Page 1 of 3
State Benefits
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 1:58 pm
by quizard
By reasonable income I mean at least as much as they could make doing a minimum wage job full-time.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 2:04 pm
by pokerpete
if you're not actively searching for work, you shouldn't be claiming unemployment benefit, regardless of how much you're winning / loosing.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 3:31 pm
by mr lugsy
on on that point pokerpete you have the nuts hand and must therefore be sitting there with your best poker face on.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 4:11 pm
by pokerpete
you've lost me.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 4:15 pm
by mr lugsy
well no one can argue the case for claiming benefits, against the law which states you must be actively job seeking,surely.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 4:17 pm
by pokerpete
plenty of people do claim with no intention of finding work.
that should be something to be ashamed of, not proudly announced.
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 8:40 pm
by ma71lda
I've been out of work for nearly 6 months yet I'm not entitled to JSA because my girlfriend works. F*ck em, I ain't gonna lower myself to beg for it.
In my opinion it stinks, but each to their own. I'm not here to judge, I respect other peoples opinions and I give my own - simple as.
Don't forget as well, Anfield is a law unto his self and has his own way with words, it doesn't really matter, does it? I'd rather Anfield recieve benefits ahead of a foreigner who's been in the country 5 minutes.
Maybe I'm missing the point but, it woudn't surprise me if all the unemployed players on here are claiming one way or another - they're just too embarrassed to admit it.

Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 8:57 pm
by trayhop123
ive been very fortunate to not have to claim for about the past 14years, but i wont knock those that do, we all have different circumstances, but claiming and not actively seeking/ watching jeremy kyle wearing a shell suit playing playstation all day is just wrong ,
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 11:42 pm
by Scott
Been playing full time now for just over 3 yrs, never claimed a penny so i voted no.
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 12:17 am
by Nixxy
ma71lda wrote:Don't forget as well, Anfield is a law unto his self and has his own way with words, it doesn't really matter, does it? I'd rather Anfield recieve benefits ahead of a foreigner who's been in the country 5 minutes.
If the foreigner is actively seeking employment, then clearly they're looking to integrate and put something into the society they've moved into. So how can can it ever be justified that someone home-grown receives that benefit for something they simply aren't doing?
If ever there's been grounds for appeal on a discriminatory level, that surely must be it!
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 1:41 am
by wildcat
If a "players" making £100s on average a day/week why should they get benefits to basically feed theyre addiction!!
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 10:07 am
by ma71lda
As usual Nixxy disagrees with me, or at least argues the toss - now there's a shock!!
Don't get me wrong Anfield, or any player, should NOT be allowed to claim whether they earn/make £100 or a £1000. Yet, they could claim to be actively seeking work while they are out playing machines, bit of a grey area methinks.
As for foreigners/immigrants I totally and utterly disagree with you mate. Why the hell should they be allowed into the country and immediately claim everything? They are bleeding us dry taking up dental spaces, doctor appointments and claiming every benefit under the sun, personally I think there should be a timescale of how long they have to be in the country before they can claim and when they do claim how long the claim lasts for. Don't get me wrong, I don't think J Kyle watching, elevated cap wearing chavs should be allowed to doss all day but thats a different kettle of fish. (National Service, anyone?)
Maybe I'm being a tad bitter and grumpy but after 6 months of unemployment ( benefit-less) it starts to piss me off. I've gone from earning nearly £20k a year, to seeing similar jobs at 'meets national minimum wage' or £6 p/h - nice one. Even job agancies around here tend to only employ Poles because they don't fully know their rghts, therefore they don't argue back and all I get is 'give us your name and number and we'll get back to you.......', cheers. And yes, I genuinely believe the National Minimum Wage is as low as it is because of the influx of immigrants who'll work for £5.52p/h because its a hell of a lot more than they can earn in their own country.
NOT ALL FOREIGNERS/IMMIGRANTS ARE LEECHES, SOME ARE GRAFTERS BUT THOSE WHO AREN'T SHOULD BE SENT HOME.
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 3:04 pm
by pokerpete
ma71lda, your entitlement to JSA is not effected in anyway by your girlfriends employment status.
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 3:07 pm
by pokerpete
also I think you're mistaken in your belief that JSA is available to migrants.
What support is available to Asylum seekers and Migrant workers is very different and the media actively encourage the confusion between the two.
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 3:57 pm
by ma71lda
Apparantly my girlfriends employment status does affect my claim PP. The reason is because she earns more money than an unemployed claiming couple are entitled to, don't get me wrong, I can sign on each fortnight and get my stamp paid without any payment of JSA. But I don't bother - THERE ISN'T GOING TO BE A STATE PENSION IN 35/40 YEARS TIME AT THIS RATE ANYWAY AND THATS THE MAIN REASON FOR YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS.
Here's something for you guys making £500+ p/w on machines and not making N.I. contributions. If you can afford to save £560 each month in an account with a decent rate of interest for 40 years, the amount you will have in the end (as long as you don't dip into it plus the compounded interest) would be approx £850k.
Not a bad little retirement nest egg!
