Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25
  1. #11
    -:Undertaker:-'s Avatar
    -:Undertaker:- is offline Habbox Hall of Fame Inductee
    Former Rare Values Manager


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Liverpool, Great Britain
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    23,413
    Habbo
    -:overtaker:-
    Tokens
    10,820
    Rep Count
    1145
    View Awards

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lemons View Post
    Ultimately even if you severely reduce instead of completely cutting off benefits it will just cause poverty to increase = crime, homelessness, inequality, etc. which nobody likes to see. More should be spent on drug addiction programmes!
    Why should my taxes be spent on drugged up losers? If you want to give them money then by all means do so via charity but don't force the rest of the population to hand yet more money over to these people who are selfish and have already cost us a fortune.

    With welfare I certainly think there should be incentives to get back into work, like for instance now if somebody has been sent for an interview and they turn up in trackies and aren't co-operating then the employer reports this back to the welfare office. From when Iain Duncan Smith was Work and Pensions Secretary it defintely seems to have improved. Perhaps drug tests could be introduced for those who have been on benefits for no apparent reason for over a year - with actual court action following if they test positive. But such a policy will only work when there's an *actual* War on Drugs not the de facto decriminalisation we have now.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    US
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,304
    Habbo
    landonxd
    Tokens
    11,003
    Rep Count
    16
    View Awards

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FlyingJesus View Post
    For someone supposedly conservative you're asking for a lottttttt of state intervention here
    That's because the welfare system is a state/federal issue. Part of my paycheck goes to it. I want my government to be concerned about who gets that money and who doesn't.

  3. #13
    FlyingJesus's Avatar
    FlyingJesus is offline Events Manager
    Articles Proofreader
    Graphics Designer

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Sunny Worthing
    Posts
    22,058
    Tokens
    33,907
    Rep Count
    2755
    View Awards

    Default

    Yeeeeees but surely you'd rather have a reduced welfare system in general, rather than making it an even more bureaucratic office full of red tape and administrative imposition. What you're pushing for in this thread is veeeeeeeeeeeeeery left wing lmao
    | TWITTER |


    JOIN US RIGHT THIS SECOND

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    US
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,304
    Habbo
    landonxd
    Tokens
    11,003
    Rep Count
    16
    View Awards

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FlyingJesus View Post
    Yeeeeees but surely you'd rather have a reduced welfare system in general, rather than making it an even more bureaucratic office full of red tape and administrative imposition. What you're pushing for in this thread is veeeeeeeeeeeeeery left wing lmao
    Perhaps the idea of the government being involved is. If that's what it takes then I'd proudly be labeled as left on this issue. It's bs the way it is now and I hope it changes.

    Regardless, liberals seem to think that we should pay for the druggies as well so that's the difference I guess.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Scotland
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    17,620
    Tokens
    55,272
    Rep Count
    1044
    View Awards

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lemons View Post
    Nope because the % of welfare recipients actually on drugs is probably very small and innocent people in need of financial aid for basic living standards shouldnt have to go through that humiliating process! And then what if they are found to be spending it on drugs... they get nothing?

    Should we drug test students receiving financial aid? Lots of my friends and students at uni waste their student grants and loans on getting drunk every other day and buying weed

    Perhaps better systems in place so that those found to be wasting money away on drugs have their benefits reduced!
    Entirely different though, and loans are obviously paid back with interest, so not really the same as comparing it to free money given to druggies/alcoholics who have no interest in finding a job.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    UK
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    6,046
    Habbo
    Fritec
    Tokens
    695
    Rep Count
    454
    View Awards

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Landon View Post
    Perhaps the idea of the government being involved is. If that's what it takes then I'd proudly be labeled as left on this issue. It's bs the way it is now and I hope it changes.

    Regardless, liberals seem to think that we should pay for the druggies as well so that's the difference I guess.
    The way you're going on you may as well argue for a checklist of things people receiving welfare can spend their money on and what they can't

    Even if you took away welfare from people using drugs there would not be major savings as it's a minority and as others have said it would cost more to drug test them.

