[Archived] Government Benefits

[dave birch]

Here's one for you....

In Australia, the Federal Government is widening the use of restricting benefits (so to speak, I can't think of the name they use, ahh Income management, that's it).

What it means is that your government benefit is put on a card (renewable each week/fortnight/month) and is restricted to certain uses, and certain stores.

What you can't do is get cash, buy tobacco, alcohol etc. You are basically restricted to buying food, paying rent, school fees and the like.

You can save up in this account for things like holidays etc.

It allows you to feed the kids, provide them with a home, rather than the benefit being p'd up against a wall, or gambled away.

It's a bit contentious here, what are your thoughts?

[SAS]

Don't really know much about benefits.

All I know is young single mum = sorted for life

[Al]

Brilliant. That would get rid of the dole dossers sitting in Accrington centre with their can of Special Brew and fags whilst their kids survive on a packet of crisps each.

[dave birch]

Don't really know much about benefits.

All I know is young single mum = sorted for life

SAS, Would it make a difference if ysm couldn't spend the benefits on grog, fags and having a good time, that she had to spend it on food, clothes, education and rent?

[T.J.Newton]

sounds good and simple, but im sure the scummy dole dossers/alchies/junkies/fraudsters will still find a way around it and to abuse it.

reminds me a little of when Blackburn council used to give tenants decorating allowances when needed in the form of vouchers that could only be used in diy shops, but there was a few popular independent(cant name them!) diy stores that would simply exchange the vouchers for cash(for a small commission or if you bought a small item).

[SAS]

SAS, Would it make a difference if ysm couldn't spend the benefits on grog, fags and having a good time, that she had to spend it on food, clothes, education and rent?

They get enough money for food clothes and everything and still have money left.

This system you get in Australia will probably make some people resort to buying and selling the items for cash.

[Sparky Marky]

Single mum across from us...5kids...5bed detached new build...just got brand new car and allkids have the latest stuff etc....

Thats Labour for you.....

[Nobert]

That is an interesting way of going about this issue. So it's like a debit card then. Whilst some may moan about civil liberties, I think it is a good idea as some (not all) on the dole have their priorities all wrong and do buy booze and fags before decent food. In time, it will also destroy the stereotype of those being out of work as lazy spongers who are waiting their turn to get shouted at by Jeremy Kyle, as they will be forced to get a job to buy booze and fags.

The benefit system here in Britain is so convoluted and frustrating it seems that unless you have spent time 'studying' the loopholes, and don't want to find a job you're banging your head against a wall. The staff at the job centres are fat arsed, lazy morons who are as helpful as Stevie Wonder in an air traffic control tower and the system forces you to chase down cul-de-sacs over the phone. This needs reforming before you really can do the Norman Tebbit-esque grand standing.

[3rdpillar]

maximum benefit should be minimum wage. End Of. Don't matter how many sprogs you have ( keep it in yer pants and yer legs closed ). Housing Benefit WTF????

[cn174]

maximum benefit should be minimum wage. End Of. Don't matter how many sprogs you have ( keep it in yer pants and yer legs closed ). Housing Benefit WTF????

Well that is what the universal credit is going to try and do when it comes in in March (I think it is). The idea is that all benefits (inc housing benefit) get added together so no household can get more than 26,000/year in benefits (which I guess if you work it out works out at about minimum wage for 2 people). Good idea in theory I think. The main prob now is in the implementation - govt departments aren't supposed to share certain data under the DPA, so its likely some company will get a whopping great contract to take data from all departments add it all up and send it back to DWP to pay benefits. And it wouldn't surprise me if that contract cost outweighed the savings in the benefits.

Interestingly, I currently work for a large housing assoc, and less than half of our tenants claim housing benefit.

[Sparky Marky]

Once upon a time it was kind of embarassing and demeaning to be claiming dole....now its a bloody lifestyle!!

[Paul]

Here's one for you....

In Australia, the Federal Government is widening the use of restricting benefits (so to speak, I can't think of the name they use, ahh Income management, that's it).

What it means is that your government benefit is put on a card (renewable each week/fortnight/month) and is restricted to certain uses, and certain stores.

