Wealthy UK politician reckons he can survive on £53 a week.

reply to post by illuminnaughty


Yep we owned our water,gas,electric,busses,trains, etc etc, then the bribers came and the rest is history.
Who owns these now? The same people who are privatising our nhs and education.
Ps love the avatar

the average mp spends more than 53 pounds .............. on lunch .......daily

And I just want to add, having read through more of the self-righteous posts from some folk. Is survival all about food, is that all one needs in this day and age?

Does nobody use soaps, shampoos, deoderants any more? If some is having trouble finding a job, surely being well groomed might increase their chances?

How are people to buy clothes? Travel? Use a phone to arrange interviews? Afford a computer or pay to have C.V's (resumes) pritnted out, posted?

You know why people conveniently forget to rinclude that stuff? We take it for granted...it is sick to think that people who are privileged, people like me and patrons of this site...and we are, regardless of how tough it can be, in the grand scheme of things we're all privileged, sitting around theorising on ATS...we're privileged to the point that some of us seem to take it for granted, as if it's free.

I don't have kids, or a mortgage...if I did, if I had to choose between my kids sitting in the dark or in warmth...the last thng I'd be doing is coming on ATS and issuing passive threats...if you'd said that to my face I'd be in a cell, ridiculous.

Survivaly isn't just about eating and paying rent. Seriously, what the hell is wrong with people? Believe me when I say my family and I saw some really hard times, but there were always people worse off and we knew it. My parents did their utmost and never got down - they told us, appreciate it because believe it or not we're fortunate compared to some.

I lived on benefits, it was tough but I got by, there are people who aren't as physically strong and capable as me, less mentally stable...who I don't think can get by. Stop seeing the world from your own perspective.

A couple of thing's have struck me the last few day's..

A couple of point's......

I am in the process of lodging an appeal for my daughters renewal Disability Living Allowance decision which wasn't favourable this time.. And as my daughter's need's haven't changed since the last claim based on which she was awarded the highest rate of care component....and this time she as been flat out refused DLA at any rate, I tend to think that my daughter as been hung out to dry as part of the pledge by this government to reduce the number of DLA recipient's.

But getting to my point....I have tried to get advice from everywhere. But what have I found? My local Citizen's Advice Bureaux's benefit section as been scrapped....because it's no longer being funded. Welfare right's has a 4-6 week's waiting period to get an appointment ( not much use when you get a month from the date the Dept for Work and Pension's send you a decision letter to lodge an appeal for any benefit)....because of lack of funding. My local legal charity that helped people with appeal's against benefit decision's as been closed......yep, what a surprise because the funding was pulled.

I find it a tad bit convenient that in this current climate that it is being made extremely difficult for some people to receive advice and help relating to benefit claim's.

Another VERY important point that GREATLY disturb's me.
As part of the welfare reform's people are going to be paid all their benefit's in one lump sum...including housing benefit. So where normally someone in social housing would get their housing benefit paid straight to the council or housing association it is going to be paid direct to them and they will have the responsibility for paying the rent themselves. I don't see how this help's someone who may already be struggling financially.
If I didn't know any better I would be thinking that this government want's to aid those in social housing to get into more debt/rent arrears.

And let's not forget to mention that the national council tax benefit as been abolished from this month. Instead, many local authorities are hitting the poorest on mean's tested benefit's who normally qualify for full council tax benefit, with a council tax benefit reduction of upto 25% which as to paid out of their mean's tested benefit's like JSA or income support.So every single person receiving council tax benefit within a local authority will all have to pay the blanket amount set out by their local authority....Poll Tax on the poor anyone?

So for many single people make that £53 a week MINUS around £6 a week that some may be eligible to pay after the 25% in council tax benefit reduction.
Oh, and if you fall on really hard time's that's a bit tough because Community Care Grant's and Crisis Loan's have been abolished from this week also.

Now those with a house they don't fill and find themselves having a spare bedroom they will be "taxed" ...but on the other hand those who have a house they fill with children will fall pray to the benefit "cap's" that don't take into account how many children are in a household....I think that's what's called being screwed both end's.

It amaze's me that some people feel that these new welfare reform's and cut's will fix this country......I just see us on our way down to a more "broken" Britain!

Sounds like an idea for a new TV show. Let's get some fat cats surviving on a few bucks for 30 days and see how they really do. If they have a family, make them come along too.

There can even be added 'game' time where the family must collect enough aluminum cans so they can buy bread.

Originally posted by CX
And don't just do it for a week, knowing that in a few days you'll be back spending more on food over lunch than most do in a month.......try it for a year, with the same treatment that the government gives to people.

