Discussion
Kozy said:
Pothole said:
hat would be my guess. It's laughable, really, this apparent concept that everyone who is claiming any benefits is automatically living the life of Riley and doing nothing to find work.
I sees it. With me own eyes. I don't read the Mail.Anyone with any form of their own income, would have their own money to buy their luxuries with. Sop no, it's not 'anyone on any benefits' at all.
Edited by Kozy on Tuesday 18th December 13:23
I think this is a great idea.
When you are dependent on the state life should not be comfortable.
the state is there as a basic safety net, not to keep folks in beer and fags.
The welfare state is clearly too generous today and could be reduced if you made sure the monies spent were on essentials only.
There's stories of kids going hungry at school and you can bet your bottom dollar that it aint because the benefits provided aren't sufficient.
When you are dependent on the state life should not be comfortable.
the state is there as a basic safety net, not to keep folks in beer and fags.
The welfare state is clearly too generous today and could be reduced if you made sure the monies spent were on essentials only.
There's stories of kids going hungry at school and you can bet your bottom dollar that it aint because the benefits provided aren't sufficient.
Pothole said:
o is this card only going to be for those whose sole income is via the benefits system?
No, anyone in receipt of benefits gets one. Anyone not relying soley on it however, will have some small amount of 'their own' money, and they are free to spend it on whatever they want.I do not see the issue.
Edited by Kozy on Tuesday 18th December 13:35
Kozy said:
Pothole said:
o is this card only going to be for those whose sole income is via the benefits system?
No, anyone in receipt of benefits gets one. Anyone not relying soley on it, will have some small amount of 'their own' money, and they are free to spend it on whatever they want.I do not see the issue.
Pothole said:
Kozy said:
Pothole said:
o is this card only going to be for those whose sole income is via the benefits system?
No, anyone in receipt of benefits gets one. Anyone not relying soley on it, will have some small amount of 'their own' money, and they are free to spend it on whatever they want.I do not see the issue.
The thing with benefits that bugs me, is just how easy it is made. You just make a phone call to start a claim, visit the Job Centre and then the money just arrives in your ban k account and there for you to do as you please. So no effort at all and free money in your account.
I think I'd like to see it made harder in some ways, so maybe have part of it in food that you can get from any supermarket, but with of a limted range ( no crap )that you have to get of your arse and go collect in store. While that idea alone maybe not that great, something just to make at least part of it a pain in the arse might actually remind some it's ( well, should be ) a safety net and not a liefestyle.
I think I'd like to see it made harder in some ways, so maybe have part of it in food that you can get from any supermarket, but with of a limted range ( no crap )that you have to get of your arse and go collect in store. While that idea alone maybe not that great, something just to make at least part of it a pain in the arse might actually remind some it's ( well, should be ) a safety net and not a liefestyle.
Mr_B said:
The thing with benefits that bugs me, is just how easy it is made. You just make a phone call to start a claim, visit the Job Centre and then the money just arrives in your ban k account and there for you to do as you please. So no effort at all and free money in your account.
I think I'd like to see it made harder in some ways, so maybe have part of it in food that you can get from any supermarket, but with of a limted range ( no crap )that you have to get of your arse and go collect in store. While that idea alone maybe not that great, something just to make at least part of it a pain in the arse might actually remind some it's ( well, should be ) a safety net and not a liefestyle.
Except you have to actually look for a job, which is being monitored more closely than ever, and JSA is a massive £70 a week. That doesn't sounds like any kind of lifestyle I'd want, but then I don't worship the Daily Mail.I think I'd like to see it made harder in some ways, so maybe have part of it in food that you can get from any supermarket, but with of a limted range ( no crap )that you have to get of your arse and go collect in store. While that idea alone maybe not that great, something just to make at least part of it a pain in the arse might actually remind some it's ( well, should be ) a safety net and not a liefestyle.
Mr_B said:
The thing with benefits that bugs me, is just how easy it is made. You just make a phone call to start a claim, visit the Job Centre and then the money just arrives in your ban k account and there for you to do as you please. So no effort at all and free money in your account.
