Thread 2 - To be agreeing with new conservative benefits proposal re alcohol

Bring back luncheon vouchers.

Where's the first thread, can anyone link? thanks.

What is the proposal? Do you have a link explining more about the subject, please?

I think its ridiculous, people will find ways around it as previously said.
Many years ago l was very poor and had milk tokens for kids. Our local shop would take them for anything, cigarette, wine, food.
If someone on benifits chooses alcholol over food, what difference does it make. If they have kids it will be the kids that suffer not the adults.

Which will cost how much more than just giving cash?

They've also said they weren't going to give cash. I know people who use cash because it's easier to budget and keep an eye on what money they have. I did this as a student.

The money from the average tax payer that goes to people in these circumstances is less than £2 per week. The amount of that they'd be spending on alcohol, cigarettes and gambling after they've paid their utilities, food, clothes etc would be so little you'd probably not bother picking it up if you dropped it. So I'm a bit so what about it too.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c920vy2jxle8o

Everyone in the wider society suffers when kids suffer.

One thing I have noticed over the years is that no expense is too great when it comes to teaching the poor a lesson.

In the US, 'food stamps' aka SNAP benefits are given to people who can't afford to feed their families or themselves (or so the theory goes anyway).

The head of household or the individual receives a preloaded card that can be swiped at the checkout. Money is automatically loaded onto the card monthly.

The SNAP card cannot be used to buy alcohol or certain other items (personal hygiene, household stuff like tin foil, etc). SNAP cards can be used to buy potted herbs or tomato plants, or other food plants, and also seeds for food plants.

Disallowed items (alcohol, etc) will be scanned at the checkout and processed as owed by the customer. The card will not pay but will pay for all allowed items as long as you have enough $$$ loaded on your card.

I fully agree with it

Not really sure aping the US (with its dazzling array of state and federal level schemes) is necessarily going to make things better.

I mean I am thinking (maybe unfairly) of all the other US ideas we imported, like private utilities which have done so much to boost UK living standards.

If something like this is introduced it could be an app with facial recognition or similar - maybe fingerprint. Then a recipient can check how much credit they've got left. Might work similar to the US Snap card mentioned above. For those without phones a card maybe, but I don't know what anti fraud measures could be used with that, maybe a pin or something.

Anyway, whatever happens, there are ways around it I suppose.

But surely a retailer that sells prohibited goods to a recipient could be prosecuted? It would depend on how the law is framed around it.

As long as recipients get their due amount, and have enough in benefits for the essentials, it is surely fair that Government prohibits "luxury" goods. But maybe I am too harsh, and knee jerk about it.

What we really need is a currency which allows a different exchange rate depending on how deserving you are.

Very deserving (i..e rich) and your £1 buys you £1 worth of goods

Not so deserving (poor or just not the right sort) and your £1 only buys you £0.90 worth of goods.

Would also tackle inflation.

Fellow posters concerned with the treatment of the poor are free to check the idea with their AI agent of choice

About 14% of tax and NI goes towards working age benefits.
Up to 30% of this is paid to landlords, so around 10% of the amount you pay goes into claimants pockets.
Half of these claimants are not required to work due to sickness disability or care commitments, taking the percentage of your tax that goes to Badenoch's target group down to 5%.
A further 37% are in work, so again, not the target group, taking it down to 1.85% of the tax you pay.
From this group, you then need to exclude the 60% who have been unemployed for under 6 months, as Badenoch has excluded them from the policy, giving you a final percentage of tax paid for the target group of 0.7%.
The average paid by a UK tax payer is £8300 per year, 0.7% of which is £58 per year. So actually just over £1 a week, but I rounded up.
I don't think the government do want to change it, do they? I thought it was Badenoch's suggestion not the governments.
Why she'd suggest all that palaver to save the average tax payer 30p a week, I don't know. Perhaps she didn't do the sums and thought no one else would.