We're All In This Together .....

[Serial_Apologist]

What sickens is that the clampdown on those who have jetted in with a dozen kids to live forever on benefits has been spoken about at length for 30 odd years. Only now when more people are in genuine need is anything being done - and wrongly.

When you speak this way, it is suddenly as a person totally out of sync with your wisdom, insight and coherence on other matters, a caricature tabloid dupe, Lat.

I shall never stop being astonished by articulate people who look down on those lower down the social scale.

[Lateralthinking1]

When you speak this way, it is suddenly as a person totally out of sync with your wisdom, insight and coherence on other matters, a caricature tabloid dupe, Lat.

I shall never stop being astonished by articulate people who look down on those lower down the social scale.

The people I am talking about s_a - more rare admittedly than the tabloids imply - are generally higher up the social scale than me. The genuinely needy are the victims of a very wide range of con artists. I'm pro the needy and anti the greedy.

The British Middle Classes - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ts-cheats.html

Meanwhile -

Somali asylum seeker Saeed Khaliif was given a £2million home in one of the country’s most exclusive neighbourhoods at the taxpayer’s expense. The 49-year-old was granted housing benefits of almost £8,000 a month to live in the six- bedroom property with his wife Sayida and children.The unemployed couple demanded to be moved to West Hampstead, north-west London, after deciding their home in the Midlands was inadequate. The payments, revealed last year, are among the largest ever given in housing benefit. Their new home has a 90ft garden and has been recently refurbished, with an en suite master bedroom and modern kitchen. It is minutes from West Hampstead Underground station and the neighbourhood is home to comedian Stephen Fry. It is understood Mr Khaliif has up to eight children and lives on benefits. He has not worked since arriving here three years ago. It is understood the family left £600 worth of damage to their old home in Coventry and did not pay the final month’s rent. Housing benefit was recently capped at £400 a week, but the Khaliifs were able to claim more because they moved before the change came into force. According to property sources, the house was being advertised to rent at £7,800 per month.

Any couple who have eight children and can afford one flight, let alone ten, are upper class to my mind. They, and those who operate the system, will along with tax avoiders ultimately be responsible for thousands of genuinely ill and poor people being homeless. They are grist to the mill for ideological nut cases and hence a real danger to much that many of us hold dear. I don't think it is a harsh line I am taking. To the contrary, it is by comparison to what we have in the round, the softest fluffy rabbit.

[Serial_Apologist]

The people I am talking about s_a - more rare admittedly than the tabloids imply - are generally higher up the social scale than me. The genuinely needy are the victims of a very wide range of con artists. I'm pro the needy and anti the greedy.

The British Middle Classes - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ts-cheats.html

Meanwhile -

Somali asylum seeker Saeed Khaliif was given a £2million home in one of the country’s most exclusive neighbourhoods at the taxpayer’s expense. The 49-year-old was granted housing benefits of almost £8,000 a month to live in the six- bedroom property with his wife Sayida and children.The unemployed couple demanded to be moved to West Hampstead, north-west London, after deciding their home in the Midlands was inadequate. The payments, revealed last year, are among the largest ever given in housing benefit. Their new home has a 90ft garden and has been recently refurbished, with an en suite master bedroom and modern kitchen. It is minutes from West Hampstead Underground station and the neighbourhood is home to comedian Stephen Fry. It is understood Mr Khaliif has up to eight children and lives on benefits. He has not worked since arriving here three years ago. It is understood the family left £600 worth of damage to their old home in Coventry and did not pay the final month’s rent. Housing benefit was recently capped at £400 a week, but the Khaliifs were able to claim more because they moved before the change came into force. According to property sources, the house was being advertised to rent at £7,800 per month.

Any couple who have eight children and can afford one flight, let alone ten, are upper class to my mind. They, and those who operate the system, will along with tax avoiders ultimately be responsible for thousands of genuinely ill and poor people being homeless. They are grist to the mill for ideological nut cases and hence a real danger to much that many of us hold dear. I don't think it is a harsh line I am taking. To the contrary, it is by comparison to what we have in the round, the softest fluffy rabbit.

