Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Old age pensions
Topic Started: Jan 25 2015, 08:35 PM (906 Views)
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]

Read on and pass on:
Dear Prime Minister The RT. Hon. David Cameron, MP.

I wish to ask you a Question:- "Is This True?"

I refer to the Pension Reality Check.

Are you aware of the following ?

The British Government provides the following financial assistance:-

BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER
(bearing in mind they worked hard and paid their Income Tax and National
Insurance contributions to the British Government all their working life)
Weekly allowance: £106.00?

IMMIGRANTS/REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
(No Income Tax and National Insurance contribution whatsoever)
Weekly allowance: £250.00

BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER
Weekly Spouse Allowance: £25.00?

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS/REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
Weekly Spouse Allowance: £225.00

BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER
Additional Weekly Hardship Allowance: £0.00?

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS/REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
Additional Weekly Hardship Allowance: £100.00

A British old age pensioner is no less hard up than an illegal
immigrant/refugee yet receives nothing

BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER


TOTAL YEARLY BENEFIT £6,000?

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS/REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
TOTAL YEARLY BENEFIT: £29,900


Please read all and then forward to all your contacts so that we
can lobby for a decent state pension.

After all, the average pensioner has paid taxes and contributed to the
growth of this country for the last 40 to 60 years.

Sad isn't it? Surely it's about time we put our own people first.

Please have the guts to forward this.

I JUST DID!







Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
Nonsense
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Nonsense
Jan 28 2015, 11:46 AM
Tytoalba
Jan 25 2015, 08:35 PM
Read on and pass on:
Dear Prime Minister The RT. Hon. David Cameron, MP.

I wish to ask you a Question:- "Is This True?"

I refer to the Pension Reality Check.

Are you aware of the following ?

The British Government provides the following financial assistance:-

BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER
(bearing in mind they worked hard and paid their Income Tax and National
Insurance contributions to the British Government all their working life)
Weekly allowance: £106.00?

IMMIGRANTS/REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
(No Income Tax and National Insurance contribution whatsoever)
Weekly allowance: £250.00

BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER
Weekly Spouse Allowance: £25.00?

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS/REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
Weekly Spouse Allowance: £225.00

BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER
Additional Weekly Hardship Allowance: £0.00?

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS/REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
Additional Weekly Hardship Allowance: £100.00

A British old age pensioner is no less hard up than an illegal
immigrant/refugee yet receives nothing

BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER


TOTAL YEARLY BENEFIT £6,000?

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS/REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
TOTAL YEARLY BENEFIT: £29,900


Please read all and then forward to all your contacts so that we
can lobby for a decent state pension.

After all, the average pensioner has paid taxes and contributed to the
growth of this country for the last 40 to 60 years.

Sad isn't it? Surely it's about time we put our own people first.

Please have the guts to forward this.

I JUST DID!







"TOTAL YEARLY BENEFIT £6,000"?

I smell the money, do tell me pray, WTF do I get my hands on some of it?

I worked all my life from the age of 15 until retirement, even with an occupational pension, I receive £950+ LESS than the tax threshold for someone of my age, yet, I am expected to pay Council Tax from my meagre pension, whose value was reduced by 25-30% in the first year of this government's period in office.

Even with that low income, I am NOT entitled to any Pension Tax Credit.

Struggling along is not confined to the job shy or unemployed & this when this government pays £35 BILLION in pension relief each year to the wealthiest in society....OOP's, did I just say, 'SOCIETY', I must be dreaming, lol.

I must get myself a 'reality check'.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ranger121
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tytoalba
Jan 25 2015, 11:34 PM
Tigger
Jan 25 2015, 08:39 PM
Most of that is completely untrue! ;D


To many gullible and senile right wing old codgers about.
I most is untrue, which parts are true? It was sent to me by acquaintances and I just passed it on as requested. Just thought the true parts were more food for thought.
The part about illegal immigrants being able to access public funds is untrue.

The pension amounts paid to pensioners are under-estimated, and do not include the guaranteed weekly minimum that pensioners are paid.

The 'weekly allowances' are incorrect, and don't exist.

The 'Weekly Spouse Allowance' does not exist.

The 'Additional Weekly Hardship Allowance' is a made-up notion.

