Welfare Card

[EDLT]

TEKNOPUG said:

I think that there should be a correlation between the amount of benefits received and the amount of money you’ve paid in.

New to the country? Have some food stamps

Long term unemployed? Food stamps and JSA.

Paid 30 years worth of Income Tax and NI? Follow me through to the VIP lounge…

It should be like a pension, the more you put it, the more you get out. With set minimum and maximum amounts.

It would certainly be one way of making the country a less attractive benefits destination and incentivise people to be in work and pay their taxes.

Contribution based JSA already exists, you can claim it on top of normal JSA in some cases or instead of JSA if you have a large amount of savings.

This thread has gone full Daily Mail though, so I'm out.

[thinfourth2]

One question i must ask

If live on benefits is so fking great then why aren't the daily wail crowd getting themselves onto benefits?

NWTony said:

I like that you missed point 2! The fact that Thinfourth buys his vegetables from the farm shop up the road and the farmer uses an honesty box system as payment Yes' that's a good reason to not introduce a welfare card for benefits.

I would add that my hand woven, Bengalese, organic hemp wallet doesn't have slots for credit cards as well, the idea is clearly unworkable.

No not a farm shop

A old garden shed at the side of the road

But the point remains it merely pushes more money towards big supermarkets

[bitchstewie]

thinfourth2 said:

No not a farm shop

A old garden shed at the side of the road

But the point remains it merely pushes more money towards big supermarkets

But not paying so much of your taxes towards benefits means you can put more in the honesty box.

Of course cutting the benefits bill probably wouldn't lead to a tax reduction but that's a different point.

[Pothole]

Du1point8 said:

Pothole said:

Du1point8 said:

Chrisw666 said:

Du1point8 said:

How do you sort out a solution to kick the ass of anyone who is making it their career to be on benefits without hurting those that need it?

How do you explain to people in areas that have high unemployment, that they might actually have to move away from friends and family to get a job and that is not an excuse to stay there on benefits?

The above is just 2 things, but most of all, how do you do it without certain groups of people jumping down your throat for penalising the poor ( when they say it should be the rich that is taxed more) and saying its not like that at all?

The other question would be where are the jobs for these people?

I know there are unfilled vacancies, but not always the skills. I also know that some of those who are working the system wouldn't be wanted by many (if any) employers, can you imagine taking on idle/unskilled/un work ready/barely capable people in a country where sacking someone is a minefield. You could almost guarantee that those who made a living from the benefits system would revel in the more lucrative employment tribunal industry.

This is one of the problems, people defend the feckless with their benefits but they wont have working for them themselves... Yet get all upset when people suggest they do some type of manual labour as frankly thats all they are good for, picking potatoes, etc...

All some people want is to sit on their arse watching their 55" plasma tv, make no effort to work and actively look to get fired from jobs, yet when you look to remove benefits and tell them to fk off out of society, people stick up for them stating its their human rights to get benefits and be a burden on society.

Strange that those socialists that bleat about socialism also forget that one of the biggest part of socialism is the following: You can only take out, what you put into society. Put nothing in, then you deserve to starve.

Where does this crap about large plasma TVs come from?

Bravo sir... is that it? that your total comeback... well done!!

I have no TV, therefore everyone else compared to me, has those huge cheap ass plasma TVs... or LCD 3D TVs... not sure which is the latest model out there.

Calm down, dear, it's a simple question. I don't know anyone who is on any benefits other than JSA (and that's me, for the moment) so I don't know what the assumption is based on. Do you, or are you just spouting the usual bks?

[thinfourth2]

bhstewie said:

thinfourth2 said:

No not a farm shop

A old garden shed at the side of the road

But the point remains it merely pushes more money towards big supermarkets

But not paying so much of your taxes towards benefits means you can put more in the honesty box.

Of course cutting the benefits bill probably wouldn't lead to a tax reduction but that's a different point.

Okay current system

for every £1.00 that goes to a doley it probably costs me £1.10


So you want to introduce a more complex and harder to manage system with more chance for it to go wrong

Do you really think the £1.00 going to the doley will cost more or less then £1.10


I don't know what planet you live on but introducing a more complex system with more folk in it rarely results in lower costs

[Pothole]

thinfourth2 said:

bhstewie said:

thinfourth2 said:

No not a farm shop

A old garden shed at the side of the road

But the point remains it merely pushes more money towards big supermarkets

But not paying so much of your taxes towards benefits means you can put more in the honesty box.

Of course cutting the benefits bill probably wouldn't lead to a tax reduction but that's a different point.