OK then, the stereotyped image of the one-parent family means that increasingly understaffed personnel at the DHSS are looking at the wrong people. Nothing surprising there. Sort 'em out, and the Daily Wail will have to look elsewhere for its scapegoatings.

[Lateralthinking1]

OK then, the stereotyped image of the one-parent family means that increasingly understaffed personnel at the DHSS are looking at the wrong people. Nothing surprising there. Sort 'em out, and the Daily Wail will have to look elsewhere for its scapegoatings.

Yes. The Mail has its own series of issues, accentuating what is happening with benefits people and most often in the category it calls 'chavs'. By comparison, on the dodgy mill-yon-aires, it is frequently silent. I am not where that paper is at all but it doesn't mean it is wholly wrong on this issue. As Beef Oven mentioned, the focus should be on outcomes and that can only be successfully done with suitable support by Governments. Unfortunately, this one is psychologically designed to target all the wrong people.

[DracoM]

And clearly if you live in the North of England on benefit, it looks like you are about to be declared less important, less worth supporting and obviously less equal than Southerners. 'We're all in this together'.? The barefaced cheek of it is almost gobsmacking were it not coming from the source it has.

George Orwell, thou shouldst be living at this hour. You'd recognise it instantly.

[Beef Oven]

And clearly if you live in the North of England on benefit, it looks like you are about to be declared less important, less worth supporting and obviously less equal than Southerners. 'We're all in this together'.? The barefaced cheek of it is almost gobsmacking were it not coming from the source it has.

George Orwell, thou shouldst be living at this hour. You'd recognise it instantly.

What's Blair got to do with it?

[Beef Oven]

When you speak this way, it is suddenly as a person totally out of sync with your wisdom, insight and coherence on other matters, a caricature tabloid dupe, Lat.

I shall never stop being astonished by articulate people who look down on those lower down the social scale.

What a Saint!

[Flosshilde]

Meanwhile -

Somali asylum seeker Saeed Khaliif was given a £2million home in one of the country’s most exclusive neighbourhoods at the taxpayer’s expense. The 49-year-old was granted housing benefits of almost £8,000 a month to live in the six- bedroom property with his wife Sayida and children.The unemployed couple demanded to be moved to West Hampstead, north-west London, after deciding their home in the Midlands was inadequate. The payments, revealed last year, are among the largest ever given in housing benefit. Their new home has a 90ft garden and has been recently refurbished, with an en suite master bedroom and modern kitchen. It is minutes from West Hampstead Underground station and the neighbourhood is home to comedian Stephen Fry. It is understood Mr Khaliif has up to eight children and lives on benefits. He has not worked since arriving here three years ago. It is understood the family left £600 worth of damage to their old home in Coventry and did not pay the final month’s rent. Housing benefit was recently capped at £400 a week, but the Khaliifs were able to claim more because they moved before the change came into force. According to property sources, the house was being advertised to rent at £7,800 per month.

Any couple who have eight children and can afford one flight, let alone ten, are upper class to my mind. They, and those who operate the system, will along with tax avoiders ultimately be responsible for thousands of genuinely ill and poor people being homeless. They are grist to the mill for ideological nut cases and hence a real danger to much that many of us hold dear. I don't think it is a harsh line I am taking. To the contrary, it is by comparison to what we have in the round, the softest fluffy rabbit.

Lat, like SA I'm surprised that you don't look behind the (unatributed, but it's actually from the Daily Mail - surprise not) quote you give. To start with, you have no idea what class these people are, how they managed to raise funds for the flights, or what their situation was in Somalia. Asylum seekers cannot work in the UK, unless the UKBA has lifted restrictions for a specific person, so it would be impossible for the father, or any of the family, to work - unless it was illegally. Asylum seekers are not "responsible for thousands of genuinely ill and poor people being homeless." The governments who have overseen, or forced, the sale of millions of council homes without building replacements are responsible for that, along with the people (including nice middle-class people) who buy houses to rent out as speculation, helping to push up prices, and banks & mortgage lenders who have encouraged people to take out loans they cannot afford.

