The Benefits System

Xiderpunk

SingleSue wrote: »

A voucher system would be extremely expensive to run, even more expensive than the current system and thus, there would not give the savings you assume.

How would a voucher system address school trips? Extra books for courses at school? A lack of public transport in the area? Special food needed? How would you work out how and when to give vouchers for clothes? You do not need to purchase them every week. Differences in the consumption of utilities, especially if a member of the family has a disability?

A voucher system is far too rigid and assumes that everyone has the same needs where in real life, people do not (that is what makes us individuals rather than robots)

There are people on benefits who are on them through no fault of their own, maybe through a disability which has made it impossible for them to work for a time, or they have lost their job because of the current economic setting, or they have had to give up work to care for an ill relative. These same people could have been working for 30 years or more in the past.

How you would YOU feel if you had to start to rely on benefits and found that it was being dictated how and when you purchased something new to wear, or what food to buy after very many years of working and paying taxes.

Unfortunately, you appear to be of the assumption that every person who claims benefits, are wastrels, drunkards with little care for any offspring whereas in the vast majority, the benefits are used as intended, to buy food, buy clothes (when needed rather than when liked), pay utilities and to provide a roof over the head.

As for an E petition, I would not be signing it as I can see it from both sides....as I have been in both sides!

I do not believe it would be expensive to run, consider war time and the implementation of rationing and food stamps, it was established very quickly and was largely very effective. Today measures could be taken with technology to limit forgery.

Clothing frankly is not up to the tax payer to fund so claimants can wear the latest fashions. We have entered a different time now, the days of entitlement and liberalism in this form is over, even if the country has yet to wake up to this yet.

I have worked all my life, I have been made redundant in the past and addressed the problem by getting another job. I was prepared to do anything to work, I worked three jobs for a short time while trying to get back into my chosen profession. Should I get a pat on the back for this? God no, it is simple.. my duty to my family and myself. Should I through no fault of my own require some help while job seeking, then I would be more than happy to get the basics, food and shelter and the means to take public transport. Clothing and special foods.. well that is ridiculous and is not societies problem as to how well dressed I may or may not be. If it really is an issue then donated clothes would be the answer.

Disability does differ somewhat I accept and I agree that the system needs the flexibility based on exacting needs.

I honestly believe that those who use the benefits system as it is intended would welcome the change. It should be for the vast majority a short term aid.

Thrifter_2

They should do what they do in Germany. A number of people every week are randomly plucked out the Job centre and taken to do menial jobs for local businesses. That way they are actually earning their 'benefit' and are demonstrating that they are willing to work.

pqrdef

hallmark wrote: »

I was listening to a radio programme the other day & they said that one country in europe (think it was Holland) has a rule that any single girl who has a baby is immediately INeligible for social housing. Has worked wonders apparently.

I expect it's put more girls on the streets. Or on the street.

Xiderpunk

MacMickster wrote: »

Benefits are there to help people through hard times.

I'm all for a high rate of benefits to help those who are prevented from earning by illness or disability, and to support those who find themselves temporarily out of work (say up to a year).

If people are physically able to work, but have been unemployed for over a year, then I think that they have to recognise their changed circumstances and should be given a very basic subsistence level of benefit. If this means having to move home, sell their car etc then so be it.

The idea of taking away people's dignity by giving vouchers only is ridiculous though, and would merely create a black market where cash is exchanged for vouchers.

I agree, benefits are there to help people through hard times. However, that is not the case today or over the decades where the incipient growth of the welfare state has led to making it a viable life-style choice. To deny this is to completely ignore the wide spread evidence through-out our society.

Dignity is unimportant and frankly a luxury. If I am hungry and I have children to feed, how I feel about myself is not even on the radar let alone a priority. There is a job cleaning the local public toilets? Where do I sign up? If it means my children eat then I will do it enthusiastically.

Vouchers could be nothing more than digital, the government could use a swipe card linked to an account to make deductions and credits directly to or from an account. No physical voucher needs to exist. It would function just like a debit card.

Going4TheDream

Xiderpunk wrote: »

With the current economic and long term prospects looking fairly bleak I think the welfare system needs a more rapid overhaul than promised in the last election. The government is working to address the problem of 'entitlement' where the benefits system has historically allowed income from benefits to be a viable way of life, therefore a choice.

I think the next step is to address the way benefits are provided, it seems to me that providing cash is fundamentally flawed. Stamps for food could be provided which apply to all essential food items, a bus pass/tube pass could be provided for transport, housing benefits should be paid direct to the landlord or the mortgage company. By removing cash from the equation it will ensure that tax payers money is being used as intended and furthermore will remove the attractiveness of seeing it as a way of life.

Naturally, benefits is far from the only problem our economy faces, however it is one aspect where real changes could be made in a relatively short space of time. I am considering filing an e-petition to this effect, therefore I am interested in feedback.

The government is already considering a slow down or even U turn on the 'controversial' child benefit proposal of stopping it for any one earning over £42k or there abouts, over how unfair it is that 2 persons earning say £40k each would qualify but if one earned £45 and one earned £35k they would lose it even though there gross incomes is the same, I dont see anything happening to quickly on any benefit reform if I am honest.

Yes the whole benefits system does need totally and radically overhauling but if it is going to 'fiddled' with and changed it needs to be done right. I dont believe that there are any quick fixes that will not in some way knock on to other aspects of social life in some way. Take away or stop certain benefits and will the crime rate go up? etc etc Stop paying out total benefits of more than the average wage, will this make people homeless, what is the social impact on this, will it vary in different parts of the country, I dont like the thought of someone who has had their benefit stopped breaking into my house to steal something they can sell or mugging me in the street for my purse.

