Re: Priti Patel omg : Tue Mar 03, 2020 4:22 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

We all know if they have kids they wont be getting £80 a week. UC should be short term help not an alternative to work. What would you say is a fair amount - minimum wage will be £8.75 an hour so how close to that do you set basic UC?

Well that is indeed the $million question.
However, I was responding to the comment "If someone is struggling on UC then they are not spending the £80 a week sensibly".

It's an extremely complex issue and the lack of social housing heavily distorts the amount that some people / families can claim.
There are people claiming housing benefit who will be claiming more than many people earn ,which shouldn't be possible and is primarily due to the lack of local authority housing stock - sold under the Thatcher regime to buy votes for a second term in office, which neither the Tories or Labour have ever replaced.

Re: Priti Patel omg : Tue Mar 03, 2020 4:43 pm  

I know people who are in work albeit zero hour contracts who still live on the street because they cannot get any accommodation. The one thing I really do detest are those who try to pit one part of society against another. If you want to persecute one section I would suggest you go after the tax avoiders be it companies or individuals.

Re: Priti Patel omg : Tue Mar 03, 2020 7:00 pm  

Scarlet Pimpernell wrote:

I know people who are in work albeit zero hour contracts who still live on the street because they cannot get any accommodation. The one thing I really do detest are those who try to pit one part of society against another. If you want to persecute one section I would suggest you go after the tax avoiders be it companies or individuals.

There is no need at all for anyone to live on the street, the support is there, but the individuals do not want to give up spice, booze and comply to the rules.

Some people are intentionally homeless.

[Mild Rover]

Re: Priti Patel omg : Tue Mar 03, 2020 7:25 pm  

IR80 wrote:

There is no need at all for anyone to live on the street, the support is there, but the individuals do not want to give up spice, booze and comply to the rules.

Some people are intentionally homeless.

Why do you think the number of people choosing to live on the street has has increased over the last decade - what has made it more attractive?

Re: Priti Patel omg : Tue Mar 03, 2020 7:36 pm  

Mild Rover wrote:

Why do you think the number of people choosing to live on the street has has increased over the last decade - what has made it more attractive?

Who told you that morw people are on the street because it's "attractive"?

[Mild Rover]

Re: Priti Patel omg : Tue Mar 03, 2020 8:52 pm  

IR80 wrote:

Who told you that morw people are on the street because it's "attractive"?

If nobody has to be there but more are, then the implication has to be that more are choosing it and there has to be some underlying reason for that.

Re: Priti Patel omg : Tue Mar 03, 2020 8:59 pm  

Mild Rover wrote:

If nobody has to be there but more are, then the implication has to be that more are choosing it and there has to be some underlying reason for that.

There are many reasons, underlying, obvious, personal, private... but this thread isn't about that.

[Mild Rover]

Re: Priti Patel omg : Tue Mar 03, 2020 9:18 pm  

IR80 wrote:

There are many reasons, underlying, obvious, personal, private... but this thread isn't about that.

Societal, economic?

Re: Priti Patel omg : Tue Mar 03, 2020 9:21 pm  

Mild Rover wrote:

Societal, economic?

IR80 wrote:

There are many reasons, underlying, obvious, personal, private... but this thread isn't about that.

Re: Priti Patel omg : Wed Mar 04, 2020 10:55 am  

It looks like she has opened the floodgates and if true appears not to be able to learn her lessons.