Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

As employment increases you would expect the numbers in work claiming benefits to increase.

quite extraordinary - well not really ...... sticky is great at ladling out rubbish and worse, but God forbid you should call him an idiot, let alone a liar in his turn

Now come on read it properly Hays.

And if you said that, to say someone who had never ever claimed benefit like my late father, hed have wondered what on earth you were talking about.

His outlook would be why do you need benefits if your working.

Lets face it and be honest here you are only claiming housing benefit because you are on a low take home wage/salary and housing costs have spiralled out of control.

but if you read sticky's usual stuff, he frequently tells a different story when it suits about house prices, and thus rental levels once you get north of the wash

the answers of course are never anywhere near as simple as most post here

If there was a figure of say 5% of employees working and claiming benefit then an increase in employment would produce 5% of new employees claiming on a pro rata basis.
Now, of course, these new employees coming off unemployment will have a lower average income as the normal figure includes people on high and very high earnings. Getting a job from unemployment will put you at the bottom of the scale in wages.

This means that the 5% figure is far too low and the real increase in working claiming benefit will be a much higher increase, possibly 10%.

(note, the figures of 5% and 10% are for illustration purposes)

Hays not with you sorry, can you put it another way please.

We are now living in the benefit utopia of the world in this country. I was born in an era where my parents couldn't afford central heating, despite the fact my father worked his socks off and my mother stayed at home to look after her 2 children. We couldn't afford holidays, go to the pub or eat in fancy restaurants. My parents didn't have credit cards, so if we didn't have money in the bank to pay for something we didn't get it. This is not a sob story, quite the contrary as I'm very grateful I have been brought up to understand that if I want to buy something I have to work to afford it. It's become the modern mentality with a large section of the population in this country to think that the country owes them a living, but I guess you cannot blame people for using the system and abusing it when it's there to be abused.

Thanks for the view Hilary. I made the call on the basis GJ seamed to top out technically. Also if consumption falls ultimatly this has knock on effect within money supply and deflation.

hays - your logic has to be faulty .....

if you're unemployed, you'll be getting housing benefit
if you're employed, and certainly if you work more than 16 hours a week (i think that's right), your housing benefit is cut

What Im trying to say Hays is my father would say, why on earth is Housing Benefit payable to a person in full time work. Surely he should be bringing home a wage big enough to cover his rent payments even if he is a trainee or apprentice.

This use of Housing Benefit is madness.

When I was a young kid I think some got what they used to call a rent rebate.

But it was nothing on the scale of this housing benefit.

What Im trying to say Hays is my father would say, why on earth is Housing Benefit payable to a person in full time work. Surely he should be bringing home a wage big enough to cover his rent payments even if he is a trainee or apprentice.

This use of Housing Benefit is madness.

When I was a young kid I think some got what they used to call a rent rebate.

But it was nothing on the scale of this housing benefit.

cynic
gf was complaining about the numbers in work getting benefits increasing.

Good point made by doodlebug above only yesterday I was talking about younger people overstretching themselves wanting 2 cars a bigger house than they can afford etc etc. Just to beat their freinds and them nextdoor.

I was brought up in a make do and repair world.

Hays just to let you know I have filtered Cynic permanently. See earlier post.

I make this point in case we have a communication breakdown. Remember I cant see his posts.

cynic's posts are some of the most sensible on here.

The introduction of credit cards and various finance deals have a lot to answer for, it's far too easy to borrow money now and run up large debts. I think part of the education curriculum should include lessons for teenagers on how to manage their finances properly. It's not rocket science really = don't spend more than you earn.

Yep but you dont attack a person who as a disability and invite others in to take part.

That is the lowest of the lowest. See post 40776

Doodles I and few others on SCrazy were arguing for that to be added to the national curriculum say for 2 hours per week at the age of 13.

I think it would lead to far greater financial awareness and responsibility.

I didn't know this , Australia's state pension system operates on a non-contributory basis and is financed by general tax revenues. The Age Pension provides means-tested benefits for men over 65, but at different ages for women, based on their date of birth. By 2014, however, the age limit will be set at 65 for both men and women.

what a thin-skinned little pillock sticky is at times
i certainly told him he was a bully, which is a character defect he seems to have in abundance - e.g. if you don't show me respect, i'll punch you
dyslexic? ..... never aware of it anyway .... most here can't spell or write grammatically

specifically - did you know what he meant by "ingenuine"?
sure as hell i didn't!