Is this likely to happen? Benefit related.

[littlemisssarcastic]

And where would it end?? Is this just the start of a slippery slope ?

Tell that to the young lady with CF who has just had her money reduced to £21 a week.

No wonder the Tories are in government albeit a coalition. I think they will get in again with an even larger majority. Not saying I think this is a good thing but it's what will happen. Just because a person doesn't agree with you Darkesteyes doesn't mean they are thick, naive, a DM reader or whatever. What a patronising attitude. I wasn't going to post on this thread again. It's not good for my blood pressure.

In theory its a good idea BUT it would single people out clearly with the cash cards, it would probably lead to a thriving black market too!

It would help if people didnt post bare faced LIES on here. Being called ignorant because i pointed out the fact that GIROS HAVE BEEN PHASED OUT so there is NO WAY that Ghostship has seen people cashing giros "many times" Thats bullshit.

It would also lead to more hate crime.

Tell what to this lady?

What does changing the way benefits are paid have to do with disability benefits being cut? They are completely separate subjects and your opinion on one does not give an automatic guarantee of your opinion on the other FFS.

I called you ignorant because of your assumption that Ghost has been influenced by right wing press, not because of what you said about giros.

I didnt say anyone was thick. I said people should think outside of there own circumstances.
Be careful what you wish for.

OutragedAtThePriceOfFreddosFri 21-Dec-12 13:48:03

Maybe she is thinking for herself, and just happens to disagree with all the leftie socialists on here.

It seems to be ok for you to make assumptions though. Different rules for different folks again.

I don't see how it would single out people on cards at all. How would anyone else know?

I use my debit card in shops, I can't say I've ever noticed anyone looking at what type of card I'm using, nor have I ever noticed what type of card other people are using. Why would I? it's not interesting.

And if people can't tell who else has been put on a card, then there would be no reason for it to increase hate crime. That's just scaremongering.

That's not making an assumption Darkest, it's making a suggestion. I'm sure you are intelligent enough to read the word 'maybe' and be able to see the difference.

Increase hate crime. I've never heard such nonsense. There is nothing wrong in theory with paying people part of their benefits with a card which enables them to buy food and other essential items. I certainly would not object to it if that was me getting the card. And what's this be careful what you wish for stuff. I've been hard up at times in my life. It's difficult. I wouldn't have objected to a food card if I had qualified for one.

I wouldn't object if I needed the card either.

I expect someone has already said this but articles like this crop up every couple of months, they did so under the Blair and Brown governments too.
Remember how all the parents of truanting children were going to be thrown into jail, or have their benefits cut, and how outraged we all were?

If you read the article, there are several points to note. These include:

Mr Shelbrooke, a Conservative MP, is a parliamentary private secretary at the Northern Ireland Office . . . He made the suggestion as a backbencher in the House of Commons

• he's a backbencher, a PPS for Northern Ireland. He might as well have made his suggestion in the pub

and

His Bill has no realistic prospect of becoming law

also

Iain Duncan Smith . . . is examining whether the law can be changed to specify how claimants spend their benefit money.

• if this would need a massive change in the LAW, then it is not currently LEGAL to do this.

I don't think people should be all that worried about this. However, outrage at plans like this should always be expressed, lest they start to actually think they could get away with it.

"People who choose not to be part of society are a cost to society in more ways than just what is paid out in benefits. They bring up children to have no aspiration, to become disengaged, who may then turn to drugs and other crimes."

And limiting people's purchasing power (by limiting their access to cash, second hand goods etc) is going to help how exactly?

It won't, it'll just make those children's lives more miserable.

Job creation on the other hand could make a massive difference to many people's lives.

I think it will happen. Further benefit cuts are inevitable.
I'm not sure how it will work.
I have links to a food bank, the majority who go there have alcohol, drug or debt problems... Leaving no cash for food. Their kids look too skinny and Unwell. Would such a scheme help resolve alcoholism and drug addiction and spiralling debt. Who knows?

It might help by encouraging people who can to get jobs, and by those people encouraging their children to get jobs, even if those jobs are voluntary with a view to increasing future earring potential. Those things help people engage with society so that they don't feel the need to turn to crime, drugs, alcohol, or other anti social behaviour.