    I don't really see how anyone in highly developed countries, whatever politics you support, can justify poverty by removing peoples benefits! The money people on benefits receive isn't even a lot (despite the crap you will read in papers like the Daily Mail)

    Quote Originally Posted by scottish View Post
    Entirely different though, and loans are obviously paid back with interest, so not really the same as comparing it to free money given to druggies/alcoholics who have no interest in finding a job.
    Well not really seeing as students also get grants and scholarships as well, and it's unlikely everyone is going to pay back their loans fully
    Likes Jam liked this post

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    US
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,304
    Habbo
    landonxd
    Tokens
    11,003
    Rep Count
    16
    View Awards

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lemons View Post
    The way you're going on you may as well argue for a checklist of things people receiving welfare can spend their money on and what they can't
    That's exactly what we need. I don't want the welfare recipients out buying drugs, beer, etc.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    England, UK
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,922
    Habbo
    dbgtz
    Tokens
    26,825
    Rep Count
    938
    View Awards

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Landon View Post
    Haha I don't deny that but taxpayers don't like to spend money on other people's drugs, yes?
    Taxpayers don't generally like paying tax full stop. What's worse, losing a few million on people spending benefits on drugs or losing more than that by spending it on monitoring those on benefits? It's senseless outrage.

    Quote Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- View Post
    Why should my taxes be spent on drugged up losers? If you want to give them money then by all means do so via charity but don't force the rest of the population to hand yet more money over to these people who are selfish and have already cost us a fortune.

    With welfare I certainly think there should be incentives to get back into work, like for instance now if somebody has been sent for an interview and they turn up in trackies and aren't co-operating then the employer reports this back to the welfare office. From when Iain Duncan Smith was Work and Pensions Secretary it defintely seems to have improved. Perhaps drug tests could be introduced for those who have been on benefits for no apparent reason for over a year - with actual court action following if they test positive. But such a policy will only work when there's an *actual* War on Drugs not the de facto decriminalisation we have now.
    You honestly thing benefits have improved under IDS & the Conservatives? Many stories about people on JSA being sanctioned for ridiculous reasons and disabled people who have lifelong conditions being reassessed over and over. Also, aren't you meant to support a small state, yet you're basically advocating an enlargement of the state by wanting a "war on drugs"?

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    US
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,304
    Habbo
    landonxd
    Tokens
    11,003
    Rep Count
    16
    View Awards

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dbgtz View Post
    Taxpayers don't generally like paying tax full stop. What's worse, losing a few million on people spending benefits on drugs or losing more than that by spending it on monitoring those on benefits? It's senseless outrage.
    If we used that kind of thinking then everyone would be on welfare. And everyone would be lazy.

  10. #20
    -:Undertaker:-'s Avatar
    -:Undertaker:- is offline Habbox Hall of Fame Inductee
    Former Rare Values Manager


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Liverpool, Great Britain
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    23,413
    Habbo
    -:overtaker:-
    Tokens
    10,820
    Rep Count
    1145
    View Awards

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dbgtz
    You honestly thing benefits have improved under IDS & the Conservatives? Many stories about people on JSA being sanctioned for ridiculous reasons and disabled people who have lifelong conditions being reassessed over and over.
    Absolutely. Yes there have been cases of clearly disabled but on the whole it has given a real kick up the arse to those permanently on benefits. I hear stories myself of people who are on them and it is becoming more and more tiresome to stay on them to the point where it is easier just getting a job than staying on them. And that's the point of making life difficult for them, a boot up the arse.

    When benefit scroungers **** off the Tories for it you know they're doing the right thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by dbgtz
    Taxpayers don't generally like paying tax full stop. What's worse, losing a few million on people spending benefits on drugs or losing more than that by spending it on monitoring those on benefits? It's senseless outrage.
    Not everything revolves around money, often laws must be enforced for a moral point than for financial reasons. It's morally reprehensible to tax decent people who work to pay for the drug habits via benefits or healthcare of junkies.

    Quote Originally Posted by dbgtz
    Also, aren't you meant to support a small state, yet you're basically advocating an enlargement of the state by wanting a "war on drugs"?
    Sure, but you can't have drug decriminalisation with free state healthcare.

    One or the other, and I think the public would pick keeping the NHS over letting junkies even more off the hook.
    Last edited by -:Undertaker:-; 21-04-2017 at 05:48 PM.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO