Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Yes Willow that reminds me of my own father,worked all his life never off ill(until terminal cancer) then died 2 days after his 65th. birthday.They say you can't take it with you and pensions are promised to no one.
There are many genuine benefit cases,but alas there are many who are milking the system and promenade round Accrington on a daily basis.
They are the untouchables in both senses of the word.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

i agree, but what is wrong with a government funded scheme that covers volantary work, i am sure that we could all think of worthwhile causes that are currently under/not even funded, that people with skills and a disabillity could both benefit and give the community the benefit of, it would not only give those people the chance to prove to society that they have no need to be discriminated against, and it wasnt just disabled, i remember the used to have a similar scheme for the unemployed back in the eighties CPU if i remember correctly, wether my views are oover the top, i just feel as a community we would benefit from people earning their benefits (if capable) oppose to a government that is quite happy to carry on sending out the giros, and fixing the unemployment figures.

i also understand the arguement that this could actually take full time jobs away from people, but as i say if it was centered around new or existing non paid community work, i dont see this a major problem

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

...and that would be a good thing?

Wouldn't it result in even more people being without 'real' jobs, and hence claiming benefit?

State run industries, that aren't run for profit, but to just employ people for the sake of it, does sound rather like the workhouses of old, or British Leyland in the seventies.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

awfully selective in my quote there dont you think? what happened to the rest of the sentance? it sort of pre-emtied what you just said!

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

I only quoted the part of your post that I was replying to. You said it.

What sort of state run employment would you suggest for those claiming benefit?

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

i am sure there are many worthwhile causes out there that could benefit from a few more "helpers",

enviromental clean up campaigns
citizens advice
help the aged

i am sure everyone could think of at least 1, yes it would require administration, but that in itself is job creation, and i would rather my taxes where paying someones wage, than just paying them to sit at home with richard and judy!

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Yes it does. It's all very flawed.

Another case of lies, damned lies, and statistics.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

The first example would result in people who are now employed losing their job, the second two could be done now voluntary, as those claiming benefit can work up to fifteen hours per week.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

It maybe another case of statistics being massaged, but this DWP press release makes for more encouraging reading.

'Since 1997, the number of people in work has increased by over 2.5 million and every single day around 250 people have come off out of work benefits.'

DWP Press release: Murphy: number on benefits down, as employment hits record levels 14 Feb 07

We could always cut the non-means tested child benefit, that is paid to all children regardless of how much their paren't earn, to pay for in genuine dire straits.;)

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Clean up campaigns would be better done by prison chain gangs, at least then they can earn their lavish lifestyle :)

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

I've often thought it's strange that child benefit isn't means tested. Anyone who has a child gets it don't they? That will include the likes of Madonna and Victoria Beckham. I'm bet they wouldn't even notice whether it was paid in or not.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Yes, it does seem strange that every child gets this benefit, whether your mum is a cleaner on the minimum wage, or the Countess of Wessex.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

i dont get your point at all, i thought the whole point of what i was saying was to make it mandatory, so yes they can be done at the moment volantary, your point being?, i thought we were talking about the ones who wont do anything, not the minority that already do!

as for enviroment clean up campaigns, i always see adverts asking for unpaid help, so whose job would this take, and also if it meant unemployment it would be nowhere near the 1 in 4 that the thread is titled after

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

and how many of them went on disability, the phrase is out of work benefits, if your sick you arent out of work, the point i tried to make in earlier post

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

What would you do with the people who currently work at the C.A.B., and Help the Aged, many of whom will be there voluntary and may already be claiming benefits?

You have to find 'work' for five million people on benefits, and so far you seem to be struggling.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

struggling? strange term to use, since it is a comment placed on a local forum, not that i am actually writing a manifesto here or anything!

even though when questioned, i did supply examples

but i am sure if i was to actually canvas the populous, genuine worthwhile causes could be found, the loose term of worthwhile causes should be more than ample to cover a hyperthetical argument, dont you think

as far the current CAB and help the aged, i gaurantee if you were to call either of these organisations this minute and state you wish to donate some of your time they would readily accept.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

what wages?

they are already getting the money thats the whole point!

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Don't get me wrong, I'm totally against people using the benefit system as a career option. Leave school, get banged up, and spend the next God know's how many years popping out sprogs and claiming benefit, who'll then carry on the family tradition themselved at the earliest age possible.

I do however disagree with your suggestion of making those genuine claimants 'work' for their money. To suggest that those who are unwell enough to do a real job, should be employed by the state in some sort of pseudo employment, is both unworkable and totally alien to a free market economy, in my opinion.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

so you would agree that those eclaiming the absurdly named job seekers allowance should be forced to earn the money they claim?

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

No I think those seeking employment should spend their time being encouraged to get an actual job as quickly as possible, and not be farting about doing pretend work.

Something that seems to be happening, according to the government's figures posted earlier in the thread.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

I'd overall the current benefit system by scrapping the non-means tested child benefit.

For someone who had four children that would save £54.40 per week, or £2,828.80 a year.;)

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

i was read a report years ago that stated the reason that means tested child benefit has not been overhauled, is due to the more wealthier parents dont actually claim the benefit anyway, wether this is still the case i do not know, but why is everyone perfectlly happy to scrap a benefit for children, irrelevant of their income, but more than happy to allow malingerers carry on taking state handouts.
also one of my main arguements for forcing the unemployed to work, is that the majority would rather take a real job paying minimum wage than do 40 hours for no extra, plus those working whilst claiming simply couldnt do it.

just as a real job, if the person in question had an interview of course they could attend.

if you agree that the present system is flawed, and is being played by unscrupilious individuals, then change the system, as i said earlier there is no stigma with being on benefits, if there was more people would try harder to get off them,
or better still let all the bleeding hearts have their way and we will all have a pretend illness, claim benefits, let the insurance cover the cost of our mortgage and credit card bills, receive a car insurance and tax paid with regular services thrown in, oh but hang on who would be left to pay the bill no-one, or do you have enough faith in your fellow man that they wouldnt do it, cause i dont sorry!

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Ah, someone talking sense. (and avoiding the childish"I saw a cripple who might have been pretending to be a cripple" bs.) And I agree that pretend work is just as much as a dead end as receiving welfare. Along with the encouragement, the govt does need to get serious about job creation, something other than handing out incentives to business. Business is just as adept at taking govt money and doing sweet f a, as is the individual; in fact probably better, because business can hire high priced legal aid to help it screw the public purse. And business is, of course, in the business of making money, not helping the worker, or the unemployed who wish to be workers. They have to be goaded, they are just as lazy about creating jobs as those who invent creative ways of avoiding work. I know that this means more govt intervention, but surely govt and the people in it should do more than look good at photo ops, and attend international meetings in the Bahamas, and sit around getting drunk at taxpayers' expense while their minions move bulls**t around with little silver trowels.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

As someone who stated in another thread that he was a father of four, and by your own admission you're someone who thinks people should 'earn' their benefits, do you also think that perhaps children who receive child benefit should actually work for it as well, perhaps after school and at weekends, as you suggest other claimants should?

If so, my chimney needs sweeping.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

ok in answer to that,
1) as we have discussed earlier this is a non means tested benefit
2)the last time i looked the child is not the recipient of the benefit the parent is.
3)if i do "my job"of producing a well balanced, educated, well mannered, and well behaved, constructive member of society is that not me earning that benefit? and if i dont i lose the benefit, i am all up for that!
4) only a side note but only one is of school age, the others have left.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Well are you suggesting parents should work for this non-means tested, tax free benefit, as you suggest other claimants should?

If so, I have rather a large chimney, adult as well as child size.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

see point 3

and it would have to be a pretty large chimney lol:D

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Ok, so you are picking and choosing which benefit claimants should actually have to 'earn' that benefit, as you suggested.

Enough said.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

The flaw in your argument is that this has already been tried in the late 70s, 80s and 90s. under various schemes such as TOPS and YOPS, YTS, Community Action, ET, EA, and various options under New Deal.

It doesn't work as a sizable amount of these folk have another "income" be it from dealing, burglary or any other illegal activity.

Also with regards the "You're sick but you can do something so we'll force you to type these letters for nothing" arrangement, how long do you think anyone would put up with this before getting another doctors letter stopping them from this.

The only way to get the sick back to work is with a very big carrot (encouragement and empathy) and a small stick, or you will be hit with the headlines "Sick government hits the ill".

Yes there are malingerers and skivers, yes the benefits system needs a revamp but if you just use punitive measures you will hurt the genuine disenfranchised.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

just hold up on them there horses,
on what do you base that opinion, did i not direct you to point 3, which if you read accepts and addresses the view of working for benefits, thats the reason "my job" is in quotes, it then goes on to explain what is expected in return for that benefit, and if i fail, i am quite happy to lose the benefit.

now answer me this, why do i find myself having to explain everything twice to you, and referancing you to points i have already made?

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

your points about the sick taken on board, maybe its our doctors that we need to turn our attention to then?

as for "alternative income" , do you suggest that it would turn them to crime? or that they already participate? if it is the latter then at least society would benefit from not having to pay them their benefit, i admit its only a small plus point but a plus point none the less.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

thats the point i was trying to make, and those that dont should lose the benefit, i would rather see that happen than it lose its means tested stance

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

But as has been said what about hte genuine claimants? If they are forced to work for their benefit for 40 hours a week WHEN DO THEY LOOK FOR WORK?

Also how soon after being unemployed do you bringthis in? 1 day? 2 weeks? a month? 6 months?

I can see it now 58 year old made redundant after 40 years in engineering on 30 June, made to count eggs 0n 31 July for his £56 a week.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

To qualify your point, that you 'earn' child benefit by bringing up a well rounded child, who is to judge if someone is doing that properly or not?

Perhaps it could be a nice job for the terminally ill, or long term sick, as a way of earning their benefits.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

glad to see your coming around to my way of thinking lol:D

but i was thinking of school reports lack of asbos that sort of thing

in fact lets go one further

i propose we pay 1 parent minimum wage of 40 hours to stay at home with their children,

my wife used to comment when she told people she was a housewife, people reacted as though she did nothing, when a housewife is on call 24/7

think of the benefits

time to prepare a proper balanced diet
time to help with homework
being there when your children get home
amongst others

if it meant we produced a future genaration of more rounded individuals it would be worth it even if it meant a tax increase, plus it would free up jobs for those poor unemployed.

so there we go ill sit back and wait to get shot down for that 1

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

oh and i forgot to mention, i dont ever recall calling any terminally ill , malingerers

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

No one suggested you did, but those are the people who may be in receipt of benefits...if they're lucky.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

going off tack a little there though dont you think, i thought we had established that some are actually tottally incapable of work, as stanaccy had suggested the system is flawed due to the doctors being to easily duped, and those that werent would just con another sick note of some kind, to get them out of their "work"

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

I'm still waiting for the answers to my questions asked further up.

Oh and I wasn't saying about genuine sick folk "duping" doctors but if you can con one sick note with a fake malady I'm sure you can get another.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

here goes, if memory serves me right (yes i have claimed unemployment benefit) if you have enough NI contributions, you can claim non means tested benefit, for a period of 6 months, during this time you are allowed to look for "you line of employment", after the six months if you are still unemployed you then go onto means tested, and you ave to broaden your scope.

i would go along with that, six months before you have to start your "forced labour".

as for time off to seek work, as long as you have some kind of proof that you are seeking work in your time off that would be more than acceptable.


i assumed you meant "fake" illness and not genuine

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

What proof would you have to seek work?

Err I'm reading the paper, here it is.

Err I'm going to look round the agencies?

Err I'm going job centre.

In a lot of cases you have to just go round to see someone. Also if you are in "full time forced labour" (if I recall correctly it used to be called slavery) where will you be able to get the assistance from the advisers who help you.

Also a lot of people who are unemployed for some time have other problems so before they can start work these have to be solved (I know I have worked with them).

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

You do realise that housewifes were included in these figures as well don't you? As you have just said when your wife was a housewife people thought she was doing nothing. If you read further back in the thread you agreed with a comment that if someone who was recovering from a heart attack could do work on an allotment that meant they were capable to work. So what would you want people to do? Getting a bit of gentle exercise is beneficial to people recovering from any illness but it seems they are dammed if they take the excercise that could help them because people like you then assume they are fit to work. Life is never as black and white as you seem to see it. As I said last night there are people on here who would give their right arm to be fit to work, it is just unfortunate that we don't always get what we want in this life.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

in a word no, if they are on benefits they are not a housewife are they, as far as i am aware there is no housewife benefit? or am i mistaken?

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

No that is what I am trying to tell you, the figures are flawed. If you go to the beginning of the thread the link is there.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

The working for benefits thing was tried unsuccessfully in Ontario; even conservative thinking people (I'm not talking about the lunatic fringe, but the average conservative) found the idea of forcing the unfortunate to work for the "peanuts" the govt gave them very distasteful, smacking of workhouses. I remember one cartoon in the local rag with the govt owned Wolfe Islander ferry being rowed by welfare recipients in chains. The devious and determined shirkers will always find a way not to work and still get support; it's the genuine poor claimants who will end up working for their pittance and not having time to look for real work. And how long would it be before the captains of industry offer to help out by providing "work" for the poor and paying them the equivalent of benefits? In other words, being able to circumvent the minimum wage laws.

There has to be more govt intervention ... no, govt intervention has to be creative and not punitive. Business wants to avoid govt control, and will go to any extent to avoid it. Moving well paid jobs overseas is one way they can do this. But the govt has powers, and these should be used not only against the poor, but also against the rich.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

I think I can sum my ideas up before I start to waffle some more.

1. The shirkers have to grow a backbone and get out and work.

2. Business needs to grow a heart (and a conscience).

3. Govt. needs to grow a pair.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

in a word no, if they are on benefits they are not a housewife are they, as far as i am aware there is no housewife benefit? or am i mistaken?

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Sure there is a benefit: you get a whole half hour a day to yourself, to do nothing.:D Or maybe five minutes if the kids are off school.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

ok i just read the article and did you read the comments below, the one i refer to is the one about austria and having the exact same policy as i was talking about

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

and it still doesnt detract from the arguement that we all accept there are people on benefits who shouldnt be, wether it is 1 in 4 or 1 in 500, it doesnt make it right

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

there are three types of lies, lies ,damn lies and statistics- benjamin disrealli

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

That is the problem with a debate like this, which has been going for a while people don't read all of the thread and then we get crossed wires. And I am not refering to you Willow we are on the same wavelength on this. Nor am I having a go at anybody else, all I suggest is that you know the facts before you join in. I try not to comment unless I have read everyones post then I'm not likely to put my foot in it!!!

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

I believe Austria had an extremist right wing government until recently. Enough said.
Also I posted this earlier

What proof would you have to seek work?

Err I'm reading the paper, here it is.

Err I'm going to look round the agencies?

Err I'm going job centre.

In a lot of cases you have to just go round to see someone. Also if you are in "full time forced labour" (if I recall correctly it used to be called slavery) where will you be able to get the assistance from the advisers who help you.

Also a lot of people who are unemployed for some time have other problems so before they can start work these have to be solved (I know I have worked with them).

Wondering about an answer to this.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

I agree with the sentiments but it was actually Mark Twain.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

i dont think it has any relevance, that housewifes and students are included in the figures, the debate has moved on, and most people agree that there are people on benefits that shouldnt be, the question is are we as a society happy to accept this as inevitable, and any system will always be abused, or asses the system and swing the balance back in favour of the honest claimant, dont forget these people that claim falsley are not only stealing from us the tax payer, but they are stealing from the most vulnerable in society, these people mays as well steal the cancer drugs out of somebodys cabinet, or mug an old woman of her pension, or turn off a premature babys incubator, what they are doing amounts to the same, and the general concensus is that the majority of you are quite happy to let them get away with it, just in case a minority of genuine cases may find it more difficult, or it heaven forbid we actually send someone to get some exercise

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

arguable point, it was never official accredited to either, but im just argumentative lol:Banane24:

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

these things are all supposed to be in place now, for JSA

so MR A how long did it take you to read the paper, 3 days mmmmmm interesting.

so the agency/job centre/advisor you visited, did you log your attendance?

i feel you are just nit picking, of course there can be procedures introduced to check on peoples job seeking

and enough said why? so any politcal stance the varies from your own can be dismissed as poppycock?

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

and to be a real smart arse i just googled it and it was actually mark twain quoting good ole benji
lol
but now im annoying myself lol

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

You aren't listening, we don't agree with it but unless we can come up with a solution what can we actually do about it? I know there are some people who manage to con their way onto DLA, but I know a hell of a lot more who have had to fight for it. No it is not right that the people not entitled are getting it but if you have the solution you are in the wrong job!

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

i just feel that apathy is the greatest enemy of any society, and although the solution i offered may not be ideal, it is a solution, but with that said will we ever find an ideal solution to any problem, i think not.

i think that any goverment are more bothered about their precious whitehall perks, than to introduce wide reaching benefit reforms

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

No, wrong end of stick meet right end.

I was a new deal advisor, many people who have been unemployed for a long period of time it takes a lot of work to get them back into work. Problems such as low self esteem and depression are common, because of the length of time without work.

Reasons for people being out of work can vary from dependency problems, criminal records and abusive relationships, forced labour or forced into anything will not help any of these.

With regards the Austrian government and extremist right wing government regime, yes I do disagree with there outlook and the majority of the policies, however if you can name another country with a working welfare state that uses this then I will look into it further, but as you have only mentioned one country with the most right wing government since Hitler I will treat it with a great deal of caution.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Now we are singing from the same sheet, until the people in power decide to tighten the system up we are powerless:(

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Government uses statistics like a drunk uses a lamp post, more for support than illumination .... John Diefenbaker.:)

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

but we put the people in power, how are we powerless, if that is the case then we may as well just live under a dictaorship, ad sign away total control of our lives, use the power of the ballot box, if everyone who felt the same lobbied their MP, they would have to take notice

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

i like it
so now im gonna google john diefenbaker

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

That is a good one Eric and so very true, they just lump figures together and this is the reaction they get from it:(

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

I really do like that one :D:D:D

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

ok done it, know who he was now

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

What can be credited is that I first used the quote, way back in post 112 of this thread.;)

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

There you go again, I do use my vote but at the moment I can't take off to London to lobby my MP(not that it would make any difference if I could). The problem runs much deeper here in Hyndburn, a lot of our industry has gone so the jobs aren't there like they used to be. This is not a new problem, people have been living on benefits for years, but when I was younger it was hardly noticeable.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Which makes me Benjamin Disraeli, and you Mark Twain, for saying it secondly.:D

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

I think I said it first at number 15 :D. I love being a pedant:rolleyes:

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Lol, touche!:p

Ok, you're Disraeli, and I'm Mark Twain.

As for Churchfcrules, he's way off the radar.:D

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

We Canadians are used to people not knowing too much about our country ... I think most of us like the anonymity ... except of course for hockey:D:D:D

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

This is quite common. In Eire, for example, now that they are experiencing and economic boom, they have immigration, rather than emmigration. But it is not only the people who are leaving for sunnier climes, it is jobs. The people leave to look for jobs, the jobs leave looking for people who will do them for less money. If the jobs stay in England, people will fill them; but only for a decent wage, not for peanuts.

But it is becoming more difficult for people to emmigrate. The places where people wish to go are no longer as welcoming as they used to be. In Canada, particularly in booming Alberta and soon to boom Saskatchewan, the labour shortage is being solved by accepting contract workers, who work on a permit for a year or two and then go home. In the near future ... it is starting even now ... it will be very difficult to get Canadian citizenship. Those who have enough money to start a business, some doctors, engineers, and highly skilled tradesmen can still make it. But for every one else, the signs are going up: Go Home, Canada is Full.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

It is very much like that in Australia according to my sister-in-law, she was saying it is much harder now for people to get into the country. Sounds like she went at the right time, I wouldn't want to be so far from family.:(

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

In a sense Canada is full ... most of the people in Canada live within 200 miles of the US border and in the major cities, particularly Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary, and Edmonton. In the province of Manitoba, for example, over 600,000 people out of the 900,000 in the province live in Winnipeg. Much of our country is forrest, Canadian Shield, and Prairies. Then there are the mountains in the west and the immense and sparsely populated areas of the North and the high Arctic. In Saskatchewan, a major wheat growing province, there are fewer than a million people. Most of them live on farming, ranching, mining (most of the world's potash and uranium, with hard rock minerals and gold). The central and northern parts of the province comprise mainly forrest and lakes. The two major cities, Regina and Saskatoon, are closely linked to agriculture. A new boom in the oil industry (Athabasca tar sands) is just starting. Saskatchewan is more than twice as big as England, yet its economy, lacking as it does any major industries apart from the resource industries, supports only a relatively small population. The most industrialised areas are in southern Ontario, and the area of Quebec around Montreal. So in a sense, Canada is full.

Sorry about the extensive geography lesson:D

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Isn't the newspaper sensationalising something that we all suspected?
And no-one really knows how many of the 1 in 4 who are claiming benefits are not entitled to them......this is just using statistics in an irresponsible manner to stir up unrest....we don't even know what criteria was used to come to the figures stated.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

A number of Australian States are actively welcoming Brits again......South Australia and Western Australia being two that spring immediately to mind........and while it isn't easy to emigrate to Oz, it isn't nearly so hard as it has been in the past.
They are actively seeking out building workers, Nurses, police personnel and painters and decorators....if you are a hairdresser too, you would find open arms in the two states mentioned.

I wish I had gone when I was younger - they aren't so keen on the wrinklies....they want people who are going to have children....so that lets me out :D

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

It is similar in Canada ... we have very strong family ties with Great Britain. And we have lots of shortages in the skilled trades, and particularly in nursing. However, with nursing and medicine in particular, immigrants willing to live in the underserviced areas are given priority. Kingston, for example is very short of nurses in its two major hospitals, Kingston General and the Hotel Dieu (for this last one it helps if you are catholic). In general though, it is getting increasingly more difficult to get citizenship in Canada. I know that I am biased, but this is a very desirable place to live. Living standards are high, and , compared to England, the cost of living is still relatively low. (I remember someone asking if there was somewhere in Accy where a couple could go out for a meal for 40 pounds. Assuming this is about $85 you could eat your fill at any one of the really fine restaurants in town.) A country such as ours, rich, safe, and free, attracts a lot of applications for entry. And, unfortunately for most applicants, this means that the people at Immigration Canada can afford to be choosey and restrictive.

Also, to keep more or less on topic, we too have a social safety net, which includes unemployment benefits, worker's compensation, old age and disability pensions, welfare payments to those not covered by any other programme, and universal access to medical care and education below the university level. At that level, there is, for those who qualify but can't afford to go to college and university, an extensive system of grants and govt. guaranteed loans.

And in winter you can watch hockey every night on tv. And Coronation Street if you wish.:D

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

How about me Marg ? I wouldn't mind having another kiddie, I like cricket and I can sell things ! Plus I drink Fosters ( so much that they really should make me an honourary citizen !):rolleyes:

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Lindsay, I would say go for it girl.....a great place to bring up children too
My sister migrated 5 years ago and she has done really well, of course she has worked hard (she is a Nurse).....her hubby trained for the Queensland Police....he was a graduate Nurse in Learning Disabilities over here....they have two houses and have just bought a plot of land in Tasmania (to build a retirement home on).
I'm not sure about them needing folk who can sell things though...but if you have any other skills you might just qualify.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Well, if you want to migrate to Oz you get extra points for being able to read and write and speak English....and I was talking to one Aussie recently and he said it is a back handed way of the Australian governments to keep out the Vietnamese.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

It certainly is ironic. Canadians live comfortably with the idea of a "cultural mosaic" in which all races and cultures exisst in relative harmony. The only major racial irritant is a recent one: in subtle ways and sometimes in an outspoken fashion, Canadians are letting it be known that muslims are welcome only if they leave their islamic law where they came from. Canada has laws and a Charter of Rights and Feedoms; these are for everyone. Other systems of law, which are extremist, racist, and sexist are not welcome.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Sounds great, just a pity it is to late to try and adopt that attitude here:(

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

Not too late to start again surely?

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

I think perhaps it is.......open a can of worms and the first thing you realise is that you are going to need a much bigger can!

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

I know ... and it is very fine line we tread. At one extreme, a small community in Quebec (I forget the name and am to busy to go looking for it) passed a bylaw which acknowledged that while all new Canadians/Quebecois(e) were welcome, certain forms of Islamic law, particularly that dealing with the status of women, were not. There are no muslims living in that community. At the other extreme is one of the most popular shows on Canadian tv, "Little Mosque on the Prairies."

Canada has, in several cases, granted refugee status to young women who would fave female circumcision if they returned to their own countries.

While we have freedom of speech in our country, there are limits. One can be convicted of "hate crimes." It is not ok, for example, to paint swastikas on synagogues. People come to this country to become Canadians. They can bring with them all that is positive and good about their cultures and religions; but they can leave the crap behind them. The vast majority of immigrants are ok with this because it is usually this crap that they wish to escape from.

Re: 1 in 4 living off benefits
 

I don't think that rights are being infringed. It is Canada's right as a sovreign nation to refuse citizenship. In the two tier system we have, a person applies for Landed Immigrant Status. After five years (I think) they can apply for citizenship. Once they have citizenship then they have all the rights guaranteed under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The point is that one can be choosey at the time of entry.