Benefit System Revolution

This has been on the horizon for a while now.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7516551.stm

2 years on social security benefit and one can get a job as a local street cleaner.

There also appears to be some emphasis on drug users, does that mean conviction for possession stops ones right to benefit, sounds like it.

Is this also confronting the rabble of some of our city housing estates ?

 

Im not sure forcing people to work is the best of things
Im not sure i can explain why. I just think theres enough resentment and working with distaste about which cause problems in themselves, and we need to tackle it from a slightly different angle
Id be concerned too about people with mental health issues or health problems that are either not fully recognised or understood or ones that are easy to miss
Forcing someone who is suicidal to mop up vomit on the road isnt going to do much good

I think we should start caring about eachother more. There are far more worrying places tax money is going to be honest. Sure there are a LOT of losers who are lazy and scam and even have a massive family and wear a neckbrace to get more money! These people shouldnt be encouraged and it is shame on them, but there are also the genuine cases who need care and support

Its a tough one, but i dont like to promote the whole fascist "if you dont have a paying job youre a no good hippy bum scrounging off everyone else and you should be forced to clean toilets" view...because not everyone can slot into their little system quite so easily, and having a paying job does not make you a good person. Whats so great about becoming a cog in a nasty machine, working for an unethical shop which exploits people in other countries for example? Is this person better than someone who volunteers with charities in their spare time or writes amazing poetry, or any number of great things that dont class as a job?

I dont think itd work. What about parents? Does this count for them, too?

 

I think one area the UK stands out is unwed mothers - basically if you are a single mom you can stay on benefits for longer than almost any other country in Europe, long after the kid is in school.

I'd like to see that change.

 

All I can say is, it's about time. Although this does need to be implemented carefully (something the government seems unable to do).. those that are actively looking for work and people with disabilities shouldn't be included in this.

My philosophy is, if you don't want to work, fine. Just don't expect me to pay for you not to work.

 

If it wasnt for this very fact id have probably been put in care
My mum was a victim of abuse from my father over a period of ten years. She needed complex psychtherapy to get back on her feet, and i can assure you she STILL thinks about this
She had 3 very young children and 2 older ones when she finally got the courage to leave and nowhere to go. Thankfully she was able to get a few scraps of benefit and a little house for us to live in. This was no luxury, times were tough. We had holey clothes and had to eat tinned meat and beans every day for ages, we slept on mattresses on the floor for a while at one point
The fact is my mum couldnt just have a year out and then be back on her feet ready to work full time again-and shed have probably had to work day and night to get enough money to feed us
She wasnt qualified as shed spent her life raising us, and she was in her 50s by then
Have you ever had 5 kids and a broken spirit?
Circumstances differ and you cant put everyone in one bag

 

its all good n well gettin ppl to stop abusin the system n ting but my aunty physically cant work now and if she dosent get benefits i think its bad

 

Exactly and thats worrying, really worrying...they say youll be assessed by a doctor...who ISNT your GP...so this guys going to be seeing you just the once, probably for about 5 minutes, will assess you and thats it

Firstly itd depend on his stance. Secondly, people have good days. Thats how illness works. Your GP will see both the good and bad days and be able to balance it up. Thirdly some illnesses are very hard to spot and easy to misinterpret, like mental disorders for example

Using the example of my mum above, she would have been denied benefit by one doctor, most likely. Why? Because of all the above-because physically she was fine (most days) and most of all she had built up a massive load of pride as a final defense against her abuse, and she would not show her vulnerability

Working would have crushed her and us and wed have been in a care home within weeks, i just know

 

I'm not going to talk about your mom, I can't know her circumstances. Sounds like she overcame a lot.

But should people be on benefits for decades? Should having a child mean you have a right to benefits for 18 years, when they can go on benefits? Once the state is taking care of your kids at school, is it too much to ask for you to start working, even part time? I'm sure you think your mom deserved/needed the benefits. But what about other people? Who does and who doesn't deserve it?

 

Thats the exact question thats the problem, the line will inevitably be drawn in the wrong places at times, and i feel it is much better to protect those in need and risk a few scroungers than put so many at risk

My mum wasnt on benefits for decades by the way, just longer than a year, and hat was just one example. This new policy is saying you get a year and then your times up. I just dont think thats right

 

A year is nothing, I'm talking about the long term unemployed.

