic point I've put across, and not try and make it a political issue as you'll end up looking even sillier

Who mentioned sour grapes? We've all agreed that white working class boys under achieve. It's the next bit you're stuck on. Why do they under achieve? Despite your seeming wish to blame it on anyone who doesn't agree with you, it's not because of my political leanings - or anyone else's. Youth unemployment is ALWAYS the worst affected during economic troubles as they are low wages, often low skilled, and are therefore surplus to requirements. Back to late 1970's / early 80's when there was a rush to sell manufacturing industry off by first gutting it. This left a generation of prospective steel workers, miners, car makers, ship builders, engineers, etc with no career path, as had been the case for generations before. We are still paying the price for this today in a third generation of workless households with no role model for kids to aspire to within the home.

As i thought