I think I'd like to see it made harder in some ways, so maybe have part of it in food that you can get from any supermarket, but with of a limted range ( no crap )that you have to get of your arse and go collect in store. While that idea alone maybe not that great, something just to make at least part of it a pain in the arse might actually remind some it's ( well, should be ) a safety net and not a liefestyle.
Are you talking about benefits, or job seekers allowance? I think I'd like to see it made harder in some ways, so maybe have part of it in food that you can get from any supermarket, but with of a limted range ( no crap )that you have to get of your arse and go collect in store. While that idea alone maybe not that great, something just to make at least part of it a pain in the arse might actually remind some it's ( well, should be ) a safety net and not a liefestyle.
I was on JSA for about 2 months. I would have been pretty annoyed if some of that money came as Tesco vouchers...as it would have entirely contradicted its purpose in my opinion.
Im guessing people on here are saying that they cant do this:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
saving money off benefits for holidays/cars/luxuries.
After all if the tax payer is paying for it and they themselves cant afford those luxuries, then why should people on benefits.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
saving money off benefits for holidays/cars/luxuries.
After all if the tax payer is paying for it and they themselves cant afford those luxuries, then why should people on benefits.
BOR said:
God forbid I ever have to claim any of the thousands I've paid into this system, but if I do, I would consider it a personal favour, if some vile little Tory b
h-boy declined to tell me how I spend my money that I previously paid in.
The money you have "paid in" has ALREADY been spent!h-boy declined to tell me how I spend my money that I previously paid in.When/if you become unemployed, the money will be paid for by those currently paying in tax.
Mr_B said:
The thing with benefits that bugs me, is just how easy it is made. You just make a phone call to start a claim, visit the Job Centre and then the money just arrives in your ban k account and there for you to do as you please. So no effort at all and free money in your account.
I think I'd like to see it made harder in some ways, so maybe have part of it in food that you can get from any supermarket, but with of a limted range ( no crap )that you have to get of your arse and go collect in store. While that idea alone maybe not that great, something just to make at least part of it a pain in the arse might actually remind some it's ( well, should be ) a safety net and not a liefestyle.
How do you think those of us on JSA get food now? £70 a week doesn't get a whole lot from Ocado!I think I'd like to see it made harder in some ways, so maybe have part of it in food that you can get from any supermarket, but with of a limted range ( no crap )that you have to get of your arse and go collect in store. While that idea alone maybe not that great, something just to make at least part of it a pain in the arse might actually remind some it's ( well, should be ) a safety net and not a liefestyle.
As another poster has said which is a fair point, replace an expensive system with another, that is not the answer.
The best way round it would be get the supermarket companies to do the set up as the ones who sort it will get the business. Do it with food vouchers handed out by the benefits office which can only be spent at supermarkets and not on fags and booze and only with ID, put the resipients names on them.
If they get forged, then add some security to them, but to be honest all they are going to get is more food such as fruit veg grain etc. No microwave meals.
And if the dole blaggers dont have the relevant supermarket that close then they can get some exercise by walking to the next avaliable shop, and thus reducing some of the obesity problems.
There you go, problem solved (2 birds with 1 stone)
The best way round it would be get the supermarket companies to do the set up as the ones who sort it will get the business. Do it with food vouchers handed out by the benefits office which can only be spent at supermarkets and not on fags and booze and only with ID, put the resipients names on them.
If they get forged, then add some security to them, but to be honest all they are going to get is more food such as fruit veg grain etc. No microwave meals.
And if the dole blaggers dont have the relevant supermarket that close then they can get some exercise by walking to the next avaliable shop, and thus reducing some of the obesity problems.
There you go, problem solved (2 birds with 1 stone)
The subject of JSA always crops up in these threads. I'm not sure if it's a lefty conspiracy or a lack of understanding about what benefits entails.
