Tuesday, 29 September 2009

Wipe out Welfare

Well ok, maybe not completely. But we could easy knock a few billion of the benefits bill by getting tough on the lazy ‘can’t work, won’t work’.


Now, I don’t pretend to understand the intricacies of the UK’s liberal welfare system...its way too complicated, but maybe this is part of the problem. Who, for example, understands how tax credits work ? Anyone ? Anyone at all. No, thought not, and that apparently includes most of Her Majesty’s revenue and customs officers. The founding principles of welfare are basically positive – to provide assistance to the deserving poor. But our generous welfare system has resulted in this deserving minority becoming vastly outnumbered by the undeserved.

So it’s time to get tough. 10% cuts on public spending ?.. .Welfare should be the first place to drop the axe. It’s an unfortunate time to be saying this, but I just don’t believe there aren’t enough jobs out there. McDonalds are recruiting ! Seriously though, society would be much better off if public sector jobs were created for the unemployed instead of just paying them to sit at home watching Kilroy (or whichever other useless person hosts daytime TV shows these days). Our schools and hospitals need cleaners, they along with most other public buildings are filthy, the streets need sweeping...pay people to scrape chewing gum off the pavements if you have to. As long as the government pays the lazy to do nothing, they will do nothing. Continuing to do so goes against the principles of the state welfare system.



Another place to get tough is single teenage mothers. Have children young by all means, but do not expect the state to raise you and your kids. Partners, families, friends should be turned to for support, but the young and uneducated seem to believe that a pregnancy and a baby are a ticket to your own home and a weekly cheque courtesy of the state. How did this happen? It’s absolutely right that every child in this country should receive a guaranteed sum to prevent that child ever going hungry, many deserving single mothers are grateful for this lifeline. But these are usually the ones that also work full time and claim no other benefits. Young single mothers should remain in the care of their own family, or be housed in a similar manner to other children in care, ensuring that education continues.



Well, would you look at that, it’s happening as we speak...Gord announces young teenage mothers will no longer get their own homes paid for by the state. The talk doesn’t work unless you do what you say you’re going to though Labour.

1 comment:

  1. I like the latest blog! About time someone has the b*lls to say what we are all thinking! My only comment would be that Gordon Brown is only concerned about 16 and 17 year old parents. It is ALL single parents that get pregnant on purpose with no partner to support them whether they are 16 or, as in most cases, in their 20s that should be given no benefits. The PM's proposals will only affect a small minority of people. Too little, too late. A radical shake up is needed but none of the political parties have the guts to do it! The country is way too overpopulated as it is without losers breeding more and more! It seems to be becoming the norm nowadays to have 3 kids from 3 different casual partners! Also, the rules on adoption need shaking up. If people could adopt without so much red tape etc getting in the way maybe less people would spend thousands of pounds of taxpayers money on IVF etc ...............

    Nicola Sluggett

    ReplyDelete