What you can't do is get cash, buy tobacco, alcohol etc. You are basically restricted to buying food, paying rent, school fees and the like.

You can save up in this account for things like holidays etc.

It allows you to feed the kids, provide them with a home, rather than the benefit being p'd up against a wall, or gambled away.

It's a bit contentious here, what are your thoughts?

Sounds very reasonable to me Dave. I have to manage my son's benefits as his appointee and I can see how such a system would generally be beneficial to claimants. It doesn't apply in Tom's case. However being very aware of how LITTLE disposable income some on state benefits have available it would seem wise to help direct their spending.

Interesting to see saving for holidays is included as I can't imagine affording that on the benefit my lad receives.

You have to hope fast food outlets are not allowed to accept the scheme.

[dave birch]

Sounds very reasonable to me Dave. I have to manage my son's benefits as his appointee and I can see how such a system would generally be beneficial to claimants. It doesn't apply in Tom's case. However being very aware of how LITTLE disposable income some on state benefits have available it would seem wise to help direct their spending.

Interesting to see saving for holidays is included as I can't imagine affording that on the benefit my lad receives.

You have to hope fast food outlets are not allowed to accept the scheme.

A large % of the benefit is put on the card, the rest can be obtained as cash.

The card can only be used in certain stores, for certain goods or services (rent, School fees and the like). It can't be used to purchase alcohol or tobacco.

To date, it's only been used in the remote aboriginal areas and has just been introduced into other areas as a further test.

Some see it a a benefit, as kids get fed, they have a roof over their head and the has been a reduction of alcohol related problems.

Others see it as a bit "nanny state-ish", and others see it as demeaning that people are stigmatised as being a welfare recipient unable to manage their affairs.

At a guess, being card based, it would be easy to find out what for and where the card was being used, reducing the possibility of swapping stuff for cash.

[Jeru tha Damaja]

Others see it as a bit "nanny state-ish", and others see it as demeaning that people are stigmatised as being a welfare recipient unable to manage their affairs.

If you're spending someone else's money then you can't really complain when they want to check what you've spent it on. It isn't a gift and if you can afford to spend that money on unnecessary items then you shouldn't get it.

[Jeru tha Damaja]

How the system makes people feel is irrelevant, really. If you need a hand-out then there's no need to feel guilty about taking it, if there's even the remotest possibility that you could provide for yourself then you absolutely should feel guilty about taking other people's money.

Allowing people to spend their benefits on things they don't need is not really helpful to the economy. Creating jobs for a government agency to monitor the use of benefits, on the other hand, actually has its advantages in a time of recession, even if it does cost more than it saves. Besides, I probably don't speak for too many people here, but I'd rather pay more tax to ensure a fair system than pay half the amount and see it abused. It's not about cost for me, it's a principle.

[T4E]

Single mum across from us...5kids...5bed detached new build...just got brand new car and allkids have the latest stuff etc....

Thats Labour for you.....

Maybe she's got a good job and a supportive family that help with childcare?

I think it's a great idea. Tax payers have the right to know that their money is being spent for the right purposes. If I was on any kind of benefit I would have absolutely no qualms in proving and ensuring it was spent on the things that it was meant for.

Agreed - it would also prompt those that feel the need to drink/smoke to get a job to be able to pay for it. One thing - will crime rates increase and non-desirables have to seek a different route to get what they "need"?

[Sparky Marky]

Maybe she's got a good job and a supportive family that help with childcare?

No...she's bumming off the social.

[Baz]

I think it sounds reasonable, but maybe only for some benefits. Those with disability benefits probably don't have the same level of benefit abuse as others for example.

I see an issue in the administration of the scheme to make sure the money is spent on the right things though. The majority of people shop in supermarkets, that sell everything under the sun, from basic foods through to alcohol, DVDs, games, furniture, ciggies etc. how are you going to make sure people only get benefits for the right items?

[LeChuck]

Surely the biggest issue here is that it would further alienate a section of society that already feel like they are cut adrift?

