to think that there are people who choose to live a life on benefits?

[autumnlights12]

the recent threads about George Osbourne made me wonder..
A high number of posters say that people don't choose to live like that, they stumble into it, hate it, what a miserable existence it is, nobody would ever choose it etc..
but if you have two or three children through choice, whilst at the same time having no job to provide for them, or if you turn down the job at the local factory (as I know someone who did) because it pays £7.50 an hour and a full time job there doesn't give you the same unemployment rights and benefits, isn't that choosing to live a life on benefits? Or being trapped on benefits? I'm not talking about people who can't work, disabled people, ill people, women dumped by feckless ex and left to fend for herself etc.. of course they should be protected.
I was watching 999 What's Your Emergency and I know that area. And I know people like that exist. And it's often a second, third generation who have never worked a day in their life, even during times when work was freely available. In the town I live, we have numerous Eastern European immigrants who all seem to be working, but mostly in low paid work the locals wont do
What say you?

garlic get it right she implied its made up but if its not then you must eat crappy junk food drink and smoke to much, so clearly you cant be trusted to choose your own food, but thats not because your ill but because you may be poor.

dont forget all poor people should be very very grateful to xenia because she only goes to work to feed you, not because she wants her own money or anything like that. you should be very greatful that she has bestowed not only her tax's on you but her eating advice as well you lucky lucky lady.

You're so right, Sock!

bitofa make to lists on one put the amount you recive in CA then the childcare cost,and travel to work costs, dont forget to add the additional time dc's will be in childcare while you travel to work and back (thats if you will be dropping them befor you go and getting them back after) in the next list write your weekly wage. deduct that from your first list then you will know how much you will be down.

im guessing its going to be about twice as much as you think.and dont forget as long as you have a entitlement to ca your pension contibution is also done for you.

im also guessing that chances are your family is one that probally cant afford the hit. just like the other 70% of the uk and im saying this again so you know i mean it you are a carer not a scrounger

Xenia people like you live in cloud cuckoo land.

Making people use vouchers / a card scheme will not stop people who are determined to spend their money on drugs, or to drink.

Junkies are nothing if not inventive when it comes to getting money to score drugs. They will either sell on what they buy in the supermarket, or give their cards to their dealers.

My grandfather came from a country which was part of the USSR. Alcohol was rationed under communism. A thriving bootleg alcohol industry grew up, to the point that even today in Russia bootleg alcohol accounts for a huge amount of deaths among men.

What a voucher / card scheme does is penalise many honest people who are already trying to eat and live healthily on very little money.

If the cards / vouchers are only taken in participating places like supermarkets for example than that seriously limits people's choices. They won't be able to chose to spend cash down the local market / with the local farmer for cheap eggs / fruit / whatever (as we can do near where I live) / or on second hand goods like car boot sales / second hand shops / ebay etc, which are a real godsend if you're struggling.

The supermarkets will benefit greatly from this, but it won't make people healthier, it'll simply stigmatise people, reduce their choice and make their lives harder.

From that post about the cards it says its only for "troubled" families.

How is that determined? A dx of alcoholism or drug addiction? Asbos?

The 1200 troubled families come from a study done by the coalition earlier this year. They could only find about half a dozen of the supposed long-term unemployed, addicted, deeply dysfunctional families they've been telling the media and conference delegates about. So, instead of saying "We couldn't find this tranche of trouble, perhaps we were wrong", they extrapolated their findings on no viable statistical basis whatsoever to 1,200.

Since these 1200 families do not exist - or, if they do, none of the multiple bodies tasked with finding them could do so - interventionist sanctions can't be applied to them exclusively. They'll have to roll this Mastercard moneyspinner out to all claimants. Thus handing even more taxpayer pounds over to the big banks and supermarkets, robbing independent traders and SMEs of everyday custom and generally fucking things up worse.

If you'd told me, even five years ago, that a fictional 1,200 British families would be used to stream public money into large, foreign-owned corporates, I'd have thought you a raving loon. But that's what this scheme is.

Will it actually get passed though? Is it even legal?

Tbh my anxiety levels continue to rise with every mention of this government. Why should anyone limit what we spend when we are looking after our family just because a few dont? We dont want to be claiming benefits. But theres no other choice right now. Yet we are being treated like children who dont know how to budget or prioritise.

I feel helpless.

I feel helpless.

