(February 23, 2013 at 10:52 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I'm on-board with you, being that neither of us imagine that people are popping out kids left and right to get higher benefits one has to ask - are immigrants (for example, being the initial group in question) a majority of the demonstrated cases of benefit fraud via dodgy disability checks? You need a SS number to claim disability here btw.No, as the article alluded to, the concern involves the NHS, which has less checks involved. The conversation has gotten side-tracked onto the more general problems in welfare. The original article (and my original comment) was about immigrants taking advantage of our already overburdened "free healthcare" system, which is paid for by taxpayers, and used by anyone. The government wants to restrict access so only citizens and tax-paying immigrants can use the NHS for free; others would have to pay.
Quote:Right, but unfortunately (at least in the case of the US) benefits don't work exactly like a court or legal system. They can be revoked or suspended for a wide variety of questionable this and that's(it's not a right or anything) - and while you could (and I'd say should) hammer them to reinstate said benefits...that won't really help you in the interim. This is the gov we're talking about, "the interim" could be a very, very long time. They also aren't interested or responsible if you lose what little you had left in said interim due to their foot dragging.Exactly; I don't expect to find many cases, and if one was suspected, I'm not even sure there would be a fair way to go about determining guilt (unless of course we find a "baby-making manifesto" under their bed.
But I suppose it isn't much of a problem, because neither of us expects to find too many cases of this yeah?
)Quote: I see two articles about a grand total of two families Tibs, who may or may not actually be doing anything illegal (don't see anything about a conviction or revocation of benefits). I'm not sure if I'm ready to cry epidemic or anything even remotely close on that count. I get that you think it's dishonest or unfair (and I'm not exactly disagreeing with you here - but precedent is precedent- and We should be careful with precedent). How many people in your country are currently claiming some kind of benefits? Would we expect any system handing out resources to be crime free in any case? Why even continue the use of a term manufactured as a fairy tale if criminal, or fraud works just as well and is all you're talking about anyway?Did I cry epidemic? No. I simply said they were a problem. You said they were a problem in the US but you couldn't find any. I can (at least) find references to some actual families.
Look, I'm aware you don't like the word "welfare queen" because it is associated in America with lying about welfare cheats. That's fine; over here it's not. I didn't even realise it was invented by you guys in the Reagan era before this conversation. I only use it because that is the term we use over here; it's what the papers use, it's what people use.
I've also already explained the difference I see between simple benefit cheats and welfare queens. It's scale. Just as there is a difference between a pickpocket and a career criminal burglar.
