Unpopular opinions #18

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
1
This Is Not An Ad said:
Never watched game of thrones or greatest showman. They just don’t appeal to me 😁

To add to the child benefit talk .. having twins as your first kids you should get the £21 for each. I have twins , no other children and my second twin gets less than the first. The idea behind less for the second is because they can have hand me downs. There are no hand me downs with twins!
Click to expand...

Good point. You also can't do hand me downs if you have a very big age gap or the second wasn't planned.

The whole benefit system needs to be simplified. The amount they waste on paperwork, assessments, staff manning the call centres and administration. Idiots coming up with stupid new schemes.

Disability, your doctor just signs a form.
Child benefit just give all kids 80 quid a month
Universal credit, just top up the familes total net income to 30 k.
 
Brigitjonesbuttcheek said:
Good point. You also can't do hand me downs if you have a very big age gap or the second wasn't planned.

The whole benefit system needs to be simplified. The amount they waste on paperwork, assessments, staff manning the call centres and administration. Idiots coming up with stupid new schemes.

Disability, your doctor just signs a form.
Child benefit just give all kids 80 quid a month
Universal credit, just top up the familes total net income to 30 k.
Click to expand...

Child benefit can be claimed for all kids £21 for first and £13 for everyone after until they finish full time education unless parents are very high earners.

Universal credit and tax credits is capped at 2 kids for any born after April 2017 if you have 3, 4, 5 plus all born before 2017 you can claim for them.

I think it should be capped as there are a high percentage of people who will continue to breed knowing they will be paid for it and this is only way to stop them.

Yes it's unfair for people who can support themselves then a partner dies or leaves and they can only claim for 2 of the kids but that's how the cookie crumbles.

These professional breeders need to be stopped. Its not fair to know fine well you can't provide for children and just keep on having them and be paid for it.

Very rarely do you see 2 working parents with a football team of kids because they can't afford it. Yet people who have never worked and have no intention in doing so have child after child get paid for it then manage to claim PIP for their own health issues of the stress if having so many kids and not enough money.

I know many people like this and also work in a sector that supports them, their bad choices, their claiming everything and blaming everyone else for the fact they have too many kids.
 
Brigitjonesbuttcheek said:
Disability, your doctor just signs a form.
Click to expand...
I find it hilarious when trying to claim disability from the DWP because you need a lot of evidence which I understand. You need doctors notes, GP notes and notes from consultants, mental health experts etc. You have all this evidence from people who have spent their careers in the healthcare industry only for you to be told you need to go to an appointment to see if Sandra, who worked for two years as an HCA, thinks you’re ill enough for her.
 
thegirlscout said:
I find it hilarious when trying to claim disability from the DWP because you need a lot of evidence which I understand. You need doctors notes, GP notes and notes from consultants, mental health experts etc. You have all this evidence from people who have spent their careers in the healthcare industry only for you to be told you need to go to an appointment to see if Sandra, who worked for two years as an HCA, thinks you’re ill enough for her.
Click to expand...
And Sandra makes X feel ashamed and "guilty" even though X genuinely need benefits.
 
Crystal Beth said:
Child benefit can be claimed for all kids £21 for first and £13 for everyone after until they finish full time education unless parents are very high earners.

Universal credit and tax credits is capped at 2 kids for any born after April 2017 if you have 3, 4, 5 plus all born before 2017 you can claim for them.

I think it should be capped as there are a high percentage of people who will continue to breed knowing they will be paid for it and this is only way to stop them.

Yes it's unfair for people who can support themselves then a partner dies or leaves and they can only claim for 2 of the kids but that's how the cookie crumbles.

These professional breeders need to be stopped. Its not fair to know fine well you can't provide for children and just keep on having them and be paid for it.

Very rarely do you see 2 working parents with a football team of kids because they can't afford it. Yet people who have never worked and have no intention in doing so have child after child get paid for it then manage to claim PIP for their own health issues of the stress if having so many kids and not enough money.

I know many people like this and also work in a sector that supports them, their bad choices, their claiming everything and blaming everyone else for the fact they have too many kids.
Click to expand...
60k is not a very high earner. Especially not in the south and especially not if there is only one parent or only one parent earning.

I'm not saying we should go back to the days of people taking in 60k for breeding. I'm saying the system is too complicated and that it actually costs more in the running of the system. Just simplify it. Any family with income less than 30k gets topped up to that amount regardless of how many kids you have or how much you work.