 

I am not sure how this would work, but I am hopeful that this reform may give those currently neglected by the system in terms of training/volunteer opportunities that currently mean you could have benefits affected, may suddenly find the rules are relaxed. And working for benefits may not be such a bad idea. It would discourage those who simply want to live off benefits and not work. Although I am still unemployed, the amount of dissillusionment I have had from New Deal, this is something I would personally opt in too. But I am concerned about abolition of incapacity benefit. What would this mean for those genuinely unable to work?

 

About time we reformed this, although I hate the way people who claim benefits (and immigrants for the record) always seem to be blamed outright for the UK's financial problems... there's way more to it... the government waste shit loads of our money themselves without any help for the people on benefits. If you're ill and / or need help to get over a hard patch I'm more than happy to let part of my wage go you. We fought long and hard for social security and we'd be mad not to fight to keep it. Let's see what the government come up with, I have a horrible feeling it'll hit the most needy the hardest

 

I don't believe anybody is blaming the unemployed for the current economic cycle though to be fair I imagine with the upcoming rise in job losses it would be a handy way to switch the long term unemployed from the register.

I do believe in the right to life but I also struggle with some peoples view that also means someone else should also provide the means with which to do so. Payers into the social network have the right to protection from it those that won't subscribe shouldn't.

 

Believe it, I'd refer you to the Mail but I wouldn't wish that on anyone!

 

Your right not a good source of data, thats why I linked to the BBC

 

Just because WE know it's full of shit dosn't stop a vast section of society buying into it unfortunately... including a good few at my work gaaaaahhhhhhh!!

How do you mean... what would be your guidelines for who's entitled?

Born here? Worked here for a period of time? Never broken the law?

I think there's so many grey areas to deciding who's entitled to benefits.

 

I agree the world is fool of fools, but y'know you can't keep worrying about them, they've either have or haven't I've decided and just get on with it.

Nothing regarding entitlement limits just a general gripe at a couple or so characters that share my existence now and again, dear though that they are.

Mostly I think it is just politicing, easy points with middle england sorting out the scroungers, it really is small beans in the grand order of things but because it can affect a lot of people it maybe perceived as strong government, perhaps.

 

My partner is on incapacity. He is genuinly unable to work. Every 6 months he has to attend a medical which is done by a government worker not his GP.

Just over a year ago we decided to get a flat together and worked out that with my apprentice wage and his benefits, we could just about do it.

At this time he had just had a medical (home visit) done by a woman who had previously done it. However this time she seemed to not listen to him, and actually got shirty/snappy and overall very unprofesional. To get benefit, you need to gain a certain amount of points. She graded him at 1 below the needed amount.

After checking out the news online etc i discovered that the government had recently decided to have a big push to get people off benefit. Seems like their attitude was to kick everyone off, and then let those back on who question the decision. Takes about 4 months to process this and have benefit reinstated.

Ok thats all well and good when looking at it... however the implications for those who require the money to live is a lot bigger. especially considering the initial problem itself for my partner was mental health.

The way i see it is that no matter what changes are made, the overall plan is to get as many people off it as possible even if they require it... use the cash for other things eg military and defence. Being synical i could say they might use it to increase the governments personal budget each year

 

This sounds like the final move toward destroying the support systems that have been the political successes of the 20th century. We are already beginning to hear the sounds of a privatized medical service. If we decide to make people work for their welfare then will they be entitled to a fair pay, minimum wage at least? Which isn't a bad improvement on many people's circumstances, but what about those who are already employed in these areas, do we just ignore them?

Again this is just a stupid political manoeuvre that works toward destroying Labours credibility. Lets be honest, people who claim income support and the various benefits available are a drop in the ocean to the total bill for what it costs in public/SOCIAL services.

This stupid idea throws up more questions than can be answered.

 

Anything that can stop long term unemployment must be a good thing.Perhaps the current proposals have yet to be scrapped and replaced with a robust system. Under Labour, this remains a dream. Under Tory, this may become a reality.