YY but don't worry because you'll get a leaflet telling you how to shop for food, which will be empowering claimants to live well or some such bollocks. You will definitely be given some 'empowerment' as you're robbed of your free will, anyhow.

I really wouldn't worry about legality, either. Laws are being changed and/or applied in different ways almost daily now. Did you know you risk life imprisonment for a peaceful protest? Never mind, it's empowered democracy.

I'd better get off this thread and watch something less upsetting on the telly like the propaganda leading to our invasion of Iran. Nah, forget it, I'll eat biscuits instead. (Am I allowed biscuits??)

I don'tt hink it will happen but it's party conference season when all parties trot out stuff they think will go down well with their own. However the Tories and Labour all want to help the core problem families who usually have a range of issues from drugs to drink and are mired into permanent poverty down the generations - the 120,000 mentioned above. The suggestion is that they may receive these cards. Food stamps was rejected as they then were sold on in the US. I doubt anyone will want to sell on their carrots or eggs ration although of course its possible. If the children of these people are going hungry and these cards don't work we will have to think of another way to feed them. School breakfast and a tea at 6 would be one possibility.

I do think something needs to be done to address so called "problem" families.

I just dont think controlling their every move will help them.

If someone is an alcoholic and they cant buy their alcohol, they will steal it. Keep doing that they will end up in prison. Their kids? In care.

Prison and kids in care will cost a hell of a lot more to the tax payer than £71 per week.

It just doesnt make sense.

Why not do that straight off, Xenia? Feeding deprived children a healthy diet at school is time-honoured and effective. They could even make a small start by bringing back school milk ...

the core problem families who usually have a range of issues from drugs to drink and are mired into permanent poverty down the generations - the 120,000 mentioned above.

Once again. Only 4,200 people have been on JSA for five years or more.

No garlic. No biscuits. They will make you depressed.

Eat grapes instead.

Wherever the money is coming from, it's terrible to think of children going hungry while the family income is spent on drink or drugs. Friends of mine fostered two girls whose mother was addicted to crack. The cooker in her flat had never been plumbed in. They shoplifted biscuits for breakfast and dinner and their free school lunch was their only hot meal. Their feet were distorted because there was no money for shoes. State benefits did not keep those children out of deprivation. They would have done better with a free breakfast club and after school meal.

Typo correction. 4,220 people have been on JSA for 5+ years.

Source: Office of National Statistics. Date January 2011. Reason for old data: method of counting long-term claims was changed in 2011. Thus, conveniently, measurements over time cannot accurately be made.

I last did the numbers in early spring this year. Happy to look at alternative interpretations, but not if they're done by rank amateurs or number-fudgers (ie, national press or any govt body other than DWP.)

Well, that's not very many Garlicbutty. Not many at all.

Yes, if we can afford it we could provide free breakfast and tea for children on free school meals as long as I get to control its content. I want those children to have eggs at breakfast (not cereal, carb, sugar etc) and their tea will be tuna fish and salads and things like that not fish fingers, chips, bread and junk food.

Grapes are better than biscuits, but they are still fructose. I am not saying never have them but not all the time.

That's more than a little disingenuous garlic, even I know that JSA is no the one that "pays" - if I were to opt for a life of handouts I wouldn't aim for JSA. I thought everyone knew the figures were fudge and that long-term unemployed are shoved on to other benefits.

But if you did want a life on benefits what would you do? You start on JSA and then what...? I thought you couldn't keep turning down jobs. Get pregnant. You only have to look if your child is at school. But surely even that option runs out.

long-term unemployed are shoved on to other benefits - Agreed, but several here have said not. All now being shoved back on to JSA. Confusing ... !

Men cant get pregnant. And couples cant claim income support because they have a child.

So what benefit are capable men being pushed onto?

I don't know enough about the different types of benefits. People the age of my children and stage would be on JSA. If you are ill or disabled then that's different.

If you are not ill at all but cannot look for work - eg looking after a baby but unlike people like I am who are back at work after 2 weeks you seem to think you have a god given right to be kept by people like I am because you have a baby you cannot afford... those ones get Income Support. You get IS if your child is under 5. So all you need to do is have a baby every 5 years and you can keep on getting IS and not have to look for work... sorted... This is the Uk in 2012.

And how much is Income Support?

£71 over 25. £68 under 25. I think.

Income support accounts for single women.

What about the men and couples?