It's easy to sit and judge "breeders" but if you've got no education and come from a culture of non workers, a system that rewards people for having kids is going to encourage you to breed. Then the more kids you have the less able you are to get an education or job. So you're stuck, one turns 16 you feel you have no choice but to have another, otherwise your benefits are cut. If we had a system that just supports everyone the same regardless of how many kids you have or how much you work then maybe people woulndt keep having kids to get benefits. Scrap all benefits just have a top up to 30k for all families. If your not earning 30k net then you get topped up. No council houses, no housing benefit no discounts nothing. Single people can have a different level of top up.

Caz the other problem is people keep having kids to get a bigger council house. Just scrap them, the system isn't working. Regulate the rental housing market give people enough to live on then tell them to sort themselves out. People are in flats having more kids because then they'll get a house (that they probably won't get because there are no houses available).
 
thegirlscout said:
I find it hilarious when trying to claim disability from the DWP because you need a lot of evidence which I understand. You need doctors notes, GP notes and notes from consultants, mental health experts etc. You have all this evidence from people who have spent their careers in the healthcare industry only for you to be told you need to go to an appointment to see if Sandra, who worked for two years as an HCA, thinks you’re ill enough for her.
Click to expand...

I had a PIP "assessment" done in 2016. The "nurse" decided that I had no hearing impairment despite a letter from Audiology stating the opposite and me being under a hearing therapist. I wouldn't have been referred if audiology decided there was nothing wrong. She also asked what one of my hearing impairments was and decided it wasn't that bad. Why would I get a diagnosis? For fun?

She also decided that there was no medical reason why I couldn't drive and the GP who claimed I'm registered partially sighted is lying. My parents were told when I was 4 I would never be able to drive. I've been under various consultants about my eyes since I was 5 months old.

My GP and consultant have no reason at all to lie.
 
I don’t like the term “breeders”. It makes those with more than 2.2 children sound like some sort of livestock. A lot of hard work goes into having children and regardless of income the amount of children people decide to have shouldn’t be of anyones concern. These children from these “breeders” will be the ones wiping your arses in the nursing home and contributing to your services once you are a pensioner!

I’m not bothered about carbon footprints or perceived over population either.
 
Melian said:
I had a PIP "assessment" done in 2016. The "nurse" decided that I had no hearing impairment despite a letter from Audiology stating the opposite and me being under a hearing therapist. I wouldn't have been referred if audiology decided there was nothing wrong. She also asked what one of my hearing impairments was and decided it wasn't that bad. Why would I get a diagnosis? For fun?

She also decided that there was no medical reason why I couldn't drive and the GP who claimed I'm registered partially sighted is lying. My parents were told when I was 4 I would never be able to drive. I've been under various consultants about my eyes since I was 5 months old.

My GP and consultant have no reason at all to lie.
Click to expand...
Their is a model that is used in certain sectors where you turn claims away on the first application in the hope that they don't bother coming back. If they appeal you assess properly and award the claim appropriately.

I woulndt be suprised if PIP use that method too.

It was claimed that we needed PIP assessors because people were able to trick their doctors or pressure them. A doctor who has had years of training now apparently can't be trusted to diagnose an illness incase they are being tricked. I'm not buying it. And even if some people did trick their Dr, they're probably able to trick PIP assessors too and the cost of all the PIP assessments will be more than the few people that "tricked" their gp.

When you apply for a EHCP (education support for children with additional needs) they never bother to meet the child. Again Dr and teacher sign off should be enough, or get the decision makers to just meet the child.
 
BattleAxing said:
I don’t like the term “breeders”. It makes those with more than 2.2 children sound like some sort of livestock. A lot of hard work goes into having children and regardless of income the amount of children people decide to have shouldn’t be of anyones concern. These children from these “breeders” will be the ones wiping your arses in the nursing home and contributing to your services once you are a pensioner!

I’m not bothered about carbon footprints or perceived over population either.
Click to expand...
Agreed. It’s a disgusting way to talk about people who have children (however many).

Plenty of wealthy folk go on to have lots of children (which they can rightfully afford, not saying otherwise) and don’t get raked over the coals for contributing to “over population”. It’s always a different story when it’s the little people in society though eh? It’s those same people who will go on to do the menial jobs nobody else wants.
 
LittleMy said:
Agreed. It’s a disgusting way to talk about people who have children (however many).

Plenty of wealthy folk go on to have lots of children (which they can rightfully afford, not saying otherwise) and don’t get raked over the coals for contributing to “over population”. It’s always a different story when it’s the little people in society though eh? It’s those same people who will go on to do the menial jobs nobody else wants.
Click to expand...

People are only concerned about lower income families living in Western countries over populating the planet too, I find. Or focus and hate the one individual who doesn’t use sustainable drinking straws or sanitary products while blind to the fact countries like China don’t care and still dump shed loads in the sea.

