Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
Sign in to follow this  
Donald Trumps

Thatcherite Treasury Team Launch Fresh Assault On Poor

Recommended Posts

Cos we've got the tax cap and CCS to maintain, doncha know?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what motivates them is stopping the cycle where people use the benefits system to help fund a lifestyle where they don't have to do much work nor take any responsibility for anything? 

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So just read the detail.  They are asking those claiming employed persons allowance with a child over 13 to work 24 hours a week rather than 16 hours as at present.  

Is that an embarrassment to humanity or just fair to the taxpayer ? If your oldest child is aged over 13 why shouldn’t you have to work at least 4 hours a day to get benefits ??

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was on EPA/FIS for a couple of years when the nipper was small, it was very helpful, dunno how we'd have survived without it, although we'd have found a way. It does get you caught in a bit of a trap though, an opportunity arose where I could have earned a little more money but at the loss of the benefits, which over the course of a year would have cost us. There is a definite step where some kind of improvement could be made. I'm not sure what exactly, but if the aim of it is to help people get more or better paid work then they could actually find a way to help. Really EPA can help people drift a bit for a few years, you can come to rely on the money, which is probably not the point.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, I think that Henderson or Cannan should have all their bank accounts blocked for a month, give them an abrahams flat and jobseekers or basic incapacity and see how they do. Because until you've lived it, you haven't got a fucking clue how your decisions at the top affect those who do.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if you can't get a job for 4.8 hrs a day mon to fri you should lose income support or employed persons allowance?

Low earners just don't get the support from this government that they would if they were farmers or someone they felt they needed to further expand their own workforce

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For every genuine person in need of financial assistant there are those that are taking the pee. Agree with Teapot, get those feckless goons to live on next to nothing for six months and see how they react

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To the majority of employed ( tax payers ), this will seem to be a reasonable move.

\if your child/ren is at school, then it seems reasonable that you could work 9 - 3, say 25 hrs per week. Though, possibility of getting such working hours is not taken into account, with these new rules there will be a scrabble to get such a job and hours, what of the people who miss out on these jobs? What of employers who take advantage to offer lower hourly rates for people desparate to get these hours?

As ever, the general principal is OK. , it is details and interpretation that will cause the problems.

Of course, it is always going to be down to 'abuse' of the system that will determine  how this move will be accepted by the gen public. As an employer, I have seen many examples of people believing that they can ONLY work 16 hrs / wk but equally, many people who will accept any hrs that will add to their other jobs that will give then a reasonable weeks hrs and wage to add to the family income and not considering the Soc Sec rules.

It is a political maneuver, safe in the knowledge that the majority of people will support it without consideeration of the people who cannot conform to the new rules for, reasons above or no fault of their own.

What do we do for these people? Let them and their kids go hungry? Bring on another generation of underclass?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get off their backsides and give their kids a good work ethic.  This change is welcome to stop the culture of the people who thing money comes from end of the rainbow from the fairy’s 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems reasonable and they take so bloody long to bring anything in that I thought it had been enacted long ago. With the caveat of protecting genuine cases who really cannot comply I don't see how anyone can have a problem with this. Plenty of taxpayers on relatively low pay who support the nailing of the piss takers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Neil Down said:

For every genuine person in need of financial assistant there are those that are taking the pee. Agree with Teapot, get those feckless goons to live on next to nothing for six months and see how they react

The number of claimants is actually low. Especially compared to the number of zero rated companies here, and tax cappers who are getting bigger lifestyle subsidies. But that’s ok apparently. We just hate the poor. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, MrPB said:

The number of claimants is actually low. Especially compared to the number of zero rated companies here, and tax cappers who are getting bigger lifestyle subsidies. But that’s ok apparently. We just hate the poor. 

Any £numbers to back your statement up with facts...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, P.K. said:

Any £numbers to back your statement up with facts...?

If you disagree then why don’t you publish your facts disproving what I said. 

Edited by MrPB
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...