Food Stamps - What's the issue?
Discussion
900T-R said:
Derek Smith said:
It seems that everyone wants to control how others run their lives.
While accepting no control on their own life. Amazing how people tend to be libertarian as long as it's about 'their own', yet want to apply a level of authoritariansim last seen ca. 1933-45 in Central Europe on 'the others'. Caulkhead said:
900T-R said:
Derek Smith said:
It seems that everyone wants to control how others run their lives.
While accepting no control on their own life. Amazing how people tend to be libertarian as long as it's about 'their own', yet want to apply a level of authoritariansim last seen ca. 1933-45 in Central Europe on 'the others'. surveyor said:
Some hard liners on this thread. While everyone on PH is obviously a Director of at least ten businesses and wealthy...
Put yourself in someone else's shoes. Young family, just about keeping head above water, one half loses their jobs. They've paid their NI and are entitled to some benefit - would you claim or let the family go deeper in the dirt?
Then your not earning enough now, as benefits don't replace so your having to juggle while looking for work. What would you prefer stamps or the cash that you can juggle...
So we have a struggling family, having their income cut and despite paying into their NI are told that they cannot buy frozen peas. The comment was not against long term scroungers but those who, after paying NI, were made unemployed.Put yourself in someone else's shoes. Young family, just about keeping head above water, one half loses their jobs. They've paid their NI and are entitled to some benefit - would you claim or let the family go deeper in the dirt?
Then your not earning enough now, as benefits don't replace so your having to juggle while looking for work. What would you prefer stamps or the cash that you can juggle...
NI is not a tax.
Brother D said:
So, something I've never quite got my head around.
What are the issues with providing food/clothing stamps for those who choose not to work? Rather than providing cold hard cash to fund the drugs/booze/holidays/sky/new laptops/mobile phones etc?
Well you could provide food stamps, clothing stamps , bus fare stamps, electricy stamps, gas stamps, water stamps, stamp stamps, telephone stamps, newspaper stamps, stationary stamps, household goods stamp and haircut stamps. Or you could just give people tokens of exchange that can provide all of these with maximum convenience to the tax payer, claimant and business - called money.What are the issues with providing food/clothing stamps for those who choose not to work? Rather than providing cold hard cash to fund the drugs/booze/holidays/sky/new laptops/mobile phones etc?
If you're worried the unemployed are enjoying themselves at taxpayers expense I suggest you stop reading the Daily Mail and try and live on 67 quid a week.
rover 623gsi said:
Caulkhead said:
You mean people who contribute tax expecting some say in how it is distributed to those who don't contribute? Remember the OP was about those who choose not to work, not those trying hard to find work.
by definition, anyone on JSA is trying to find workDerek Smith said:
Caulkhead said:
900T-R said:
Derek Smith said:
It seems that everyone wants to control how others run their lives.
While accepting no control on their own life. Amazing how people tend to be libertarian as long as it's about 'their own', yet want to apply a level of authoritariansim last seen ca. 1933-45 in Central Europe on 'the others'. surveyor said:
Some hard liners on this thread. While everyone on PH is obviously a Director of at least ten businesses and wealthy...
Put yourself in someone else's shoes. Young family, just about keeping head above water, one half loses their jobs. They've paid their NI and are entitled to some benefit - would you claim or let the family go deeper in the dirt?
Then your not earning enough now, as benefits don't replace so your having to juggle while looking for work. What would you prefer stamps or the cash that you can juggle...
So we have a struggling family, having their income cut and despite paying into their NI are told that they cannot buy frozen peas. The comment was not against long term scroungers but those who, after paying NI, were made unemployed.Put yourself in someone else's shoes. Young family, just about keeping head above water, one half loses their jobs. They've paid their NI and are entitled to some benefit - would you claim or let the family go deeper in the dirt?
Then your not earning enough now, as benefits don't replace so your having to juggle while looking for work. What would you prefer stamps or the cash that you can juggle...
NI is not a tax.
Caulkhead said:
Nope, it's an hypothecated tax. Insurance is not income proportional.
Insurance premiums are proportional to risk. Unless in the UK one goes straight from gainful employment to the £67.50 per week JSA, I assume for the first weeks/months of unemployment at least you'd get a proportion of your last earned income like in The Netherlands and most other European countries? Higher income = higer payout = higher risk.
900T-R said:
Insurance premiums are proportional to risk. Unless in the UK one goes straight from gainful employment to the £67.50 per week JSA, I assume for the first weeks/months of unemployment at least you'd get a proportion of your last earned income like in The Netherlands and most other European countries?
Higher income = higer payout = higher risk.
Eh? NI is for health cover. Isn't it?Higher income = higer payout = higher risk.
900T-R said:
Insurance premiums are proportional to risk. Unless in the UK one goes straight from gainful employment to the £67.50 per week JSA, I assume for the first weeks/months of unemployment at least you'd get a proportion of your last earned income like in The Netherlands and most other European countries?
Higher income = higer payout = higher risk.
Nope, everybody gets the same amount. More socialist that way Higher income = higer payout = higher risk.
There is a relatively simple solution and that is to use cash points or a similar system to release cash each day but the card that is issued to do this only works at set hours of the day. So, people have to get up and out of the house each day and only have the money for each day.
Pretty harsh but if someone has been job seeking for 6 months to no avail then switching them onto such a system could have benefits.
Pretty harsh but if someone has been job seeking for 6 months to no avail then switching them onto such a system could have benefits.
900T-R said:
Caulkhead said:
Nope, it's an hypothecated tax. Insurance is not income proportional.
Insurance premiums are proportional to risk. Unless in the UK one goes straight from gainful employment to the £67.50 per week JSA, I assume for the first weeks/months of unemployment at least you'd get a proportion of your last earned income like in The Netherlands and most other European countries? Higher income = higer payout = higher risk.
rover 623gsi said:
Caulkhead said:
Once again, JSA wasn't mentioned in the OP.
then who are these people who "choose not to work"? Listen to the bit where the scrote gets to pay his 12,000th fine for burglary/theft/dealing at @5p per week as he is on JSA.
Who knows you might meet some useful future employees there.
Caution, breath don't hold.
We are all forgetting that 'welfare' is supposed to be about providing a 'safety net', not about maintaining the same human rights as those ith greater means are able to achieve. Some sort of card/voucher/whatever system would seem very sensible to me if it ensures that those with needs are fed, clothed and provided with power/water.
There is such a huge body of evidence pointing to a link between poor nutrition and poor education/employment outcomes, that ensuring the basics are not able to be skipped seems only sensible to me.
The responsibilty of society IMHO is to ensure that those in need stop being in need as soon as possible. If society ignores this responsibility, society as a whole pays a far higher price for a much longer time.
And, yes, I have claimed (before JSA existed). I am aware that each situation is different. But I also know far too many people in my area (East London) for whom benefits are a lifestyle choice.
There is such a huge body of evidence pointing to a link between poor nutrition and poor education/employment outcomes, that ensuring the basics are not able to be skipped seems only sensible to me.
The responsibilty of society IMHO is to ensure that those in need stop being in need as soon as possible. If society ignores this responsibility, society as a whole pays a far higher price for a much longer time.
And, yes, I have claimed (before JSA existed). I am aware that each situation is different. But I also know far too many people in my area (East London) for whom benefits are a lifestyle choice.
stitched said:
rover 623gsi said:
Caulkhead said:
Once again, JSA wasn't mentioned in the OP.
then who are these people who "choose not to work"? Listen to the bit where the scrote gets to pay his 12,000th fine for burglary/theft/dealing at @5p per week as he is on JSA.
Who knows you might meet some useful future employees there.
Caution, breath don't hold.
DonkeyApple said:
stitched said:
rover 623gsi said:
Caulkhead said:
Once again, JSA wasn't mentioned in the OP.
then who are these people who "choose not to work"? Listen to the bit where the scrote gets to pay his 12,000th fine for burglary/theft/dealing at @5p per week as he is on JSA.
Who knows you might meet some useful future employees there.
Caution, breath don't hold.
Would be my guess.
DonkeyApple said:
stitched said:
rover 623gsi said:
Caulkhead said:
Once again, JSA wasn't mentioned in the OP.
then who are these people who "choose not to work"? Listen to the bit where the scrote gets to pay his 12,000th fine for burglary/theft/dealing at @5p per week as he is on JSA.
Who knows you might meet some useful future employees there.
Caution, breath don't hold.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff