The Conservative Cave

Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: CactusCarlos on December 08, 2010, 12:46:17 PM

Title: [UK] 1.6m benefits claimants have never had a job 'because it does not pay to wo
Post by: CactusCarlos on December 08, 2010, 12:46:17 PM
[UK] 1.6m benefits claimants have never had a job 'because it does not pay to work'

Quote
About 1.6million people in Britain have never worked, Iain Duncan Smith revealed yesterday.

Hundreds of thousands of teenagers and adults have become used to languishing on benefit because work simply does not pay, the Work and Pensions Secretary said.

More: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1336691/Iain-Duncan-Smith-1-6m-benefits-job-work-does-pay.html

This is what you want, isn't it DUmmies?
Title: Re: [UK] 1.6m benefits claimants have never had a job 'because it does not pay to wo
Post by: JohnnyReb on December 08, 2010, 12:53:20 PM
[UK] 1.6m benefits claimants have never had a job 'because it does not pay to work'

More: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1336691/Iain-Duncan-Smith-1-6m-benefits-job-work-does-pay.html

This is what you want, isn't it DUmmies?

Egg-zactly.....get on it at 16 and then retire at 65.... :loser:
Title: Re: [UK] 1.6m benefits claimants have never had a job 'because it does not pay to wo
Post by: thundley4 on December 08, 2010, 12:56:25 PM
I think they pay way more per child over there, too.
Title: Re: [UK] 1.6m benefits claimants have never had a job 'because it does not pay to wo
Post by: NHSparky on December 08, 2010, 01:46:07 PM
And if the numbers are anywhere near the same here, that means about 6-7 million here are in the same situation.
Title: Re: [UK] 1.6m benefits claimants have never had a job 'because it does not pay to wo
Post by: true_blood on December 08, 2010, 07:24:07 PM
That is absolutely disgusting. :banghead:
Title: Re: [UK] 1.6m benefits claimants have never had a job 'because it does not pay to wo
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on December 09, 2010, 08:42:26 AM
It's a rational economic decision on the part of the slugs, I have to say.  Not one I regard as ethical myself, but certainly rational.  This situation is what happens when Socialism doesn't immediatley drive the plane straight into a mountain* and manages to provide benefits the citizenry regards as sufficient...they have no reason to work any harder (Or at all, in this case) for more.

*Of course, this kind of rational microeconomic decision eventually does lead to the economy hitting that mountain on a macroeconomic level, it just takes awhile.