Yesterday the big fuss in the news media was all about it being the day when benefit claimants would be restricted to £26,000 p.a.
Why all the fuss? That is £26,000 tax free benefits, or, £500 per week. I have worked for nearly 40 years and that is very close to what I receive as net pay after all deductions have been taken. These are limits on benefits that are in the main being claimed by people who have never worked, the scroungers in our society who have nothing better to do than complain that the state isn't paying them enough to stay at home.
I have been made redundant 4 times and only once did I qualify for any 'benefits' and that was job seekers allowance (JSA) which was/is a farce at roughly £66 p.w. Nobody can live on that! But because my wife had/has a full time job that is all I qualified for. In my view the government (and all those that went before it) have got its priorities wrong. Instead of paying out a pittance to people who have lost their job and are seeking re-employment and paying out big money to those that have never worked, what they should be doing is paying out a realistic amount to those seeking work and a pittance to those that have never held a job down for more than a day or so.
This government should be commended and lauded for starting to get to grips with benefits payouts. Yesterday was a good start but it needs to go much further, like (for example) making payment of any benefits AT ALL dependent upon having been resident in the UK for a minimum of 12 months and having worked, and earned, at a level where National Insurance contributions and minimal/lowest level tax has been paid for a minimum of 6 months. That would stop free-loaders coming into the country and being subsidised by benefit payouts while looking to take jobs that could be done by UK residents, and stop all the school / college / university leavers from drawing benefits until they have held down a job (working while in education would count if it met the earlier suggested criteria).
No comments:
Post a Comment