I don’t believe over population is a thing to be worried about either. Bigger families are an exception these days, the average amount of children born to western families is as little as 1 or 2. Infertility is also on the rise too as are people making the choice to choose to remain child free. Population has to be sustained in order for the moaners to be taken care of in later life. Those few families with more than the average amount of children don’t even make up the gap!
 
Last edited:
More dog breeds need to be banned. Anything that an average sized woman can't over power shouldn't be allowed as a pet.
I don't care that staffies make lovely pets, people are able to keep pitbulls and pass them off as staffies so they need to go too.

And if it really is deed not breed then you should be just as happy with a Yorkie as you are Rottweiler.

Unless youre the police or a security guard you don't need a big powerful dog. Maybe if people were only allowed to have little cute ones this culture of "hard men" wanting vicious breeds will dissapear.
 
Brigitjonesbuttcheek said:
60k is not a very high earner. Especially not in the south and especially not if there is only one parent or only one parent earning.

I'm not saying we should go back to the days of people taking in 60k for breeding. I'm saying the system is too complicated and that it actually costs more in the running of the system. Just simplify it. Any family with income less than 30k gets topped up to that amount regardless of how many kids you have or how much you work.

It's easy to sit and judge "breeders" but if you've got no education and come from a culture of non workers, a system that rewards people for having kids is going to encourage you to breed. Then the more kids you have the less able you are to get an education or job. So you're stuck, one turns 16 you feel you have no choice but to have another, otherwise your benefits are cut. If we had a system that just supports everyone the same regardless of how many kids you have or how much you work then maybe people woulndt keep having kids to get benefits. Scrap all benefits just have a top up to 30k for all families. If your not earning 30k net then you get topped up. No council houses, no housing benefit no discounts nothing. Single people can have a different level of top up.

Caz the other problem is people keep having kids to get a bigger council house. Just scrap them, the system isn't working. Regulate the rental housing market give people enough to live on then tell them to sort themselves out. People are in flats having more kids because then they'll get a house (that they probably won't get because there are no houses available).
Click to expand...

I like this idea but when you say £30,000 for families would that include single parent households? They get £30,000? Or a household where 2 parents are working say one earns 20,000 and the other doesn’t work they get £10,000 in benefits? There needs to be a something to encourage people into work. If they would be no better off working they aren’t going to look for work. Giving a drug addict who doesn’t work £30,000 a year May only encourage their habit ☹️
 
Brigitjonesbuttcheek said:
More dog breeds need to be banned. Anything that an average sized woman can't over power shouldn't be allowed as a pet.
I don't care that staffies make lovely pets, people are able to keep pitbulls and pass them off as staffies so they need to go too.

And if it really is deed not breed then you should be just as happy with a Yorkie as you are Rottweiler.

Unless youre the police or a security guard you don't need a big powerful dog. Maybe if people were only allowed to have little cute ones this culture of "hard men" wanting vicious breeds will dissapear.
Click to expand...

I’ve seen a story in the local news today about a 17 month old being attacked and killed by a dog. It doesn’t state the breed yet but it doesn’t take much guessing.

There should be some sort of licence on owning a larger dog - no matter the breed. And certainly these new giant bully types need outright banning, they are often more powerful and aggressive than the average dog in the small list of banned breeds. The “no dog is bad, just bad owners” brigade are very ill informed. There are bad breeds! The ones they often defend were bred to fight and maim. It is in their instinct and nature to do so.

I’ve already seen people trying to argue that a Jack Russel or Chihuahua is just as capable of attacking. But these small breeds are easier to manage and even fight off and are very unlikely to cause death.
 
Last edited:
BattleAxing said:
People are only concerned about lower income families living in Western countries over populating the planet too, I find. Or focus and hate the one individual who doesn’t use sustainable drinking straws or sanitary products while blind to the fact countries like China don’t care and still dump shed loads in the sea.

I don’t believe over population is a thing to be worried about either. Bigger families are an exception these days, the average amount of children born to western families is as little as 1 or 2. Infertility is also on the rise too as are people making the choice to choose to remain child free. Population has to be sustained in order for the moaners to be taken care of in later life. Those few families with more than the average amount of children don’t even make up the gap!
Click to expand...
Quite right, as long as it's not immigrants increasing the population, we should be okay.

Even though immigrants are prepared to do the low paid jobs, it would be a mistake to let them in.
 
JOHN1967 said:
Quite right, as long as it's not immigrants increasing the population, we should be okay.

Even though immigrants are prepared to do the low paid jobs, it would be a mistake to let them in.
Click to expand...

As long as they are working and are adding to, rather than taking from the system, get a home that is non social housing so it doesn’t take away from a British family who has been waiting on the list for years and have arrived here by legal avenues I don’t have a problem with LEGAL immigration.
 
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
Back
Top