This thread shows that many people won't like having to have cards instead of cash, so if it makes even a few people choose work instead of choosing benefits, then that is a good thing.

This thread is so frustrating. It makes me so sad.

I do wish people would realise that the majority of people who are on one form of benefits such as JSA and IS do NOT choose to be in receipt of said benefits.

It's not about the majority of people choosing benefits or work. Those who do want work are finding it increasingly difficult to find employment. Never mind employment that pays a wage that means they do not receive any form of benefit.

I feel I am banging my head against the proverbial wall though. Always astounds me that people only hear what they want to.

It's not that people are only hearing what they want to, well, not for me anyway.

I'm well aware that benefits is a miserable existence on a pitiful amount of money if you have lost your job through redundancy.

There is no reason why schemes like this couldn't be used only for people who have obvious social problems and who are form families who have never or rarely worked. They don't have to be given to people who are receiving disability related benefits, or to those who have been unemployed for only a small amount of their working age lives.

"There is no reason why schemes like this couldn't be used only for people who have obvious social problems and who are form families who have never or rarely worked. They don't have to be given to people who are receiving disability related benefits, or to those who have been unemployed for only a small amount of their working age lives."

Firstly that's not what's being proposed, so I don't understand the point of talking about it.

Secondly, deciding who did and didn't get the money would be a logistical nightmare, totally impractical! It's hard enough to work out who should receive money when the yardstick is something tangible like - for example - income.

Trying to identify "people who have obvious social problems" to then penalise them would be an absolute nightmare, very costly with very little benefit to anyone! (Except big business).

Please, can we stick to what is actually being proposed - or sensible suggestions, rather than this fantasy world stuff?

"It might help by encouraging people who can to get jobs"

Might! Is that really worth making life more miserable for everyone on benefits.

What's the point of this? To get people into jobs, or to make life more miserable for everyone on the dole, while lining the pockets of big business?

If the point is to get people into work, then there are many more credible, cost-effective ways to do this, which won't result in punishing vast swathes of people.

On the other hand, if the point is to make life more miserable for everyone claiming benefits, while lining the pockets of big business, well then it would have a good chance of succeeding.

But we aren't talking about all benefit claimants if we are discussing the article linked to in the OP, we are talking about problem families. So I don't know what you are on about tbh.

From the article

One idea under discussion in Whitehall is for the 120,000 problem families who were identified in the Government?s riots review to be given the Oyster-style cards.

See? Not everyone. Just problem families.

But that wouldn't work, Outraged. It's discrimination. You cannot seperate and segregate people into groups to suit a certain section of society.

I think it's a dreadful shame that instead of frightening the crap out of people, and making a lot of people feel even worse about themselves and the situations they have found themselves in, (the majority of which was through no fault of their own,) this coalition doesn't to more to find solutions to the problems we have.

Threatening people never works.

Where are their ideas/plans for job creation ? Where are their ideas/plans for helping people in their 40's/50's/60's and cannot find work/ retrain ?
Where are their ideas/plans for the younger generation, who have left school/college with qualifications but no experience of the working world ?

They have nothing, because we are in such a deep recession (just about triple dip, it won't be long) that at the moment there isn't anything they can do, well they could, but they won't.

Everything, including the economy, is going backwards. Not getting better, not improving, it's 'not as bad as they expected' (after it's been revised). But whether we like it or not, things are getting worse.

As others have said, on numerous threads like these, there but for the grace of God go I. Your life can change when you least expect it, for a multitude of reasons you would never expect.

....doesn't do more..... (Sorry)

Have the day off today and just come back from having my nails done. There were three young women in there two of whom had their daughters who looked about 10. All of them were having their nails re-done. They were on benefits and not working because they were so loud their conversations could be overheard by all of us and they shared all of this with the rest of the salon. They talked about going out this weekend and also about the fact that they didnt feel what they got from the state was enough and it wasnt fair that they couldnt afford to get a taxi to the nightclub on Saturday night until one of them said they might be able to get someone's friend to take them!

In all honesty - is this that unusual? Some posters are saying there are only a few people like this. There arent there are lots of people who feel the state owes them the same standard of living as everyone else regardless of the fact they dont work or dont want to.

And no it wasnt a special treat. They had loyalty cards and the owner did seem to know them.

So, is it any wonder that benefits are being reviewed.