I'd pay good money to watch it.

CX.

Yeah, make him do it for at least a few months. Lets make sure that his first payment is delayed by 6 weeks too, as is customary with the Job Centre

reply to post by Thundersmurf


Haha...of course...! And they have to repeatedly ask him to confirm bank details before payments can be made, as well as every payment being late by at least two days, just because...well, they never seem to know why....

I think it's pretty much a given that he will never, ever take up this challenge.

reply to post by something wicked


Just counter what you said, firstly I didn't simply imply that because he has a double barrelled name that meant he was wealthy, while many are not all are, I also added that he came from wealth, not gentry.

He does come from a well off family.

And yes he is an idiot, the very fact that he chooses to make a totally daft statement that 53UK is enough to live on is daft stupid and offensive to the people struggling on what they get. The fact that basic food items were clearly not factored in to the amount said is almost criminal, it shows yet again that those in power have lost track of what happens in the real world.

I don't care what the education the man has, like my brother who has many letters after his name and was a whizz in uni he is missing one important character feature, common sense. While Osbourne and co have to make something out of the economy and it will be tough on people (of course bar the rich like themselves) but making incredibly daft comments that 53UK is ok to live on is reckless and shows zero respect for the poor.

The question is can they live on it, brutally its a yes, but exist would be a better word, it would be a return to times of famine almost, living on scraps, poor quality of life, health issues, all things that in this day and age should be long gone. We should not be having a return to 30's lifestyle while so much money is wasted by our glorious leaders on the rich and non needing.All this while banks that are public owned are still being allowed to give multi million bonuses despite losing money. The excuse, it keeps the best people at the bank, really, then why are the banks in a state, surely these best people are there to avoid that but actually what they mean is it keeps the best crooks at the top whose job it is to make as much for them as the bank. Then there's Politicians being allowed to vote themselves a 29 or was it 37% pay rise while the rest of the country get either lower than inflation rises or none, worst still many lose their job.

Isn't that what these brilliant minds in power are there to counter, the brains to reinvigorate the system, to show their intelligence and expertise to keep the country on track?

It is what we pay them for yet time after time we throw money in aid to countries who are so corrupt it never gets to the people its for, they flood the country with massive immigration which despite lies does not bring as much into the Uk as claimed, we know this because these brilliant brains are now trying to limit those who come here to avoid them using the country for free housing, health care and a benefits pay off, if the number who come here to work were so high it would not be an issue.

Add to that where the money made by those that come to work is for the most part sent home and not reinvested in to the uk at all.

As for the EU, 53 million a day and for what?

We cannot make our own trade deals, they do them for us, we cannot decide for the most part who can be removed as a threat to the UK population although I have to say many cases were judged here in the UK by equally out of the loop Judges, judges who show remorse for a paedophile?

The EU is a a money sapping cash cow for failing countries with people like us having to foot the bill, its a milestone around our neck, with out it trade would still continue and may even flourish as we could trade with who we like and not who we are allowed to trade with under EU rules.

So while I appreciate your call for balance I think it would be better addressed to Ian Duncan Smith and George Osbourne who clearly are not showing any balance to the poor old and sick.

Originally posted by caitlinfae
reply to post by Thundersmurf

 

Haha...of course...!

And they have to repeatedly ask him to confirm bank details before payments can be made, as well as every payment being late by at least two days, just because...well, they never seem to know why....

I think it's pretty much a given that he will never, ever take up this challenge.

Why would he, they are part of the 'posh boy club' lest we forget the Osbourne train thing where he was caught riding first class yet with a 2nd class ticket, when confronted and asked to go to second class he refused and his assistant offered to pay and was heard saying "you don't expect him to travel with those people".

No, Duncan Smith will never do the challenge and if made to do it on an estate such as mine I doubt he would last the night. He would be a bit like survivalist Bear Gryles (spelling) who does those programmes where he's camped out in the wild in the middle of nowhere eating off the land, turns out on many of them when the camera's went off he was taken to a hotel and stayed there.

You would expect the same from Ian D

Originally posted by Mclaneinc

Why would he, they are part of the 'posh boy club' lest we forget the Osbourne train thing where he was caught riding first class yet with a 2nd class ticket, when confronted and asked to go to second class he refused and his assistant offered to pay and was heard saying "you don't expect him to travel with those people".

Ah well, I didn't catch that one....how typical, disgusting condescending elitist .....bah...I could go on and on.

It makes me so angry when people are slamming folk who already have NOTHING and want them to have less than nothing, and would have no problem foisting yet more poverty and misery on them - call yourselves human? You're souls are black and rotten. Where is the 'human' in you for goodness sake?

