Originally Posted by
ollie the optimist
None of the benefit families in that BBC show had jobs, they were living solely off benefits, hence the point of the program.
If you are on benefits, and have been for a while, ie years not months, and you pay for sky, instead of food and end up being short of money to pay for food, that is wrong. Benefits are there to support and buy essentials. Not luxury items, which sky tv is.
Food banks are there to help those in desperate need of food, if you can't afford food because you spending your benefits on luxury items such as sky, then although food banks won't turn you down, you are depriving someone who might really need food because your piroities in life are wrong.
This family, live in Ipswich, from looks of it, fairly central location, now, I know Ipswich and there are a large amount of parks there, which kids can go to, especially in the summer and entertain yourselves there, parents can go to. Play football, play on the swings etc, that's free because they could easily walk there. Free view, although while not an expert on it's kids channels, does have Ceebeebes, CBbc and citv. Fairly standard kids channels. They should suffice for the kids. I just can't accept the principle, of yeah I spend my some of my benefits on sky, amd go to a food bank which is free. Furthermore, if you are a parent, them surely you need to provide for your children, the first you do is make sure food is on the table, not pay for sky.
If you are newly unemployed then fine, I accept it's unreasonable to stop sky etc etc, but after years, you have too. The state is there to fund essentials, not luxury items