Okay current system

for every £1.00 that goes to a doley it probably costs me £1.10


So you want to introduce a more complex and harder to manage system with more chance for it to go wrong

Do you really think the £1.00 going to the doley will cost more or less then £1.10


I don't know what planet you live on but introducing a more complex system with more folk in it rarely results in lower costs

So I cost you £77 a week? (I'm clearly missing something, aren't I?

[thinfourth2]

Pothole said:

o I cost you £77 a week? (I'm clearly missing something, aren't I?

Yeah you were meant to do my washing

And the garage needs tidying

[eccles]

Chrisw666 said:

It's quite sad but in pockets of society there really are people who are incapable of work, or at least because of their social situation incapable of coping with the routine of regular employment.

I would say that the current system had bred people like this.
How would they have managed to live before benefits?

[jbi]

what's wrong with food stamps like they use in the USA?

Can be swapped for food in the supermarket from a limited menu.

[Caulkhead]

sugerbear said:

Caulkhead said:

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.

How would that happen? Do you want to an an MI system on top of the payment card as well ?

Why the hell would Tesco or Sainsburys want anything to do with this card ? They currently take payment cards but they dont discrimate against the types of items you can buy so it would be their responsiblity to implement something that stopped certain categories of item being sold. Tesco dont report that you spend £x on ciggies and £y on food at the moment, why would they even want to start.

Using a card for benefits payments is fine if you (as a government) want to be able to track the card and who it is issued to, but if you want something that stops spending on certain specific items you have zero chance of that actually being implemented.

Dumb expensive idea.

The payment card would have to have a system to block banned goods purchases so collecting the data would be easy. Any modern EPOS can do this.

Tesco and Sainsburys would not wish to lose such a significant part of their business, so would be happy to accept it.

As I said, excellent idea unlikely to be implemented.

[Caulkhead]

Pothole said:

Du1point8 said:

Pothole said:

Someone above said the money should not be available to spend on ready meals (junk food) but rencet research suggests that they could be 'healthier' (whatever the fk that means) than meals cooked from sratch follwoing popular 'celebrity' chefs' recipes. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20713985

Really... you are going to say that a ready meal is healthier than a gourmet meal that you are supposed to have once in a blue moon, if you ate out of recipe books all the time then you would be dead before 40.

So your ready made meal of macaroni cheese is:
flavourless cheese, sauce and cheapo pasta

gourmet version:
lots of cream and full fat milk in sauce, when creating the pasta, you choose the best flour, butter, etc, cheeses in the form of a mature cheddar and gouda.

Which is healthier and which would you rather have?

Such a non biased article you choose there.

Just throwing something into the mix. I apologise for my awful spelling, too! There appeared to be some rather snobbish intention to force people on benefits to be 'more healthy' as well as trying to force them into unsuitable, poorly paid, soul destroying employment. I am not in favour of that kind of thing.

Remember that next time your taxes increase to cover the benefits bill.

[thinfourth2]

EDLT said:

thinfourth2 said:

fking terrible idea for 2 reasons

1 Would you trust our glorious leaders not to roll this out to everyone that receives some money from the state such as pensioners and then roll it out to everyone so you can only buy government approved goods.

The first bit is a crazy conspiracy theory. The torys are in power, not those evil red-ties!.

Do you want Red Ed the power to say what you spend your money on?

Anyone who wants more state interferance in their lives is bonkers

[SpeedMattersNot]

Caulkhead said:

Pothole said:

Du1point8 said:

Pothole said:

Someone above said the money should not be available to spend on ready meals (junk food) but rencet research suggests that they could be 'healthier' (whatever the fk that means) than meals cooked from sratch follwoing popular 'celebrity' chefs' recipes. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20713985

Really... you are going to say that a ready meal is healthier than a gourmet meal that you are supposed to have once in a blue moon, if you ate out of recipe books all the time then you would be dead before 40.

So your ready made meal of macaroni cheese is:
flavourless cheese, sauce and cheapo pasta

gourmet version:
lots of cream and full fat milk in sauce, when creating the pasta, you choose the best flour, butter, etc, cheeses in the form of a mature cheddar and gouda.

Which is healthier and which would you rather have?

Such a non biased article you choose there.

Just throwing something into the mix. I apologise for my awful spelling, too! There appeared to be some rather snobbish intention to force people on benefits to be 'more healthy' as well as trying to force them into unsuitable, poorly paid, soul destroying employment. I am not in favour of that kind of thing.

Remember that next time your taxes increase to cover the benefits bill.

More like tax increases to cover Tory fox-hunting parties

[vsonix]

Pothole said:

Mr_B said:

Pothole said:

Mr_B said:

Pothole said:

Mr_B said:

EDLT said:

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.

If you don't think there are people who get more than £70 in benefits and happy to live to like that, more fool you.
The point and rough idea was, if you remove simply dropping a sum of money in their bank account for a 2 weekly 5 min visit to a Job center and make it a bit more a of a pain,it will help it not being a lazy system of free cash that just appears in your bank account.
If you were only able to access part of the payment and only able to spend in store on a range of food that wasn't junk food, it would be a small step to dissuade people from picking if they want a job , or just stay on benefits.
It's not a total answer or solution, and the example wasn't a final idea, but simply dropping free cash into someones bank account is hardly motivation for some to get a job.

Have you actually claimed JSA recently?

You do know people get more than just JSA ?

Of course, but your guff about "a 2 weekly 5 min visit to a Job center" would suggest that's what you're talking about.

It comes of a direct result actually. I lost my job aged 37 and was the first time since 17 I had ever been out of work or claimed for a thing. I was very surprised how easy it was to claim and get money.
The day after I lost my job I turned up at the Job Center and was actually told they won't do it here, but if you wanted to make a claim, to do it over the phone, which I did.
I then had an interview at the job center and was givena booklet and agreed a course of work to get me back into employment. It was then every other week at the Job Center to produce the booklet which records what you have done to find work. I think I was set 10 or 15 things a week to show I was looking for work. Given the Job Centers own examples on the form where along the lines of ' Checked online at Job Centers site ' or Called Fred Blobs Builders ' , I found it stupidly easy. The first time I went after 2 weeks I was there 10 mins a quick chat about one of the jobs I applied for. The second time I was waiting in and out in less than 5 mins after the guy just signed off be being there and the booklet looking two pages more full than last week.

I found it so easy and simple, and along with them starting to pay my private rent nearly in full and the discounted council tax, I could quite easily and enjoyably taken 6 months of work, and while not having much cash, would have very possible and very easy.

I'm sorry it doesn't fit with your view you want to project, but that's my experience and I haven't forgot how easy it was or way people would and do simply go this route , rather than cleaning or something for 40 - 50 hours a week and take home less money.

So there was a bit more than just the 2 weekly visits, then? I'm just looking for accuracy. Why should it, for someone in the position you were in for example, be any harder to claim the benefits you did? I'm not sure I agree with the argument that making people jump through hoops unnecessarily encourages them to do more to look for work.

I can just see it now "Oh I wish it was a bit harder to get housing benefit! Please sir, can I fill out a few more forms? Would you like to know when I last bought a pack of cigarettes? No?! Oh, you slackers!"

[crankedup]

Back to Wetherspoons for a moment, now I didn't know until last Friday lunchtime that the Company financial reads like this. For every one pound profit they make eleven pounds is paid in tax.

[SpeedMattersNot]

crankedup said:

Back to Wetherspoons for a moment, now I didn't know until last Friday lunchtime that the Company financial reads like this. For every one pound profit they make eleven pounds is paid in tax.

I'm going there tomorrow at 10am, can't wait.

[joema]

I cant see why they dont send Long term unemployed off to work camp and repair some potholes, community projects or something for 1 or 2 days per week. They can gain some skills (questionable i guess), exercise, socialising and generally doing something to raise their confidence and give them motivation.

If that costs more to do then thats fine as it seems like better value

[Pothole]

joema said:

I cant see why they dont send Long term unemployed off to work camp and repair some potholes, community projects or something for 1 or 2 days per week. They can gain some skills (questionable i guess), exercise, socialising and generally doing something to raise their confidence and give them motivation.

If that costs more to do then thats fine as it seems like better value

I'd actually quite enjoy that. Being unemployed is hellish boring.

[nigel_bytes]

joema said:

I cant see why they dont send Long term unemployed off to work camp and repair some potholes, community projects or something for 1 or 2 days per week. They can gain some skills (questionable i guess), exercise, socialising and generally doing something to raise their confidence and give them motivation.

If that costs more to do then thats fine as it seems like better value

The Tories did that in the early 80s but were accused by Labour(spit) of massaging the unemployment figures.
The community programme,
March 14, 2009
Call to bring back 1980s welfare-to-work programme
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/abbd412e-1037-11de-a8ae-...

[Caulkhead]

Pothole said:

joema said:

I cant see why they dont send Long term unemployed off to work camp and repair some potholes, community projects or something for 1 or 2 days per week. They can gain some skills (questionable i guess), exercise, socialising and generally doing something to raise their confidence and give them motivation.

If that costs more to do then thats fine as it seems like better value

I'd actually quite enjoy that. Being unemployed is hellish boring.

Volunteer for something then, I used to do voluntary stuff for PHAB helping the disabled get jobs and taking disabled kids out off-roading and green laning.