Isn't that enough untruths to blow the whole thing out of the water?

The whole notion that asylum seekers and illegal immigrants have greater income from the State than an ordinary British pensioner (even one with no savings and no income assets at all) is rubbish.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
krugerman
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
I know of several asylum seekers, and I can state with first hand knowledge that an asylum seeker is given a place of abode, mostly or usually in shared houses or hostels, and often just a single room, especially if the asylum seeker is single.

The rent is always paid by the government directly to the landlord, and the only other payment which an asylum seeker is given is £5 per day to live on, and again I know this to be correct from direct involvement with several asylum seekers.

The statement referring to pensioners and comparing them to asylum seekers or refugees is not only extremely inaccurate, it is also (in my view) offensive, and it sounds like it came out of the British National Party manifesto[Andrex]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ranger121
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  * ]
krugerman
Jan 28 2015, 01:43 PM
I know of several asylum seekers, and I can state with first hand knowledge that an asylum seeker is given a place of abode, mostly or usually in shared houses or hostels, and often just a single room, especially if the asylum seeker is single.

The rent is always paid by the government directly to the landlord, and the only other payment which an asylum seeker is given is £5 per day to live on, and again I know this to be correct from direct involvement with several asylum seekers.

The statement referring to pensioners and comparing them to asylum seekers or refugees is not only extremely inaccurate, it is also (in my view) offensive, and it sounds like it came out of the British National Party manifesto[Andrex]
... which equates to:

Single person aged 18 or over £36.62 per week.

--- and when their case is eventually refused, it goes down to

£35.39 per person on a payment card for food, clothing and toiletries:

No cash, and they STILL cannot apply for work.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]

I read a surprising (to me) and interesting comment the other day .... it was to say that most Eastern bloc EU migrants to the UK are 'women'.
Women out number the men apparently ........ it's ten years back now but where my wife worked there too did they employ several Poles (from the first surge), and most of these worked on other jobs during the evenings, either in bars or restaurants, fast food outlets.
That was before unemployment statistics started to rise, before wages were held below inflation, and before all this BS about millions of new jobs being created.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
krugerman
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
ranger121
Jan 28 2015, 01:50 PM
krugerman
Jan 28 2015, 01:43 PM
I know of several asylum seekers, and I can state with first hand knowledge that an asylum seeker is given a place of abode, mostly or usually in shared houses or hostels, and often just a single room, especially if the asylum seeker is single.

The rent is always paid by the government directly to the landlord, and the only other payment which an asylum seeker is given is £5 per day to live on, and again I know this to be correct from direct involvement with several asylum seekers.

The statement referring to pensioners and comparing them to asylum seekers or refugees is not only extremely inaccurate, it is also (in my view) offensive, and it sounds like it came out of the British National Party manifesto[Andrex]
... which equates to:

Single person aged 18 or over £36.62 per week.

--- and when their case is eventually refused, it goes down to

£35.39 per person on a payment card for food, clothing and toiletries:

No cash, and they STILL cannot apply for work.
One particular asylum seeker I know, has degree level education and could quite easily work in the medical, pharmaceutical or science industry, even teaching, and he has stated that he really wants to work and pay his way, but of course the rules wont allow him to work.

There really is so much nonsense put about concerning asylum seekers and the idea that most are simply here for a free ride, or to scrounge whatever they can, but with people like Nigel Farage about, and digusting excuses for newspapers like The Daily Mail, its difficult to get the truth out.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
krugerman
Jan 28 2015, 02:48 PM
ranger121
Jan 28 2015, 01:50 PM
krugerman
Jan 28 2015, 01:43 PM
I know of several asylum seekers, and I can state with first hand knowledge that an asylum seeker is given a place of abode, mostly or usually in shared houses or hostels, and often just a single room, especially if the asylum seeker is single.

The rent is always paid by the government directly to the landlord, and the only other payment which an asylum seeker is given is £5 per day to live on, and again I know this to be correct from direct involvement with several asylum seekers.

The statement referring to pensioners and comparing them to asylum seekers or refugees is not only extremely inaccurate, it is also (in my view) offensive, and it sounds like it came out of the British National Party manifesto[Andrex]
... which equates to:

Single person aged 18 or over £36.62 per week.

--- and when their case is eventually refused, it goes down to

£35.39 per person on a payment card for food, clothing and toiletries:

No cash, and they STILL cannot apply for work.
One particular asylum seeker I know, has degree level education and could quite easily work in the medical, pharmaceutical or science industry, even teaching, and he has stated that he really wants to work and pay his way, but of course the rules wont allow him to work.

There really is so much nonsense put about concerning asylum seekers and the idea that most are simply here for a free ride, or to scrounge whatever they can, but with people like Nigel Farage about, and digusting excuses for newspapers like The Daily Mail, its difficult to get the truth out.


Why on earth has he come to this country then?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ranger121
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Jan 28 2015, 10:26 PM
krugerman
Jan 28 2015, 02:48 PM
ranger121
Jan 28 2015, 01:50 PM
krugerman
Jan 28 2015, 01:43 PM
I know of several asylum seekers, and I can state with first hand knowledge that an asylum seeker is given a place of abode, mostly or usually in shared houses or hostels, and often just a single room, especially if the asylum seeker is single.

The rent is always paid by the government directly to the landlord, and the only other payment which an asylum seeker is given is £5 per day to live on, and again I know this to be correct from direct involvement with several asylum seekers.

The statement referring to pensioners and comparing them to asylum seekers or refugees is not only extremely inaccurate, it is also (in my view) offensive, and it sounds like it came out of the British National Party manifesto[Andrex]
... which equates to:

Single person aged 18 or over £36.62 per week.

--- and when their case is eventually refused, it goes down to

£35.39 per person on a payment card for food, clothing and toiletries:

No cash, and they STILL cannot apply for work.
One particular asylum seeker I know, has degree level education and could quite easily work in the medical, pharmaceutical or science industry, even teaching, and he has stated that he really wants to work and pay his way, but of course the rules wont allow him to work.

There really is so much nonsense put about concerning asylum seekers and the idea that most are simply here for a free ride, or to scrounge whatever they can, but with people like Nigel Farage about, and digusting excuses for newspapers like The Daily Mail, its difficult to get the truth out.


Why on earth has he come to this country then?
Because it's better here than wherever he was?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nonsense
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
ranger121
Jan 28 2015, 01:50 PM
krugerman
Jan 28 2015, 01:43 PM
I know of several asylum seekers, and I can state with first hand knowledge that an asylum seeker is given a place of abode, mostly or usually in shared houses or hostels, and often just a single room, especially if the asylum seeker is single.

The rent is always paid by the government directly to the landlord, and the only other payment which an asylum seeker is given is £5 per day to live on, and again I know this to be correct from direct involvement with several asylum seekers.

The statement referring to pensioners and comparing them to asylum seekers or refugees is not only extremely inaccurate, it is also (in my view) offensive, and it sounds like it came out of the British National Party manifesto[Andrex]
... which equates to:

Single person aged 18 or over £36.62 per week.

--- and when their case is eventually refused, it goes down to

£35.39 per person on a payment card for food, clothing and toiletries:

No cash, and they STILL cannot apply for work.
Is that reduction in benefit of £1.23 per. week supposed to be some 'deterrent' or what?

Krugerman says, "The rent is always paid by the government directly to the landlord", my impression was that since the Housing Benefit changes under the coalition, that the benefit was administered via the local authority, as is Council Tax?

Is he right? Or, is he saying that this group is being treated 'differently' to the indigenous or others in this country?


If these people are receiving various 'benefits' from taxpayers of this country, it adds insult to injury to those of our own in 'poverty'.

It's one thing offering 'refuge' to a 'genuine' asylum seeker, it's quite another for such people to enjoy 'hospitality'(however frugal)at taxpayers expense, when 'cuts' have dug deep into those of our own who rely on such payments.

As with any state system, the 'asylum' system is one that is much abused & ripe for curtailment IMHO.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nonsense
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
ranger121
Jan 28 2015, 01:16 PM
Tytoalba
Jan 25 2015, 11:34 PM
Tigger
Jan 25 2015, 08:39 PM
Most of that is completely untrue! ;D


To many gullible and senile right wing old codgers about.
I most is untrue, which parts are true? It was sent to me by acquaintances and I just passed it on as requested. Just thought the true parts were more food for thought.
The part about illegal immigrants being able to access public funds is untrue.

The pension amounts paid to pensioners are under-estimated, and do not include the guaranteed weekly minimum that pensioners are paid.

The 'weekly allowances' are incorrect, and don't exist.

The 'Weekly Spouse Allowance' does not exist.

The 'Additional Weekly Hardship Allowance' is a made-up notion.

Isn't that enough untruths to blow the whole thing out of the water?

The whole notion that asylum seekers and illegal immigrants have greater income from the State than an ordinary British pensioner (even one with no savings and no income assets at all) is rubbish.

"The whole notion that asylum seekers and illegal immigrants have greater income from the State than an ordinary British pensioner (even one with no savings and no income assets at all) is rubbish".

That may be true, but, it doesn't explain how they manage to survive without 'work' or with so little by way of 'benefits'?

If they are 'illegal' migrants, what makes one think that their income in total, is 'legal'?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
krugerman
Jan 28 2015, 01:43 PM


The statement referring to pensioners and comparing them to asylum seekers or refugees is not only extremely inaccurate, it is also (in my view) offensive, and it sounds like it came out of the British National Party manifesto[Andrex]

You would be more likely to discover the source of such as this in the right-wing press, blog sites, than on the BNP website. The BNP do not have to invent excuses, to them there are more than enough factually based complaints to be going on with.

The more popular the BNP support became, the less extreme were its policies ...... they were heading towards being a serious threat - and so UKIP were exhumed, and the rest is history.




Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Nonsense
Jan 29 2015, 02:33 PM


That may be true, but, it doesn't explain how they manage to survive without 'work' or with so little by way of 'benefits'?

Charity.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ranger121
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  * ]
Nonsense
Jan 29 2015, 02:27 PM
ranger121
Jan 28 2015, 01:50 PM
krugerman
Jan 28 2015, 01:43 PM
I know of several asylum seekers, and I can state with first hand knowledge that an asylum seeker is given a place of abode, mostly or usually in shared houses or hostels, and often just a single room, especially if the asylum seeker is single.

The rent is always paid by the government directly to the landlord, and the only other payment which an asylum seeker is given is £5 per day to live on, and again I know this to be correct from direct involvement with several asylum seekers.

The statement referring to pensioners and comparing them to asylum seekers or refugees is not only extremely inaccurate, it is also (in my view) offensive, and it sounds like it came out of the British National Party manifesto[Andrex]
... which equates to:

Single person aged 18 or over £36.62 per week.

--- and when their case is eventually refused, it goes down to

£35.39 per person on a payment card for food, clothing and toiletries:

No cash, and they STILL cannot apply for work.
Is that reduction in benefit of £1.23 per. week supposed to be some 'deterrent' or what?

Krugerman says, "The rent is always paid by the government directly to the landlord", my impression was that since the Housing Benefit changes under the coalition, that the benefit was administered via the local authority, as is Council Tax?

Is he right? Or, is he saying that this group is being treated 'differently' to the indigenous or others in this country?


If these people are receiving various 'benefits' from taxpayers of this country, it adds insult to injury to those of our own in 'poverty'.

It's one thing offering 'refuge' to a 'genuine' asylum seeker, it's quite another for such people to enjoy 'hospitality'(however frugal)at taxpayers expense, when 'cuts' have dug deep into those of our own who rely on such payments.

As with any state system, the 'asylum' system is one that is much abused & ripe for curtailment IMHO.
Asylum seekers are funded and supported by NASS, not the local authority, although it is they who are the ones who find the asylum seeker somewhere to live.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Asylum_Support_Service

In their case, the landlord is paid directly from public funds. Failed asylum seekers are supported extremely basically.

So yes, these people are treated less 'favourably' than other British Citizens, and pensioners.

As to whether the system is 'abused' the figures are that

Quote:
 
In 2013, 64% of initial decisions were refusals. These initial decisions are often appealed: among the 2004-2013 cohorts, 78% of rejected applicants lodged appeals, with a success rate of 24%. Over the decade of the 2000s, successful appeals ranged from 19% to 23% of total appeals until increasing to 28% in 2009, 27% in 2010 and 24% in 2013.


http://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/migration-uk-asylum



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ranger121
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Jan 29 2015, 03:33 PM
Nonsense
Jan 29 2015, 02:33 PM


That may be true, but, it doesn't explain how they manage to survive without 'work' or with so little by way of 'benefits'?

Charity.
I think if you're an asylum seeker on Sec 4 'Hard Case Support', this is charity.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ranger121
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  * ]
Nonsense
Jan 29 2015, 02:33 PM
If they are 'illegal' migrants, what makes one think that their income in total, is 'legal'?
If you're illegally in the country, any income you may acquire isn't 'legal', however obtained.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
ranger121
Jan 29 2015, 03:40 PM


Quote:
 
In 2013, 64% of initial decisions were refusals. These initial decisions are often appealed: among the 2004-2013 cohorts, 78% of rejected applicants lodged appeals, with a success rate of 24%. Over the decade of the 2000s, successful appeals ranged from 19% to 23% of total appeals until increasing to 28% in 2009, 27% in 2010 and 24% in 2013.




For more clarity on these figures ....... this rise in the number of asylum seekers given the right to remain is despite the case that the number of FAILED asylum applications on first hearing being reduced.
The whole picture is that the number of asylum cases (%age) being given the right to remain has risen substantially over the course of this coalition - to over half of all claims being successful.

Why is best explained by the need to cut spending, reduced staffing levels, and to avoid the expensive appeals procedure as much as is possible .......... 'Cuts Cost Money'


Edited by Affa, Jan 29 2015, 04:39 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ranger121
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  * ]
The number of successful appeals has decreased since 2009, and from the above numbers, it isn't over half that are successful.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Jan 29 2015, 04:38 PM
ranger121
Jan 29 2015, 03:40 PM


Quote:
 
In 2013, 64% of initial decisions were refusals. These initial decisions are often appealed: among the 2004-2013 cohorts, 78% of rejected applicants lodged appeals, with a success rate of 24%. Over the decade of the 2000s, successful appeals ranged from 19% to 23% of total appeals until increasing to 28% in 2009, 27% in 2010 and 24% in 2013.




For more clarity on these figures ....... this rise in the number of asylum seekers given the right to remain is despite the case that the number of FAILED asylum applications on first hearing being reduced.
The whole picture is that the number of asylum cases (%age) being given the right to remain has risen substantially over the course of this coalition - to over half of all claims being successful.

Why is best explained by the need to cut spending, reduced staffing levels, and to avoid the expensive appeals procedure as much as is possible .......... 'Cuts Cost Money'


Does anyone know the overall cost of illegal immigration to British taxpayers, including the cost of policing them, bordercontrol agencies. processing them, and removing them. ?
We hear a lot about the benefits to our economy from immigration ,but do we know what the overall cost is of the benefits they and their families receive, here and on the continent, in total the plus and minuses of immigration as a whole.?
Those with the idealistic view , or an axe to grind from personal reasons, will see it from only the opposite side, and those who see it as unrequired, except for special cases, or overwhelming in numbers , with negative ways in culture and religion such as me, will see it in the negative way
Somewhere in between we will get the truth , if only we have totally honest access to it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ranger121
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  * ]
Every country has to pay for Border Control, policing, customs etc., etc.

Illegal immigrants only 'cost' in terms of finding and removing, something else that all countries do.

'Legal' immigrants are treated the same way as any other citizen - they pay their taxes and are entitled to all the benefits of living here, same as you or I.

No problem with that is there?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
ranger121
Jan 29 2015, 05:05 PM
The number of successful appeals has decreased since 2009, and from the above numbers, it isn't over half that are successful.

You should read what I wrote.
I indicated that the number being given right to remain on first application has increased.
A reason for this, I proposed, was to do precisely what you here confirm - fewer appeal hearings.
Edited by Affa, Jan 29 2015, 06:51 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ranger121
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  * ]
36%.

The rules were tightened by removing some countries from the 'qualifying list' as now being 'safe'.

Lybia, for example. Is that place 'safe'?

Anyway, figures for asylum decisions are at figure 4 of the document I linked to.

http://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/migration-uk-asylum
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]

2012 Asylum figures (Migration watch - http://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/migration-uk-asylum)

Only 17% of asylum seekers were removed either voluntary or through process.
The most notable thing since the coalition was formed is the proportion of asylum seeker now classed a 'decision unknown' = 21% as of 2012 - up from 3% in 2009.

A classic case of hiding the failures under some obscure heading -
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply