Re: Workfare judged illegal : Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:36 pm  

TrinityIHC wrote:

No, state pension cannot be used as an alternative lifestyle choice to working so not an issue. The woman we have been discussing is clearly spending the (extortionate amount of) money she receives for her childrens welfare, on luxury items - and being given a 400k house to live in I might add. A man could work his hands to the bone all his life and not be able to afford that.

Of course it can. If £70 a week JSA can be used as an alternative lifestyle choice then why can't £104 a week pension be? Other people slave away and provide for a pension themselves whilst others just rely upon the state pension? Surely the state pension is there to provide the basics for people who reach a certain age? If pensioners are spending their benefits on M&S products, garden centres and tour holidays then surely that is just as much a waste of taxpayers money as frivolously wasting money on children through child benefit?

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:52 pm  

The difference is that old folk are not in a position to earn money themselves. I don't care what they spend theirs on - most of them have earned it anway, through years of putting into the system. If they haven't then it's just £34 extra on top of JSA they will have been receiving anyway.

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Wed Feb 20, 2013 11:03 pm  

TrinityIHC wrote:

The difference is that old folk are not in a position to earn money themselves.

Really? You sure about that?

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Thu Feb 21, 2013 12:07 am  

TrinityIHC wrote:

The difference is that old folk are not in a position to earn money themselves. I don't care what they spend theirs on - most of them have earned it anway, through years of putting into the system. If they haven't then it's just £34 extra on top of JSA they will have been receiving anyway.

Really? So pensioners can't work or receive income on investments?
Most people on JSA and other benefits have paid into the system too. If its not going on basics why are taxpayers funding pensioners lavish lifestyles?

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:14 am  

Him wrote:

No, plenty of state pension recipients are capable of work, and I didn't realise it was supposed to be a disincentive I thought it was supposed to ensure benefits were spent on appropriate things. If a state pension isn't being spent on basic things like food, heating etc then surely it's not necessary.

I don't know any pensioner who doesn't buy food, or pay for heating. Do you?

Is that it, then? A pensioner is to be provided with nothing except sufficient for the basics of food, heating "etc" until they die? Subsistence kind of thing? Perhaps a temperature regulator with a maximum of say 60F should be compulsorily fitted, and vouchers for calories of no more than 2000 a day food should be obligatory.

A radio costs a penny or two a day electric to run. Is that a basic thing, or should their pension leave them unable to afford the luxury?

Can they have an extra pound per month above subsistence / basics, so they may share a glass of stout, or is that OTT for the public purse?

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:46 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Him wrote:

No, plenty of state pension recipients are capable of work, and I didn't realise it was supposed to be a disincentive I thought it was supposed to ensure benefits were spent on appropriate things. If a state pension isn't being spent on basic things like food, heating etc then surely it's not necessary.

I don't know any pensioner who doesn't buy food, or pay for heating. Do you?

Is that it, then? A pensioner is to be provided with nothing except sufficient for the basics of food, heating "etc" until they die? Subsistence kind of thing? Perhaps a temperature regulator with a maximum of say 60F should be compulsorily fitted, and vouchers for calories of no more than 2000 a day food should be obligatory.

A radio costs a penny or two a day electric to run. Is that a basic thing, or should their pension leave them unable to afford the luxury?

Can they have an extra pound per month above subsistence / basics, so they may share a glass of stout, or is that OTT for the public purse?

I think you may have misunderstood.

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Thu Feb 21, 2013 8:19 am  

Rock God X wrote:

I think you may have misunderstood.

I'm not surprised, Him's point is very obtuse. I have called for tighter controls on what people spend their CHILD benefit on - ie their kids. He's trying to draw a comparison with the state pension, which is a totally different animal altogether.

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:41 am  

TrinityIHC wrote:

The difference is that old folk are not in a position to earn money themselves...

That's factual nonsense.

My parents are pensioners. My father, however, continues to do some work, for which he is paid.

There are myriad other examples too, including rather more famous ones such as many actors.

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:44 am  

TrinityIHC wrote:

The difference is that old folk are not in a position to earn money themselves...

And the unemployed are ?

[Kosh]

Re: Workfare judged illegal : Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:51 am  

TrinityIHC wrote:

I'm not surprised, Him's point is very obtuse. I have called for tighter controls on what people spend their CHILD benefit on - ie their kids. He's trying to draw a comparison with the state pension, which is a totally different animal altogether.

Why? Both are payments from the public purse, so if the taxpayer gets a say in how one is spent why not the other?