Dont get me wrong I am as sick as the next person with the people who abuse the system, whilst I am out slogging my guts out for 40hrs a week. I am cross reading about single parents using kids as a cash cow, people skanking disability whilst the genuine ones are being tested to see if they really deserve it, however we need to take a step back and take a holistic objective view and not an emotional one if we are to get a fair system. that doesn't allow people to choose benefits as a way of life and gives those who desperately rely on them a reasonable but fair existence.

I have some views on what could be done and they would probably make the Tories look like Santa but I think as they say be careful what you wish for...

zagfles

Cleaver wrote: »

I was watching channel 4 news last night and they had some comparisons between benefits in certain european countries. Maybe someone can correct me on the actual countries but I remember the figures.

In Denmark unemployment benefit is 90% of the average wage. In Holland (I think) it was 65% and in Germany it's 75%. In the UK it's £65 maximum a week, which I make to be around 14% of the average wage. I know all of these systems will have complex systems around kids and houses and other benefits, but I was quite surprised at how low our's was.

Unemployment benefit in the UK doesn't cover housing costs or kids. Add in housing benefit, child tax credit etc, and a typical out of work family would likely get over £20k a year in benefits - that's probably over 75% of median wage.

Xiderpunk

Going4TheDream wrote: »

The government is already considering a slow down or even U turn on the 'controversial' child benefit proposal of stopping it for any one earning over £42k or there abouts, over how unfair it is that 2 persons earning say £40k each would qualify but if one earned £45 and one earned £35k they would lose it even though there gross incomes is the same, I dont see anything happening to quickly on any benefit reform if I am honest.

Yes the whole benefits system does need totally and radically overhauling but if it is going to 'fiddled' with and changed it needs to be done right. I dont believe that there are any quick fixes that will not in some way knock on to other aspects of social life in some way. Take away or stop certain benefits and will the crime rate go up? etc etc Stop paying out total benefits of more than the average wage, will this make people homeless, what is the social impact on this, will it vary in different parts of the country, I dont like the thought of someone who has had their benefit stopped breaking into my house to steal something they can sell or mugging me in the street for my purse.

Dont get me wrong I am as sick as the next person with the people who abuse the system, whilst I am out slogging my guts out for 40hrs a week. I am cross reading about single parents using kids as a cash cow, people skanking disability whilst the genuine ones are being tested to see if they really deserve it, however we need to take a step back and take a holistic objective view and not an emotional one if we are to get a fair system. that doesn't allow people to choose benefits as a way of life and gives those who desperately rely on them a reasonable but fair existence.

I have some views on what could be done and they would probably make the Tories look like Santa but I think as they say be careful what you wish for...

Well said and you make good points. As you say reforms based on what I am suggesting could trade one problem for another, I can not answer that with any degree of certainty.

In the days ahead of us all, we as a country and as a society will have to make some very big changes, some of those changes will be extremely unpleasant for some people. However the way I see it, we have a choice, we either sink or swim. Anything that can promote a strong work ethic, job creation with less tax burden on the job creators will mean we have a far greater chance of staying afloat. If we hold on to the cuddly warm fuzziness policies we will lose our competitiveness as an economy in the coming decades and all will suffer as a shrinking workforce becomes ever more liable to support the growing welfare state.

This cow has well and truly been milked.

custardy

hallmark wrote: »

Give benefits to the old & the genuinely ill.

Let everyone else work or starve.

I'm not joking. Implement that tomorrow & I guarantee not one person would starve.

so what would you propose?
there are not enough jobs for every genuinely unemployed person(thats those fit for work)

custardy

Going4TheDream wrote: »

The government is already considering a slow down or even U turn on the 'controversial' child benefit proposal of stopping it for any one earning over £42k or there abouts, over how unfair it is that 2 persons earning say £40k each would qualify but if one earned £45 and one earned £35k they would lose it even though there gross incomes is the same, I dont see anything happening to quickly on any benefit reform if I am honest.

Yes the whole benefits system does need totally and radically overhauling but if it is going to 'fiddled' with and changed it needs to be done right. I dont believe that there are any quick fixes that will not in some way knock on to other aspects of social life in some way. Take away or stop certain benefits and will the crime rate go up? etc etc Stop paying out total benefits of more than the average wage, will this make people homeless, what is the social impact on this, will it vary in different parts of the country, I dont like the thought of someone who has had their benefit stopped breaking into my house to steal something they can sell or mugging me in the street for my purse.

Dont get me wrong I am as sick as the next person with the people who abuse the system, whilst I am out slogging my guts out for 40hrs a week. I am cross reading about single parents using kids as a cash cow, people skanking disability whilst the genuine ones are being tested to see if they really deserve it, however we need to take a step back and take a holistic objective view and not an emotional one if we are to get a fair system. that doesn't allow people to choose benefits as a way of life and gives those who desperately rely on them a reasonable but fair existence.

I have some views on what could be done and they would probably make the Tories look like Santa but I think as they say be careful what you wish for...

and rightly so,because its its a crazy way of implementing it
I have a friend who just falls into the earning too much category
single parent and the dad is nowhere to be seen
however a couple could be earning £80K+ and still get the family allowance
if they want to set limit then its fine but not as simply as on one wage limit

hallmark

custardy wrote: »

so what would you propose?
there are not enough jobs for every genuinely unemployed person(thats those fit for work)

There are tons of jobs & lots of other ways to make money to boot. It does require people to actually get off their ar4e & make an effort though.

As I said, if the choice was work or starve no-one in the UK would starve.