You make poor folk into villains and criminals just for needing help with the basics to survive and would even take these away from them, I can't believe our once caring society has descended into a nation of 'I'm alright Jack so I'm pulling the ladder up' and 'every man for himself' attidude to fellow humans who are in need.

We have lost everything our granddads gained for the ordinary man since WW2: better wages, better housing, a 'safety net' system so poor families didn't go to the workhouse or starve, medical care for everyone regardless of financial status - for decades it was a wonderful system, run by honest politicians who were in touch with the less well off because they themselves came from those poor communities. Cameron has destroyed all this in a couple of years.

It's only gone wrong because of corrupt, super-rich, fat pig MP's can't keep their grunting snouts out of taxpayer monies. Pay themselves a bloody fortune in salaries, but dictate that the rest of us get paid 6 quid an hour. We now have to pay 'bedroom' tax' on spare rooms, but they raid taxpayer money for a second home. We have to cut down on food, but they use taxpayer money to pay for expensive cuisine dining. We can't afford cars, but they get chauffers and limo's at our expense.

They claim EVERYTHING as work expenses despite being paid huge salaries and should pay their own living and work expenses like the rest of us have to do.

If you or I had a job that paid good wages, do you think we would be allowed to claim ANYTHING from taxpayer money? We wouldn't. So how come these wealthy MP's with huge salaries need help with their work and living expenses? Their salaries alone should more than cover what they need. And if it doesn't, then they should do what they tell the rest of us to do, and live within their means. They wouldn't plunge into poverty if expense claims and 2nd homes were abolished, they'd still be loaded.
Yet many of you here seem ok with THEM living luxury lifestyles on the taxpayers quid while they hoard their own untouched personal fortunes, and instead want poor folk to have nothing from the taxpayer so they're starving and homeless. I'm baffled.

Roll on the next election so we can see the back of Tories for good. But I fear that by then, the damage they're doing/have done our country and it's citizens can never be put right.

Or maybe we should vote them back in again and make them deal with the mess they themselves have created.

Serious clown , probably just being sarcastic and trying to rub our faces in it !

Awright then Smith , lets see you move out your fancy mansion in the English countryside which we pay for
and see you get a house on the benefit system and live off £53 a week !

In fact I bet you £53 you cant!

what an absolute gob#e !

I agree this clown should be forced to live by his words. But he should not be entitled straight off. Oh no. First he should have to claim it. Then he should be rejected, and forced to appeal it. He should wait a year, living on 60% of the £53 a week. Then when his appeal is successful, he then gets to live on £53 a week for a whole year. And just because he is IDS, he should not be entitled to any back pay.

a young women say in her mid twenties ,has 3 children lives on her own ..never worked a day in her life gets £300 pounds a week payed into her bank account ...has her rent and council tax payed in full ...

in comparison a young male in his mid twenties no children works 40 hours plus a week on min wage earning £260 .. has to pay rent council tax ect ..basically is worse off for doing the right thing...

benefits are there to help people get back on there feet ..not to buy the latest I phone ...


i know personally of women who go out to get pregnant to boost there benefit beer fund

personally i think the government should be helping us workers .. people who want to work ...not giving my taxes to the work shy ....give them food coupons ...beer and smokes excluded ...

it bewilders me that people who don't work get rewarded while working and middle class hard working decent people have to fiance there work shy existence

as it stands the benefit system needs to be re addressed .. why should hard working people struggle while young bints get knocked up to pay for there life styles

peace

Originally posted by symptomoftheuniverse

Originally posted by SecretFace
My wife and I survive on that a week without benefits and no luxuries, he is correct you can survive on it, like the many private renting working families and average earning families with mortgages have been doing for a good few years now.

This is the silent majority that everyone, including the press, seem to forget about. The government, both past and present, don't forget about us though when it comes to striking the hammer down, we are the sizeable majority that are keeping this landfill above water and seemingly subsidising both rich and perceived poor at the same time.

Want to know how to survive on that? Speak to an average working family who private rents, they will show you exactly how to.

oh yeah whatever. Do you have any idea what having no money whatsoever feels like? People with mortgages are not skint. Oh dear.
Same as the people pulling up in cars to go to foodbanks,jeeze they are not skint either.
Some people make me puke. No idea what its like to be absolutly pennyless. Evil people.

You are of course a troll, if you are implying you are absolutely pennyless then what are you using to make your posts on ATS?

The attempt to reduce the entire welfare debate to nothing more than a question of Iain Duncan Smith’s personal finances is absurd. For a start, the whole basis of the petition is flawed, since it now turns out that David Bennett is not living on just £53 a week at all, but has an income of treble that sum, made up of his housing benefit, tax credit and earnings from his stall. As he has admitted on one website, he is “a poker player, a self-employed ducker and diver,” not exactly the destitute individual that his heart-tugging cheerleaders claimed. More importantly, Duncan Smith is the wrong target for all this abuse. The negative portrait of him as an aloof, ambitious politician keen to grind down the poor is ludicrous. His has been no easy, gilded career. The son of a renowned Spitfire pilot, he served as an officer in the Scots Guards for six years before he began work in business during the Eighties. Twice he experienced spells on the dole when he was made redundant by his employers. “I know what it’s like to live on the breadline,” he says. First elected a Conservative MP in 1992, he rose up the ranks to the Tory leadership in 2001. But his lack of charisma made him wholly unsuited for that job. Yet when he was ousted in 2003, he did not sulk or retire from politics to make his fortune.

Instead, he reinvented himself as an expert on poverty. His decision was sparked by a visit in 2002 to the Easterhouse estate in Glasgow, where he was struck by how so many of the residents were trapped in the destructive cycle of welfare dependency. “I felt I had to do something and came away a changed man,” he wrote later. Having set up the Centre for Social Justice in 2004, Iain Duncan Smith developed a raft of policies that now form the Coalition’s radical programme, based on the premise of encouraging people into work rather than abandoning them to an empty life on benefits. Duncan Smith is the first Minister to attempt this task.

Even Mrs Thatcher and her Ministers shied away, as did Tony Blair, who grandly talked of “reducing the bills for social failure” but never did so. What Duncan Smith recognises is that there is nothing compassionate about a bloated welfare system that pays people to remain out of work. Such a structure only impoverishes the nation and its users. Nor was social security originally meant to provide a comfortable existence, contrary to what the angry petitioners claim this week, it was and still is meant to just help you out between jobs . .

wright852 is absolutely right. IDS just has the UK citizenry's best interests at heart and we should all be saluting him for his bravery in tackling the poverty caused by his new rich chums in such an efficient manner..

reply to post by Mclaneinc


So in other words, no balance then? I know this is hard to accept, but welfare comes out of the same pot as any other public spending. How much do YOU think is appropriate as welfare benefit? What would you cut to cover the increase or how much would you increase my taxes by to achieve it? Which mainstream political party is proposing to significantly increase welfare benefits?

For the double barrelled name thing, your words were "I doubt this was a hardship as you will notice he's a double barrelled name". If he 'comes from money' - so what? You are suggesting that if someone has money they cannot empathise with people who have less money - sorry, inverted snobbery again. Remind me again how many days Ed Miliband has actually spent in gainful employment outside of government? That would be none, wouldn't it? At least IDS has worked outside government - in the armed forces actually and has spent time unemployed.

As for the person who challenged IDS about this, his own background is interesting....

www.telegraph.co.uk...

I am not typing this to suggest I think £53 a week is great - far from it and I have said nothing to suggest otherwise. However, I do then question what the 'right' amount should be, who should qualify for more, for how long and why, and also if the amount was raised (and the person still gets housing benefit, reduced or is exempt from council tax etc.) at what point it stops becoming what it was meant to be which was a safety net for those who needed it and becomes a sum that makes it hard for the individual to see the need to take on a job. I'd be interested in your views on this because surely that is the real point, not which minister or which government is in power because face it, the welfare cost for this country either reduces or it bankrupts us.

reply to post by samerulesapply


The worthless scumbag won't do it. As I've told people countless times, NOTHING WILL CHANGE UNLESS YOU DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

reply to post by wright852


When will people wake up and realise it is not the welfare system that is the problem here.

The problem is greedy tax avoiding corporations under paying their workers. If they got a fair wage, rather than as little as they can get away with paying them, then working would pay more than benefits. More wages = more taxes, more expenditure, better economy. Its so obvious, but the government are in the pockets of these corporations which is why they consistently fail to do anything about them.

It is absolutely criminal how they consistently shift the blame to the poor while it is clearly the rich who deserve to suffer due to their greed. IDS is the right target. Regardless of the claims of the individual concerned, IDS made the claim he can live on £53 a week. He needs to live by it. But as usual, its "do as I say, not as I do".

I do not blame anyone who wants to avoid being a corporate slave. That is not why we are on this planet, regardless of what everyone is brainwashed to believe. If people want to live off benefits, then fine, go ahead, Its not even a luxuriious lifestyle. And not everyone on benefits is a waster. There are many ways to contribute towards society and civlisation that do not involve getting greedy corporations even richer than they need to be.