I think the only thing it would serve to do is appease the feelings of working people who question how their tax money is spent. In reality I doubt it would save enough money to be worth while, and the social impact would be disastrous.

I have no idea what the answer is, but it has to involve making these people feel like they want to contribute to society, and not just push them further away.

[3rdpillar]

Once upon a time it was kind of embarassing and demeaning to be claiming dole....now its a bloody lifestyle!!

Sad, but true.

[adopted scouser]

it has to involve making these people feel like they want to contribute to society

Oh no no no ! They have to feel like they have to contribute to society. You're taliking second, third generation unemployed here, the thought of actually earning their money is a concept completely alien to them.

It doesn't stop at their cash payments, you have all the tips and tricks to gain a shiny East Asian motor from motability schemes etc etc.

So these poor souls are 'cut adrift' from society ? Don't be absurd. Up in Wythenshawe on match day watch these toothless overweight idiots carry boxes of lager back to their Ying Tong 4WD followed by theit own individual bleached Harpy and her spawn.

Absolutely give them coupons, although the sad thing is they'll find some way of selling them, whilst laughing at us silly sods who go to work and pay for it.

[LeChuck]

Oh no no no ! They have to feel like they have to contribute to society. You're taliking second, third generation unemployed here, the thought of actually earning their money is a concept completely alien to them.

It doesn't stop at their cash payments, you have all the tips and tricks to gain a shiny East Asian motor from motability schemes etc etc.

So these poor souls are 'cut adrift' from society ? Don't be absurd. Up in Wythenshawe on match day watch these toothless overweight idiots carry boxes of lager back to their Ying Tong 4WD followed by theit own individual bleached Harpy and her spawn.

Absolutely give them coupons, although the sad thing is they'll find some way of selling them, whilst laughing at us silly sods who go to work and pay for it.

I get as annoyed at those cretins as you do. Honestly I do. I just think such a policy could do irreparable damage without really saving much money.

Like I said though, I have no idea what the answer is and it's blindly obvious that the situation Labour created is definitely not it.

[Jeru tha Damaja]

Welfare should ensure survival, nothing more. It's about providing basic dignities like food, water, shelter, clothing, healthcare and education. Anything beyond that, or any extravagance should not be paid for by the state. If a person has a track record of contributing (i.e. having worked for a number of years) then they get a little more. Simple system.

We shouldn't have to make work look appealing, it would be as good to make unemployment look awful. If you want the pride of ownership or to indulge in a more comfortable lifestyle then that's your look out, you shouldn't expect me to pay for it. Once you have accepted benefits you have a responsibility to the society that has given you a helping hand, but apparently a lot of people don't see it that way.

When it comes to families with lots of children there is a problem for the rest of us. You can't cause those children to suffer because of the circumstances they were born into, which is where it would make sense to hand out vouchers for certain things to ensure that they get what they need without having to trust people to be responsible with money.

[thenodrog]

Unemployment benefits should be absolutely subsistence minimum but subject to 'top up' work schemes. When I look around the town large parts are decrepit and neglected and it's so frustrating to see half the town sat on it's arse rising at noon, switching on Sky TV and living off expensive and unhealthy fast food and strong lager whilst holding their hands out for benefit money. Walls need pointing and/or rebuilding all over the borough, buildings need painting, pavements need weeding and verges need cutting. At present the whole place is beseiged not only by nettles and thistles but by the more sinster ragwort, Himalayan balsalm and japanese knotweed. Billinge Wood itself could do with an army of workers to manage the undergrowth. We pay out money so lets have a bit in return. Who knows some of the claimants might find out that spending days working with a few mates can actually be fun and rewarding.

[Bazzanotsogreat]

Interestingly, I currently work for a large housing assoc, and less than half of our tenants claim housing benefit.

Wowzers I work for a LA in housing and over 80% of our tenanats claim some form of HB.

In theory the system that has been implemented in Australia sounds great, the problem in the UK would be getting around a whole range of EU laws that would challenge and or restrict such a system. Another problem would be keeping on top of scams to bend the system. The government had a similar system for Asylum seekers and people in NASS, all of which has created a black market for the sale vouchers......