Harming children for no good reason

[JohnD]

"Today, the High Court ruled that the benefits cap, one of the Tories’ flagship welfare policies, is unlawful, because it amounts to illegal discrimination against single parents with small children."

"Welfare reform as part of the coalition government’s austerity measures has driven thousands more people into poverty and in many tragic cases, some deaths occurred after individuals were declared fit to work. Austerity was not inevitable. It was an ideologically-motivated programme designed to force the poorest and most vulnerable in our society to shoulder the burden of a financial crisis that they had less than nothing to do with creating."

Was the financial crisis caused by huge banks gambling themselves into bankruptcy, or was it caused by families living in poverty? Where should the axe fall?

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...le-parents-youth-children-cruel-a7803106.html

I was especially interested by what the Daily Mail had to say about this latest Tory scandal:

" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , ."

 

[Deleted member 63160]

Did some shopping in Chavda the other day. I'm so hopeful that the myriads of fat munters pushing there "housing tokens" around in £500 buggies are gonna be better looked after now.

 

[securespark]

Make assumptions about people and then make more assumptions about how, if some people are acting in a certain way (that you have assumed), everybody else must be doing the same.

OK.

That makes perfect sense.

Not.

God help you if you ever have the misfortune to have to fall back on benefit.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I am wondering what is a good reason to harm children.

 

[securespark]

When they have been naughty of course!

 

[Doggit]

Oh dear typical JohnD rant -as always. Stange how the independant manages to twist people being classified as fit to work (when I agree many shouldn't be) with the benefits cap. Not the same thing, but that doesn't stop either JD or the independant twisting things.

Sorry, but I see nothing wrong with a benefits cap that says people on benefit shouldn't be getting more than someone who works. And sorry SecureSpark, but having had tenants on benefits that insist on a TV, new buggy, and the latest phones before they pay their rent, then Mitch does have a bit of a point. I've looked through paperwork after they've gone, and been horrified at the debts they've run up. One tenant even gave BT a false name to get broadband.

 

[Corgigrouch GTi]

Hmmm... For a moment there, I thought that JD was going to do something useful and campaign against Female genital mutilation... But it turns out that FGM is a cultural thing

 

[transam]

Some of these parents see there children as cash cow's

bloke down this way has 6 kids all of them have some type of syndrome ? attention disorder syndrome ?? its all worth a few squid

a month to him ,they are all on some type of medication, turn yer kids into drug addicts for benefits and no he has not got a job

But then there are those who do not get help or to proud to ask ?

Like the 66 year old widowed oap

Her dead beat , drug addict daughter took her 4 year old down to social with a case & left him there cleared off some where with some dead beat

the grand mother found out & went and got the little fella , she has had to get a part time job as her pension is not enough now.

she deserves help , the pencil pushers & paper shufflers from the council or who ever should be banging on her door to help.

dare say if she was a refugee or could play the race card she would get help ????

 

[transam]

Hmmm... For a moment there, I thought that JD was going to do something useful and campaign against Female genital mutilation... But it turns out that FGM is a cultural thing

good point.

u will not hear wanna be or him say any thing about those subjects.

We will be getting the daily wail rant shortly or how much some politician paid for there shoes

 

[^woody^]

What do you expect in the age of entitlement, when people can have as many kids as they like with no means to support them, and expect the state (and everyone else) to support them instead.

It is laughable when this decision is in favour of single parents, when everyone knows that you have to be "single" to claim the maximum amount of all state benefits. Even when the dad is living in the same state sponsored house/flat.

 

[transam]

Mind u I bet hims missis has to get her shoes / clothes from a charity shop he is that tight

 

[securespark]

And sorry SecureSpark, but having had tenants on benefits that insist on a TV, new buggy, and the latest phones before they pay their rent, then Mitch does have a bit of a point. I've looked through paperwork after they've gone, and been horrified at the debts they've run up. One tenant even gave BT a false name to get broadband.

No apology needed!

Of course there are some unscrupulous folk around. You don't have to be on benefits to be a swindler. I know of several "upstanding" folk who buy things like fiddled Sky boxes.
And just because you have experience of one dodgy tenant on benefits does not mean everybody on benefit will be the same.

It is laughable when this decision is in favour of single parents, when everyone knows that you have to be "single" to claim the maximum amount of all state benefits. Even when the dad is living in the same state sponsored house/flat.

Again, there are unscrupulous folk around. They know damn well what the rules around benefits are and they choose to break them.
But not everybody on benefits is bent as a nine Bob note.

 

[Ian H]

But obviously if Labour got in there would be no child cruelty and no fires.

 

[JohnD]

good to see that Ian has no sensible response so has withdrawn into an Absurd Absolute.

 

[Nozzle]

Your initial posting seems to be conflating a number of different ideas together - perhaps to meet your own idealogically motivated reason for sharing this item with the forum in the first place.

Single parents
Means testing for fitness to work
Tories
The Coalition govt
The banking crisis
Endless spiralling debt