Not my figures but I have no reason to doubt them.
Any way you look at them they are a disgrace.
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
This is a hoak from about 10 years ago
ReplyDeleteHow is it a hoaks/hoax when its correct.
DeleteIt's incorrect/made up/a hoax. First started around 2004 it seems. Designed to breed hate/anger perhaps. A quick search provides all the info you need. See these:
Deletehttp://arkh-hull.com/2011/11/08/response-to-pensioners-v-illegal-immigrants/
http://www.hoax-slayer.com/uk-pensioners-asylum-seekers-protest.shtml
http://www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/refugees.asp
http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN05621
Hoax!
ReplyDeleteInteresting articles.
ReplyDeleteOne of the articles is American and another is Australian so not relevant to the UK.
The first article is an organisation that relies on asylum seekers for their tax payers pounds so they are hardly going to be critical of their paymasters immigration policies.
The last reference is a Parliament briefing -i wouldnt believe anything that comes from that den of thieves and traitors.
If you read the top I stated they were not my figures but I have no reason to doubt them any more than you have any reason to believe them.The fact that you have bothered to post quoting government references would indicate that perhaps the figures are more accurate than some would like to admit.
Incidently the allowance that asylum seekers get may not be a benefit in name but it is a taxpayers handout nontheless.
The links may be from other countries but I was making the point that this information was the result of a misunderstanding from 2004 (in Canada?). It's being shared by people who have done no research into the facts, presumably because they want to breed hate; it's needlessly alarmist. I have no doubt that there are issues with the government but I feel it is important for people to point out when posts could cause unrest due to their alarmist nature, especially when the research hasn't been done. After all, the importance of "truth" is made clear at the top of your blog. This particular issue is closed because it's been discussed to death! As I said, just take a look around the web. There are some very good, detailed explanations here (see the comments):
ReplyDeletehttp://38degrees.uservoice.com/forums/78585-campaign-suggestions/suggestions/2157475-old-age-pensions-v-immigrant-refugee-benefit
If you still don't think that's enough to believe, there's plenty more out there to provide more relible information. As a taxpayer, I don't want my contributions used needlessly but we need to deal with facts and what is most likely to be true. All the signs point to this being an unhelpful piece of daily mail esque sensationalism. I'm sure there are plenty of deserving asylum seekers and I would certainly not like to encourage others to think ill of them (or worse?) on the basis of a misunderstanding/hoax. I respect your right to post anything and would also not want anyone to think ill of you but posting the above misinformation is a distraction from any justified arguments there may be about any problems with our immigration policy.
As well as a distraction from real issues with pensions.
ReplyDeleteYou have stated your opinion as you are free to do but other people are also free to make up their own minds.I think that stating you cant say certain things because it may cause unrest very unhelpful and incompatable with living in a free society with freedom of expression and speech.restricted freedom of speech is not freedom of speech.
ReplyDeleteI read your articles and gave you my opinion which cant be wrong because its my opinion.Let other people make up their own minds-they can read your comments and take them onboard or not as the case may be.
I am happy for people to read this discussion and make up their own minds (perhaps with a little more research than we have done). I felt it was important to write considering the seeming inaccuracies posted and it is to your credit that you welcome such comments. I also hope it is clear to all that I have not written against freedom of speech (or for its restriction in any way) but am urging caution, care, and ultimately a more informed approach before posting materials. That way, fewer people may be negatively affected (harmed?) as a result of unnecessary/unresearched posts and we could think more clearly as we perhaps focus on discussing real issues/the facts rather than distractions. I am sorry if I did not make myself clear in my previous comments. I certainly don't want anyone to think I oppose freedom of speech! As you say, people can make their own minds up, perhaps even do their research, and I'd be very happy with that as an outcome in this case. I think we are all more likely to find the truth if we make a bit more of an effort to do so.
ReplyDelete