My intended meaning was scroungers but, even if it wasn't I think that benefits should enable a lifestyle which does not go so far as to be indulgent and frivolous. It makes no sense that people on benefits are able to have more disposable income than people working for minimum wage.moby wrote:bbobeckyj wrote:A can of worms maybe, but, people who live on benefits yet smoke, drink, obese, buy every latest film/cd/game etcAngusWolfe wrote:There's another thing that annoys me, people who watch live TV and don't pay their TV licence, but will spend £6 on a coffee every morning and smoke 20 a day. It's £5 a week, it's not expensive for christs sake.
There is a whole raft of reasons why people are on benefits, and some have worked a lifetime before claiming (which means paying in more than most do in a working life)
Not all are "scroungers"
If they have money spare for cigarettes, alcohol and maintaining the weight of two people, then they don't need that much, and just because a hypothetical few had well paid jobs before receiving benefits does not mean that they should be entitled to maintain an indulgent frivolous lifestyle.