Let's remember there are (at least) 2 categories of claimants. We have the career claimants who claim everything they can and end up with a nice tax-free salary and housing paid for so live without a care in the World (except maybe the local co-op running out of Lambert and Butler). Then there are the poor saps who don't want to be unemployed who might only be earning JSA.
Let's remember there are (at least) 2 categories of claimants. We have the career claimants who claim everything they can and end up with a nice tax-free salary and housing paid for so live without a care in the World (except maybe the local co-op running out of Lambert and Butler). Then there are the poor saps who don't want to be unemployed who might only be earning JSA.
We went over this a few months ago when it was put forward as benefit vouchers. This is the same thing, just even more expensive to implement and going to be more likely to be limited to just the big supermarket.
I'll paste my reply from the last discussion anyway as it's still totally relevant.
It would cost tens of millions to put in place, the same again each year to run and the cost to business would be immense.
The deserving claimants (i.e pensioners) would be less likely to make use of their vouchers yet the 'scum' that people think make up bulk of claimants wouldn't have any shame.
There will be plenty of shops that will just ring up booze/fags as nappies anyway.
By all means if people are abusing the system put a stop to it. Do that by making sure they only have the correct benefits. The idea that people are paying for 50" TV's and fast cars as suggested above out of legitimate benefits is laughable.
This policy is just a very expensive way to be spiteful.
I'll paste my reply from the last discussion anyway as it's still totally relevant.
It would cost tens of millions to put in place, the same again each year to run and the cost to business would be immense.
The deserving claimants (i.e pensioners) would be less likely to make use of their vouchers yet the 'scum' that people think make up bulk of claimants wouldn't have any shame.
There will be plenty of shops that will just ring up booze/fags as nappies anyway.
By all means if people are abusing the system put a stop to it. Do that by making sure they only have the correct benefits. The idea that people are paying for 50" TV's and fast cars as suggested above out of legitimate benefits is laughable.
This policy is just a very expensive way to be spiteful.
An excellent idea if only to allow the government to see where the taxpayer's money is actually spent by those in receipt of benefits.
It will of course never happen in today's all rights and no responsibilities entitlement culture as it will be against their 'ooman rahts not to buy fags and widescreen tellies with the money intended to feed their kids.
It will of course never happen in today's all rights and no responsibilities entitlement culture as it will be against their 'ooman rahts not to buy fags and widescreen tellies with the money intended to feed their kids.
This won't work.
It will create a black economy where goods are bartered, it will force those who are unemployed and have taken on credit agreements from catalogues and brighthouse/wonga etc to dip more into debt, people will start to do various things to earn cash some of these things will be legal but immoral, some will be illegal but won't directly harm others, but theft and burglary will climb exponentially.
It will create a black economy where goods are bartered, it will force those who are unemployed and have taken on credit agreements from catalogues and brighthouse/wonga etc to dip more into debt, people will start to do various things to earn cash some of these things will be legal but immoral, some will be illegal but won't directly harm others, but theft and burglary will climb exponentially.
I'm personally of the opinion that long term claimants (and we're talking years here) should be fed and housed by the state. Childcare can then be provided centrally, people can learn new skills and they will want to go out and escape the dormitory life. Of course, this isn't a prison - they are free to leave (and lose benefits).
Everyone gets their human rights, a roof and sustenance!
Everyone gets their human rights, a roof and sustenance!
Doesn't this already happen to an extent in the States??
ETA:
Common benefits (in the United States) provided via EBT are typically of two general categories: Food and cash benefits. Food benefits are federally authorized benefits that can be used only to purchase food and non-alcoholic beverages.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Benefit_Tr...
Du1point8 said:
Im guessing people on here are saying that they cant do this:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
saving money off benefits for holidays/cars/luxuries.
After all if the tax payer is paying for it and they themselves cant afford those luxuries, then why should people on benefits.
That is clearly an example of the average person on benefits. http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
saving money off benefits for holidays/cars/luxuries.
After all if the tax payer is paying for it and they themselves cant afford those luxuries, then why should people on benefits.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff