OK, so how would YOU change the welfare system?

[MathsMadMummy]

just wondering following on from various threads lately. sorry it's probably been done before.

I guess it's more a question of how you'd change the culture really, where people feel it's their entitlement to never work etc.

I have no idea what the answer is, please tell me your bright ideas

debs vouchers don't work, you take a voucher to a shop keeper and some smaller shop keepers will exchange voucher for fags.

also this would create an underground economy - besides, i think its degrading - its like free school meal tickets innit - poor people go shopping with a special poor persons voucher. degrading.

well said barmy

Oh okay. You do know that they disregard the partners earning if they work below 16 hours anyway, dont you?

BarmyArmy I have been both. At different points in my life, I probably still will be both.

And your suggestion of not listening to poor people rather defeats the object of a democratic voting system./

BarmyArmy you are wrong

Yes, V Singleton. you make valid points.

Bosses will not employ long term unemployed;so they need right to a job of some kind. (above benefit pay.)

What is planned is a crackdown on Incapacity Benefit in October. All
those on it will be called in for interview; even
the seriously ill. (this will need watching)

I suspect the press will have a field day on the mistakes made. A bloke this week in Leeds was told he was fit for work just after a serious operation. The Ministry said they would "look at it again."
We have a big ramp near me which the disabled have to get up to be examined. Purpose built. Are these ramps being built
near you at Government offices? cheers

Yes, V Singleton. you make valid points.

Bosses will not employ long term unemployed;so they need right to a job of some kind. (above benefit pay.)

What is planned is a crackdown on Incapacity Benefit in October. All
those on it will be called in for interview; even
the seriously ill. (this will need watching)

I suspect the press will have a field day on the mistakes made. A bloke this week in Leeds was told he was fit for work just after a serious operation. The Ministry said they would "look at it again."
We have a big ramp near me which the disabled have to get up to be examined. Purpose built. Are these ramps being built
near you at Government offices? cheers

id also take religeon out of schools and close private schools.

every area would have a lottery for a ssecondary school in their borough.

bus passes for senior citizns would NOT be free, they would pay 50p.

no more universal stuff to old people

like tv licence

if as a pensioner you have a good income - you should pay for it.

is winter fuel payment universal? if so scrap that make it means tested.

If I were to split with my DH, drop my work to a cosy little 16 hours per week (Jeez, that's only 2 days a week FGS!)... I would be eligible for all sorts of benefits. My children would probably thank me as they would get £120 a month just for turning up at school! But instead, I stay married and work full time, and my kids do Saturday jobs.

Is it any wonder our system has become a national joke?

Debs, I think it's unfair because most of being a "canny shopper" is a postcode lottery.

if you are restricted by your mobility and need to use the local shop - whether it's because you have 2 sets of twins under 2 or that your back is painful - you are going to spend a lot of money on food. You have no choice.

Whereas someone like me, who can happily walk five miles a day sourcing cheap meat, in season vegetables and raiding all the super markets for cheap knockdown items - I'll stretch my money well, but it's not because I have used my money more wisely, I've just had the opportunity to do so. I still do it now even though I don't really need to.

If you have been both, colditz, then you can reasonably expect to rely on the "insurance" aspect of national insurance i.e. you pay in when you can and when you fall on hard times the state steps in to rpovide a safety net. That is totally different to people who live a life on benefits and never contribute (I would not include the genuinely disabled who obviously cannot work).

also schools would be open far more frequently. the amount of holidays is insane.

But at the heart of benefit restriction is the damage it would do to children. If you think that people who already spend the benefits on fags and booze are going to stop just because the benefits have dropped, you're mistaken. They won't stop. The children will eat 9p noodles on toast. And these people are a miority and won't make a big dent of the benefits budget no matter what you do.

So you take £20 a week of someone because they won't get a job? Fine, says they, my children will eat a worse diet because The Guvverment Took My Money.

Or, you could provide a decent amount of council housing, and in effect take away £600 PCM in benefits with no detriment to the children whatsoever, because the state won't have to fund private rentals any more!

the reason why a NI bank for your welfare - type scheme will not work is becuae the ni we pay today is paying off whats already been spent. its not paying for what we use today....no that will fall on future generations - as i understand it. so if we were to introduce such a sustem, some people would pay double for a time 9 maybe a generation) to enable us to pay for what has been used, before a new system comes into effect.

thinking about it i dont want this country to turn away dying people becuae they cant pay.

mmmmm noodles on toast.

I agree with that colditz; the children would suffer. Then again, if the children live in the sort of hosehold where the parents would make that choice, then they are probably always going to be given the 9p noodles whatever the level of benefit is, the parents would just buy more fags and booze. So the issue isn't the level of benefit, it is those parents and the choices they make.

I agree about more provision of social housing incidentally - I think it stacks up quite well with electricity and food vouchers etc Give people the means to get what they need, not necessarily cash. And yes, the kids will still end up on the 9p noodles because some parents will swap the vouchers for a lower amount of cash on the black market. But then you can't make everyone a responsible parent can you?

I;d educate other people that being a claimant today doesn't mean you ere last week, last eyar, or will be next eyar: that for most it is temporary

That would make a big difference

I would focus on removing the very real barriers to being not on benefits- schemes geting disabled people jobs rather than just saying tehy should have one, childcare access for carers (post on the SN board and you will see how many want to work). Not frree, I am happy to pay standard chidlcare costs but if it's not there I can't can I?

And I wouldn't start massive cuts when peoplea re losing their jobs; compeltely the wrong time to focus, when people look at figures in recessions its always gonna look bad: look at them when jobs are vaialble instead and you might get a better base view

nowt wrong wi' 9p noodles

I agree colditz - but the sad fact is that the State cannot make all children experience equal quality parenting. This is where individual responsibility comes in.

If a parent is going to prioritise fags, booze or a widescreen TV over decent meals, and shoes for their kids, then there comes a point where, let's face it, there's not a lot that anyone can do about it. And if the parents have got those values, then cutting or increasing benefits isnt going to make a whole load of difference anyway, because those parents will always prioritise shit choices over decent choices.

The starting point of any debate needs to recognise that individual freedom dictates that some children will be better parented than others. I agree that the state has a duty of care, but it can only ever be at a basic level.

id make it compulsory for southern chippies to sell chips and gravy and northerners would get a 10% discount

id also make it compulsory for balms and baps to be called MUFFINS

'What is planned is a crackdown on Incapacity Benefit in October. All
those on it will be called in for interview; even
the seriously ill. (this will need watching)

NAS (national Autistic Society) have very scary stuff on their website about how people with autism are falling through those interviews and a lot fo us are expecting that to happen with teh new DLA screen as well: if an untrained admin person cant see the dx in 30 minutes you're stuffed basically.

It won't mean you're cured or you no longer need a carer natch, just that you may as well give up eating coz your money will be pulled.

you can't make evryone responsible but you can remove the temptation for them to be irresponsible.

i know a HORRIBLE woman who doesn't even seem to like her children very much. She does feed them well because she can afford to do that and not go without the things that she perceives she needs. If her benefits were cut, the fruit bowl would go but her fags would not. I would put money on it. She sees her fags as more important for her temper than fruit is for the children's bowels. But as she can afford the fags AND the fruit, she will provide both.

crikey this has taken off. got to go back and read the rest later when I don't have so much studying to do lots of budding prime ministers on MN

I agree that the CSA is a joke, and it rips the shit out of men who do willingly pay while thousands bugger off and don't pay. and whomever said about exPs paying loads while the mum does fuck all and spends his/our money on fags and big TVs and catalogue crap, instead of necessary stuff for his kids? yep, that happens alright
(we no longer pay CSA to DH's ex, BTW, DH's income is too low now - we contribute to them in other ways though)

love the idea of massive companies paying a higher minimum wage, that's great.

also love the idea of some benefits being replaced with vouchers for food/clothing/heating etc. some people (and I don't just mean low income/benefit recipients, I know high earners who do it too) have a completely fucked up idea of priorities. people buying expensive branded stuff but then not being able to feed and clothe their kids. it's warped. I know it's a cliche, the whole 'ooh they've got a plasma telly on benefits' but it's only become a cliche because it really happens.

Violethill I dont agree
Becuase its not the ones who get fed shite but teh ones who dont get fed, the ones who would end up in homeless accomodation (which there wouldn;t be enough of anyway)...

If we had a decent functioning support network to pick up on those cases then there may be leeway but we don't and social services face cuts too, so IMO a base level is protect the children as much as we possibly can.

besides alientaing kids and placing them outside of society won't save a penny in the long term when theyc an't see a point to working, feel rejected and disowned, have had their life chances destroyed (plenty evidence about hosuing etc on education etc) and are used to making do on a pittance anyway