You are right to say that such cases are "are grist to the mill for ideological nut cases", & it's sad to see you joining their ranks. The only way they are "a real danger to much that many of us hold dear" is if papers like the Daily Mail, & its supporters, are allowed to peddle distortions like the above without challenge.

[Lateralthinking1]

Lat, like SA I'm surprised that you don't look behind the (unatributed, but it's actually from the Daily Mail - surprise not) quote you give. To start with, you have no idea what class these people are, how they managed to raise funds for the flights, or what their situation was in Somalia. Asylum seekers cannot work in the UK, unless the UKBA has lifted restrictions for a specific person, so it would be impossible for the father, or any of the family, to work - unless it was illegally. Asylum seekers are not "responsible for thousands of genuinely ill and poor people being homeless." The governments who have overseen, or forced, the sale of millions of council homes without building replacements are responsible for that, along with the people (including nice middle-class people) who buy houses to rent out as speculation, helping to push up prices, and banks & mortgage lenders who have encouraged people to take out loans they cannot afford.

You are right to say that such cases are "are grist to the mill for ideological nut cases", & it's sad to see you joining their ranks. The only way they are "a real danger to much that many of us hold dear" is if papers like the Daily Mail, & its supporters, are allowed to peddle distortions like the above without challenge.

Our big local story this week and from an organisation that is anything but right wing.

http://www.thisiscroydontoday.co.uk/Croydon-homeless-charity-says-collapse-weight/story-16429166-detail/story.html

I agree with you flosshilde on your points about Government but I don't see it as an either/or. I included an article about the British middle classes who were claiming and working on the quiet so it wasn't restricted to the non-British.

Nor is to class. I have a working class cousin - allegedly a car mechanic - who has spent most of his 35 adult years choosing to be unemployed and he is a father of five. It isn't the majority of benefits' claimants who are abusing the system but I can't sign up to the denial that an expectancy of responsibility should apply across the board.

80% of the time I will speak about bankers and tax avoidance - that's patently obvious - but there are cheats everywhere. It's a fact of life and they are ALL destroying the social security system when it is crucial that it survives.

[Flosshilde]

I included an article about the British middle classes who were claiming and working on the quiet so it wasn't restricted to the non-British.

Maybe, but you chose to post a quote from, rather than a link to, a selective & specious Daily Mail article - but didn't declare it as such - when we are well aware that the MAil has a particular agenda. It doesn't mention the asylum seekers who are destitute because of the prohibition on working, who are dumped in housing which 'indigenous' people won't live in in.

but there are cheats everywhere. It's a fact of life and they are ALL destroying the social security system when it is crucial that it survives.

Asylum seekers are not cheats. In the case you referred to, the family didn't just grab money & walk into a house - somebody - an official - approved it.

[Lateralthinking1]

Maybe, but you chose to post a quote from, rather than a link to, a selective & specious Daily Mail article - but didn't declare it as such - when we are well aware that the MAil has a particular agenda. It doesn't mention the asylum seekers who are destitute because of the prohibition on working, who are dumped in housing which 'indigenous' people won't live in in. Asylum seekers are not cheats. In the case you referred to, the family didn't just grab money & walk into a house - somebody - an official - approved it.

Yes, on the first point, that's the Daily Mail's agenda. It isn't mine. I'm not very clannish. I would even be prepared to quote John Redwood if he ever said something with which I agreed and my gut instinct there is that he is mad, evil and always wrong.

I'm afraid I think some asylum seekers are cheats. Some vicars are cheats. Some charity workers are cheats. Some little old ladies who do flower arranging are cheats. Most of all these people probably aren't cheats.

Tone matters. If I was fleeing from Cameron-Clegg UK, I would feel extraordinarily grateful to be housed anywhere, even if it were in a caravan. I've even considered living in a caravan here and it's this country rather than the caravan that puts me off.

I wouldn't be demanding a £2 million pound house in the equivalent place to Hampstead, knowing that others, some of them originally from my own country, were dying on the streets.

We don't need those kinds of attitudes here. We have more than enough of our own in that category already and, yes, officials are the bigger part of the problem with the Government ultimately culpable.

[amateur51]

Yes, on the first point, that's the Daily Mail's agenda. It isn't mine. I'm not very clannish. I would even be prepared to quote John Redwood if he ever said something with which I agreed and my gut instinct there is that he is mad, evil and always wrong.

I'm afraid I think some asylum seekers are cheats. Some vicars are cheats. Some charity workers are cheats. Some little old ladies who do flower arranging are cheats. Most of all these people probably aren't cheats.

Tone matters. If I was fleeing from Cameron-Clegg UK, I would feel extraordinarily grateful to be housed anywhere, even if it were in a caravan. I've even considered living in a caravan here and it's this country rather than the caravan that puts me off.

I wouldn't be demanding a £2 million pound house in the equivalent place to Hampstead, knowing that others, some of them originally from my own country, were dying on the streets.

We don't need those kinds of attitudes here. We have more than enough of our own in that category already and, yes, officials are the bigger part of the problem with the Government ultimately culpable.

West Hampstead is not Hampstead

They were not given a £2m house - they were allowed to rent one and the local authority picks up the tab in the form of Housing Benefit or Local Housing Allowance - this goes to the landlord who still owns the house. The house has to be that size because of the number of occupants I guess. So the size of the HB tab is related to the (unregulated) local market rent. Rents were at one time regulated of course.

This is not a useful story from which to extrapolate anything other than contempt for refugees, I'm afraid. :sadface:

[Lateralthinking1]

West Hampstead is not Hampstead

They were not given a £2m house - they were allowed to rent one and the local authority picks up the tab in the form of Housing Benefit or Local Housing Allowance - this goes to the landlord who still owns the house. The house has to be that size because of the number of occupants I guess. So the size of the HB tab is related to the (unregulated) local market rent. Rents were at one time regulated of course.

This is not a useful story from which to extrapolate anything other than contempt for refugees, I'm afraid. :sadface:

That's your reading. You have singled them out. I have placed them alongside bankers, tax avoiders, middle class dodgers, working class dodgers in my own family and all the others who would laugh while kicking the frail into the gutter.

I am completely colour blind and indiscriminating when it comes to assessing greed. My only concern is that we don't end up with the ill untreated and the poor unhoused. Whatever it takes to do it and what it will take is identifying the grasping.

Sadly, this Government isn't even in the Janet and John class for being able to tackle this issue without harming the harmed.

[ahinton]

That's your reading. You have singled them out. I have placed them alongside bankers, tax avoiders, middle class dodgers, working class dodgers in my own family and all the others who would laugh while kicking the frail into the gutter.

I am completely colour blind and indiscriminating when it comes to assessing greed. My only concern is that we don't end up with the ill untreated and the poor unhoused. Whatever it takes to do it and what it will take is identifying the grasping.

Sadly, this Government isn't even in the Janet and John class for being able to tackle this issue without harming the harmed.

And who is? That's a lot of people that you've accused of greed of one kind and another on one scale or another; might there be enough citizens left who fall entirely outside any of these categories at all times, without fail?

[amateur51]

That's your reading. You have singled them out. I have placed them alongside bankers, tax avoiders, middle class dodgers, working class dodgers in my own family and all the others who would laugh while kicking the frail into the gutter.

I am completely colour blind and indiscriminating when it comes to assessing greed. My only concern is that we don't end up with the ill untreated and the poor unhoused. Whatever it takes to do it and what it will take is identifying the grasping.

Sadly, this Government isn't even in the Janet and John class for being able to tackle this issue without harming the harmed.

My post was pointing out two inaccuracies in the Daily Mail story, Lats not having a go at you - if you thought that, then I apologise.

Of course there are sharks & ne'er-do-wells at every stratum of humankind. That's more to do with their being human than their being refugees, I'd suggest :winkeye: The refugee status adds to the desperation of the whole thing.:sadface: