Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
oldsport

Shocking Scale Of Eu Citizens Claiming Housing Benefit

Recommended Posts

Thousands of European migrants are living off benefits after moving to Britain without a job, costing taxpayers £10 million a year in subsidised rent, new figures disclose.
The analysis, by officials at the DWP, found that 300,000 European migrants registered for a National Insurance number during the 2011-12 period, with 3,000 of them then making claims for housing benefit as jobseekers.
The figures from the Department for Work and Pensions represent the first time the government has published an official estimate of the scale of so-called European “benefit tourism”.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/10762942/3000-jobless-European-migrants-on-benefits.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely shocking. A tiny fraction compared to UK citizens who claim housing benefit, including "hard working families" and "strivers"

Have you got the point yet?.

Please stop with the moral panic - otherwise you might be considered an Idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely shocking. A tiny fraction compared to UK citizens who claim housing benefit, including "hard working families" and "strivers"

Have you got the point yet?.

Please stop with the moral panic - otherwise you might be considered an Idiot.

When we're talking about a whole one percent of EU immigrants claiming Housing Benefit, panic is compulsory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't the story really state "LANDLORDS DRAIN MILLIONS FROM TAXPAYER BY RENTING TO NON BRITS?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me its the principle that people who were not born here can come and claim any kind of benefits.

Benefits should be paid by ones home country only to end this scam.

As 1 in 4 in London are claiming housing benefit alone, 3000 sounds like a pretty low estimate as that all it is.

http://londonist.com/2014/04/one-in-four-london-households-on-housing-benefit.php

There must be more then 3000 gypsy's and BIG Issue sellers in Britain from around Europe who will not be paying a penny in tax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

meanwhile, 70,000 claim help to buy interest free loans...soon to need housing benefit when the rates go up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to think of myself as fair and even minded. But finding I was entitled to ZERO benefits after paying in for 34 years has twisted me a bit. And I find it hard to have that much sympathy for others that get them.

I wonder If TPTB made the benefit system so unfair on purpose. Good way to distract us from what they are up to.

If you decided to design the worst benefit system you could imagine I don't think you would have done to badly if you came up with what we have got today.

Edited by gf3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only shocking if you believe the lies put out by LabourTory.

Only last week or so Clegg was telling us they can't claim benefits but are setting up businesses! Yes, Big Issue sellers on housing benefits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the ones who are self employed or work 16 hrs a week. How much are they costing in benefits?

I suspect they are made aware of the scams to maximise benefits that are used by everyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to think of myself as fair and even minded.

although in fairness it's very easy for your VI to effect your point of view. If you think you are totally rational and VI doesn't effect you it probably does. Best thing to do is except VI do colour your view and go looking for your errors with a torch

Edited by cybernoid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical lazy/agenda-driven journalism in the Telegraph article. Nowhere does it say that this is basically a rounding error given the £20bn+ size of the housing benefit bill, and the article is full of emotive journalese stock phrases like "stamp out", "exploitation", "waves of migrants", "abuse of our welfare system", "hugely underestimated" etc. The whole article is like a game of Daily Hate bingo. It's exactly why I don't buy "quality" newspapers, they are full of the same junk as the tabloids/Mail/Express but with a few long words thrown in so their readers can feel smug about how clever they are.

Edited by Dorkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical lazy/agenda-driven journalism in the Telegraph article. Nowhere does it say that this is basically a rounding error given the £20bn+ size of the housing benefit bill, and the article is full of emotive journalese stock phrases like "stamp out", "exploitation", "waves of migrants", "abuse of our welfare system", "hugely underestimated" etc. The whole article is like a game of Daily Hate bingo. It's exactly why I don't buy "quality" newspapers, they are full of the same junk as the tabloids/Mail/Express but with a few long words thrown in so their readers can feel smug about how clever they are.

I've still no idea what the point of these figures are that the DWP have released. What is IDS trying to show? It's such a tiny amount of money - about 0.005% of the overall benefits bill. Is he trying to show that benefit tourism isn't a problem after all?

Edited by oldsport

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've still no idea what the point of these figures are that the DWP have released. What is IDS trying to show? It's such a tiny amount of money - about 0.005% of the overall benefits bill. Is he trying to show that benefit tourism isn't a problem after all?

It's the old trick of saying, "my goodness, these people are costing us millions of pounds!" and relying on your listener to be so innumerate or uninformed about the scale of welfare spending that they will think this is a big number.

IDS, pictured yesterday:

200px-Drevil_million_dollars.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the ones who are self employed or work 16 hrs a week. How much are they costing in benefits?

I suspect they are made aware of the scams to maximise benefits that are used by everyone else.

Quite, housing benefit is the biggest scam going. A standard ploy has been to be a Big Issue seller, this counts as self-employed eh voila - housing benefits but it's fine because they're not scrounging skivers claiming the princely sum of £71 a week in JSA.

The only big positive step is the crackdown on the total receivable in benefits, this has finally stopped central London being a cash cow for BTLers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£10m a year is absolutely nothing, the economic benefits of EU migration are far more than that.

Rather than pursuing some dumb anti-EU agenda, we should instead be talking about the Pakistani and Bangladeshi immigrants who make up 50%+ of the east London population, the majority of whom are on benefits and costing a hell of a lot more than £10m.

Edited by Smyth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£10m a year is absolutely nothing, the economic benefits of EU migration are far more than that.

Rather than pursuing some dumb anti-EU agenda, we should instead be talking about the Pakistani and Bangladeshi immigrants who make up 50%+ of the east London population, the majority of whom are on benefits and costing a hell of a lot more than £10m.

The 3000 figure was pulled out of the sky by the government, do you believe it?

And the immigrants from E Europe started coming in even greater numbers around 2002, why is it that working class Brits are poorer then theyve been in a couple of generations and are having to work longer hours and have both parents working if these immigrants are such a wonderful economic benefit.

The only people they are of benefit to is the ruling class who love cheap labour.

Only immigrants any developed country should be looking for are extremely wealthy folk, highly skilled and foreign born spouses of indigenous Brits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 3000 figure was pulled out of the sky by the government, do you believe it?

And the immigrants from E Europe started coming in even greater numbers around 2002, why is it that working class Brits are poorer then theyve been in a couple of generations and are having to work longer hours and have both parents working if these immigrants are such a wonderful economic benefit.

The only people they are of benefit to is the ruling class who love cheap labour.

Only immigrants any developed country should be looking for are extremely wealthy folk, highly skilled and foreign born spouses of indigenous Brits.

Cheap labour is good for everyone, the 'ruling classes' arent the only people who shop in supermarkets or need walls built you know. People were complaining in a thread last week about how builders are making too much, and now suddenly Eastern Europeans lowering prices is a bad thing?

Eastern European immigration has nothing to do with why people in the UK are worse off - the Eastern European community in the UK tends to be hard working, low crime, and not a huge drain on the benefits system, unlike certain other immigrant groups (one two). Pretty much all studies show that EU immigration has been a net economic benefit (admittedly a lot of that is driven by skilled immigration from Western Europe, but you cant have one without the other) - its low/zero skill immigration from outside the EU which is the problem.

Edited by Smyth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pretty much all studies show that EU immigration has been a net economic benefit

Do you have any good inks for that? I know basic economic theory always says that sort of thing is positive, and there was plenty of speculation beforehand that it would make us al rich, but have there been any comprehensive, unbiased studies that have actually confirmed (as far as one can) that it has been positive?

I am beginnning to wonder myself, if the realities and complexities of the completely different societal, social, work, wefare, education, health ,pension etc, systems and administrations in all the diffferent member states actualy make it impossible to realise the theoretical economic benefits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been going on for decades. I was living in London in 1997 and one of the occupants in the house I shared was Spanish and living off housing and unemployment benefit. It's part of the reason why house prices are so ridiculously high in big cities. But then, what do we expect when we have open borders and only limited housing stock? Welcome to Hunger Games, welcome to the future.

Edited by Pindar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheap labour is good for everyone, the 'ruling classes' arent the only people who shop in supermarkets or need walls built you know. People were complaining in a thread last week about how builders are making too much, and now suddenly Eastern Europeans lowering prices is a bad thing?

Eastern European immigration has nothing to do with why people in the UK are worse off - the Eastern European community in the UK tends to be hard working, low crime, and not a huge drain on the benefits system, unlike certain other immigrant groups (one two). Pretty much all studies show that EU immigration has been a net economic benefit (admittedly a lot of that is driven by skilled immigration from Western Europe, but you cant have one without the other) - its low/zero skill immigration from outside the EU which is the problem.

Are you East European Smyth? It might be a good idea to declare your own VI. We used to have a poster on here who was from Eastern Europe. who wrote in a similar style and had similar opinions to you but I can't for the life of me remember his username.

A large international precariat workforce isn't a good thing at all. Global corporatists are not going to make the mistake of 19th century industrial capitalists of allowing the creation of a secure proletariat, which can organise itself, and can create a distinct identity and class.

To some extent Eastern Europe and areas of Britain like 'the North' are acting like Chinese countryside, subsidising the Cities (like London) with a low wage precariat workforce, and if and when tensions rise, and things start to kick off, can be quickly despatched again.

Edited by aSecureTenant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have any good inks for that? I know basic economic theory always says that sort of thing is positive, and there was plenty of speculation beforehand that it would make us al rich, but have there been any comprehensive, unbiased studies that have actually confirmed (as far as one can) that it has been positive?

I am beginnning to wonder myself, if the realities and complexities of the completely different societal, social, work, wefare, education, health ,pension etc, systems and administrations in all the diffferent member states actualy make it impossible to realise the theoretical economic benefits.

http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_uploads/CDP_22_13.pdf

Overall, our findings draw a positive picture of immigrant contributions, particularly for those

immigrants who entered the UK fiscal system since 2000. Our results are summarised, and

expressed in 2011 equivalent GBP, in Table 5. We find that between 1995 and 2011, immigrants

from EEA countries made a net fiscal contribution of about 8.8 billion GBP (in 2011

equivalency), compared with an overall negative net fiscal contribution of 604.5 billion GBP by

natives. Thus, between 1995 and 2011, EEA immigrants contributed to the fiscal system 4%

more than they received in transfers and benefits, whereas natives’ payments into the system

were just 93% of what they received. Our estimates also show that immigrants from non-EEA

countries have made a negative fiscal contribution overall, when considering all years between

1995 and 2011. This is partly explained by their demographic structure – non-EEA immigrants

have had more children than natives, and we have allocated educational expenditure for children

to immigrants (ignoring that immigrants arrived with their own educational expenditure paid for

by the origin country).

The immigration debate is frustrating because it is clearly and unambigiously true that European immigration is good, while non-European is bad* (from both an economic and cultural perspective). The government has the power to control non-European immigration since it is not bound by EU regulations, but rather than just doing this (because there is nothing stopping us), the anti-immigration lot instead just want to whine about EU-immigration despite the fact that a) it is a net benefit, and B) there is nothing we can do about it.

This is the main reason why the UKIP position makes no sense, although in fairness its harder to have a serious discussion about non-EU immigration without facing the tedious accusations of 'racism' from the usual left wing morons.

Edited by Smyth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_uploads/CDP_22_13.pdf

The immigration debate is frustrating because it is clearly and unambigiously true that European immigration is good, while non-European is bad (from both an economic and cultural perspective). The government has the power to control non-European immigration since it is not bound by EU regulations, but rather than just doing this (because there is nothing stopping us), the anti-immigration lot instead just want to whine about EU-immigration despite the fact that a) it is a net benefit, and B) there is nothing we can do about it.

This is the main reason why the UKIP position makes no sense, although in fairness its harder to have a serious discussion about non-EU immigration without facing the tedious accusations of 'racism' from the usual left wing morons.

What seems to never be taken into account in these studies is the effect on the displacement of people already here. The truth is there are far too many variables to measure to gain a clear picture.

However I suspect that immigration is beneficial to GDP and big business, but I see no benefit for the majority of the population.

Edited by doomed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   212 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.