The Big Benefits Row

[abillybob]

I see the logic behind depression and I know it's an actual illness that can effect people severely heck my nan had depression severely at one point. The problem is now that so many people use the term depressed to get a bit more benefits from the state it angers me. I understand fully that people have depression but it'd be very hard to argue that it would stop you from sitting at a desk a few hours a day and doing some work??? Please let me know if you think I'm wrong but please do understand I do know depression effects people but it does get used so many times nowadays as government schemes will now give you more money if your depressed and on benefits and it impacts on those that are actually depressed. People who don't work and don't do anything all day when perfectly capable I can't understand how they are depressed. You get depression from work, stress, anger. But if you're not doing any of these things everything being paid for you how can you be depressed?

[synaesthesia]

I don't think you understand enough about it to be making such statements. Evidence to that effect is "I see the logic". There isn't any. Edited February 4, 2014 by synaesthesia

[Garacesh]

Oh for fu-.. I had a huge post written out and somehow the page refreshed itself and lost it all. Grrr! Time to re-write..

 

From my own experience, and I fully announce this is all subjective, the jobcentre don't care. They just don't give a toss.

 

I was having difficulty finding work and was placed at a council warehouse via the Future Jobs Fund, supplying Sixtown Housing with their resources for council house repairs. I leapt at the chance to do six-months real work and earn an actual paycheque. Three weeks to the end of that placement I was told there wasn't any way they could keep me on permanently, so I accepted a job offer I had elsewhere at a telesales company (who I won't name due to libel/slander as of what I'll say next..) This company sold sponsored listings on Google (they sounded like SEO when I applied, first red flag) and it was my job to phone worldwide and get people signing up to it. After the training (which took up the entirety of day 1), they gave us a basic script that we could loosely work to, one of the points being to tell the users how many times X query had been searched on Google in the last month. Problem is, there's no way to actually check that so far as I knew, and neither did the other staff. When I asked about it, I was outright told to lie because nobody could prove me wrong. That, combined with the fact that the management had no problem with one of the other workers spewing racially-charged insults at somebody they had cold-called.. I reported the company to Trading Standards and quit outright on the second day.

 

I phoned my old boss (from the warehouse) and asked if I could finish my placement there, in the hopes of having another months' pay whilst I looked for more work, but I was informed that wasn't possible as the paperwork had already been filed for me leaving. So I had no choice but to return to the jobcentre and explain my circumstances to them. The work I was doing was illegal as far as I was concerned (it would be mis-selling) but they would have none of it. I quit, therefore I had to wait 6 weeks to sign on again. I asked them to phone my old boss and confirm I had even offered to return to work there, but they wouldn't lift a finger to help me, because 'I put myself in that situation'. After having to borrow a few hundred pounds off my mother for food, rent and bills I finally got signed on again.

 

The advisers were of no use to me. They told me at first my search net wasn't wide enough and I were to travel 90 minutes in either direction to find work (which would lead to up to three hours of commuting per day) which, when you don't drive, is pretty difficult. Adding to that, they would often order me to apply for jobs I did not meet the criteria for, such as a home decorator that required a CSCS card, multiple jobs requiring a full drivers license and own vehicle, or a gardener-landscaper job that required I provided me own tools. Other times it would be jobs that simply did not pay enough as I lived on my own at the time. I gave them a list of my outgoings, bills, rent, foregoing any luxury (my phone contract was cheap, as was my internet, both which were required in order to find work, I had no TV package, etc) and explicitly told them "I simply cannot accept any job that pays less than this." but they weren't having any of it, and gave me conflicting information about whether or not I would be able to 'top up' my earnings with benefits if I didn't earn a sufficient amount. I regret to admit I ended up applying for these jobs with multiple spelling and grammatical errors in order to ensure I didn't get a callback, because I was told if I were offered the job, I had to take it. If I didn't, my benefits would stop.

 

I can sympathise with them a little, I must admit. Countless times I saw the 'typical lot' signing on with the latest iPhone or brand new £30 trainers, and we all know those types exist. But I genuinely was not one of them, yet I felt I was still treated as such. I wasn't a person looking for work, I was a number. Their aim was "Get a job", regardless of if it would potentially cause me to not be able to afford my bills. I was ushered in, and ushered out just as quickly once I'd signed and been given a job to apply for, even after providing sufficient information about jobs I had already applied for. It felt like no matter how hard I tried, it wasn't 'good enough' for them, or that they considered my job hunt entries were forgeries and I wasn't applying for anything.

 

Anyway..

Honestly I think food stamps and photographic ID are the way forward. The jobcentre have deals with Burton and other companies for clothing grants if you need to refresh your wardrobe for an interview, I'm certain the same could be done with the large supermarket chains. Even if it means spending half an hour to an hour with each new claimant deciding the allocation of food/clothing/etc ratios (as admittedly each circumstance is different). The ID would be required as people who wanted to use their JSA to fund an alcohol habit would probably just sell their food stamps at less-than-worth and then just go and spend the money. Our current benefits system does nothing to help the true jobseekers and nothing to 'kick off' those that aren't trying to help themselves. I've also heard plenty of stories - though not experienced it myself - of those genuinely unable to work being treated unfairly. The entire system needs a shake-up and clean-down.

[abillybob]

No but if your friend gives you £10 as you're struggling to buy essentials for your home and then you went and spent it on fags and booze would you see that socially acceptable? Point being is the tax payer is the friend and the person on benefits is misusing. It angers me as I'm paying for my girlfriend mum to buy fags and alcohol in excess and yet my girlfriend has had the same mattress for the last 10 years! All about priorities and if people aren't going to set their priorities straight the tax payer should be able to dictate what other people are spending their tax money on!

 

As for "vouchers" - hell no! I don't believe governments or society should have the right to dictate how I choose to live my life in that level detail. 1984.

[abillybob]

I didn't mean it in literal terms what I meant by this was I understand what you were trying to say and I understand depression does effect people in a bad way! I do understand it enough my auntie has depression (still works mind) and so does my nan I've heard all about it and experienced what depression does!

I don't think you understand enough about it to be making such statements. Evidence to that effect is "I see the logic". There isn't any.

[localzuk]

You are wrong. Simple as that. It is not up to the government to decide if someone is well or not. Its up to doctors. If a doctor signs you off as depressed, that is good enough for me. My mother has suffered with depression for many years, to the extent that many days she couldn't even get out of bed. How could someone hold a job in that state?

 

You don't get depression from just work, stress and anger - depression is an illness caused by a great many things, such as bereavement, other illness, a relationship failing. Some people are susceptible due to having low self esteem or being too self-critical. It can be a family trait even! Pregnancy/giving birth can cause it. Loneliness. Alcohol/drug addiction.

 

A great many causes.

[mthomas08]

I liked the quote of the man from Africa in benefits street who said: In Africa if you don't work you don't get simple as that. For people with severe disabilities benefits should be allowed for but not for people who can sit at a desk and type on a keyboard "depression" doesn't stop you typing on a keyboard!

 

Thing is if the system doesn't get sorted out we have one outcome and the government has already started it. Which simply is squeezing the system until there is very little left. As shown in this discussion there are people who still feel its their right to get it and do what they want with it.

A system will get abused but our benefit system is far too easy to abuse. It really does turn me in to fury simply because I know people who should be on benefits and they get so little because of the scroungers. Maybe its the area I grew up in, I actually do know streets like what was on TV. I actually do know several people living the easy life and don't want to work. I also know people who have family who do the exact same thing.

 

Its a system being over abused and it will continue to be squeezed because people like me will vote for anyone (yes anyone) who is prepared to be hard on the benefit system.

[abillybob]

I'm sorry if I've offended anyone with the depression thing that really didn't mean much to me it was just an example I was putting across and it was probably used wrongly so I apologise for this! It's just a subject that angers me as I experience it first hand and my girlfriend is always the one that suffers as her parent would rather spend 100's a week on booze, cat food and fags rather than their children. It's a topic that really angers me and it's funny that when I was talking to my girlfriends mum and asked her about depression she just winked and did a money sign and laughed, she told me it helps towards costs and that she doesn't she just played the doctor! You can't prove depression it's like whiplash! But that's another story I'm not going to post any more on this as the topic just makes me angry!

[tmcd35]

No but if your friend gives you £10 as you're struggling to buy essentials for your home and then you went and spent it on fags and booze would you see that socially acceptable? Point being is the tax payer is the friend and the person on benefits is misusing. It angers me as I'm paying for my girlfriend mum to buy fags and alcohol in excess and yet my girlfriend has had the same mattress for the last 10 years! All about priorities and if people aren't going to set their priorities straight the tax payer should be able to dictate what other people are spending their tax money on!

 

Tobacco and alcahol are drugs. People who have been dependant on them for any length of time, most start experimenting as teenagers remember, don't have any real choices. It's a drug dependancy and society should treat it as such. Maybe there's more the medical profession can do to help these people? Maybe there's more that can be done to educate at a younger age so they don't full into this trap.

 

Dictating how the majority must live their lifes based on the poor choices of a minority is wrong. It's big brother. Will you give up your personal freedoms that easily?

 

To my mind what you are describing is a social problem not a welfare problem.

[Garacesh]

Tobacco and alcahol are drugs. People who have been dependant on them for any length of time, most start experimenting as teenagers remember, don't have any real choices. It's a drug dependancy and society should treat it as such. Maybe there's more the medical profession can do to help these people? Maybe there's more that can be done to educate at a younger age so they don't full into this trap.

 

Dictating how the majority must live their lifes based on the poor choices of a minority is wrong. It's big brother. Will you give up your personal freedoms that easily?

 

To my mind what you are describing is a social problem not a welfare problem.

 

I think you're taking it a little too far. Stamps/vouchers wouldn't be to the tune of "You have to go to Asda, buy a loaf of bread, a tub of butter, 2 pints of semi-skimmed milk, a pack of 6 tomatoes' etc. More, (or at least how I would vision it) is "Your dole is £160 per fortnight. We will allocate £40 of this as food stamps, which can be spent at $shop[1], $shop[2], $shop[3]. £100 will be allocated for bills funding. The final £20 can be used any way you please." (of course these are arbitrary figures pulled out of my butt)

 

These could be issued in the form of pre-paid(ish) cards. We have the technology to do it. I certainly don't consider this 'big brother'. But if you must be so exaggerative - you're damn right. If I'm going to loan you money, I want to know exactly what you're spending it on, and if I don't approve, you're not getting my money. If a friend came to me and said "Hey, look, my pay's FUBAR'd. Can I borrow £20 just to get some food in?" I'd give it to them. If they came to me and said "Look, can I get £20 to go buy some $drugs" they'd be told to sod off. If I found out that £20 for 'food' was spent on $drugs, I would not loan them any money ever again because they had abused my trust.

[tmcd35]

I think you're taking it a little too far. Stamps/vouchers wouldn't be to the tune of "You have to go to Asda, buy a loaf of bread, a tub of butter, 2 pints of semi-skimmed milk, a pack of 6 tomatoes' etc. More, (or at least how I would vision it) is "Your dole is £160 per fortnight. We will allocate £40 of this as food stamps, which can be spent at $shop[1], $shop[2], $shop[3]. £100 will be allocated for bills funding. The final £20 can be used any way you please." (of course these are arbitrary figures pulled out of my butt)

 

But...

 

My bills only come to £90 and there is food I want to buy from $shop[5] for £10. But $shop[5] isn't on the "approved" list and besides that £10 is allocated for bills so I can't use it for food...

[Garacesh]

But...

 

My bills only come to £90 and there is food I want to buy from $shop[5] for £10. But $shop[5] isn't on the "approved" list and besides that £10 is allocated for bills so I can't use it for food...

 

Honestly I think food stamps and photographic ID are the way forward. The jobcentre have deals with Burton and other companies for clothing grants if you need to refresh your wardrobe for an interview, I'm certain the same could be done with the large supermarket chains. Even if it means spending half an hour to an hour with each new claimant deciding the allocation of food/clothing/etc ratios (as admittedly each circumstance is different).

I already addressed this in my post on page 2

I understand ratios would need to be tailored - and you'd need to be allowed to request alterations if circumstances change. But I do believe there needs to be some limitation of where and what can be purchased with it.

 

As for $shop[5] not being on the list, if things were to as I envision them in my scenario, it would be up to $shop[5] to apply to be on the allowed list. If they were caught breaking the terms, they would be removed.

Edited February 4, 2014 by Garacesh

[tmcd35]

Sorry, tldr;

 

Just had a read of the last paragraph - EEK!

 

Are you seriously suggesting I sit down with a government official and justify my personal spending decisions? And have to go back begging if I want to ever change the ratio's, even as a 1 off (I don't know - buy a birthday present or something)?

[Edu-IT]

I know of people on benefits who can afford to eat out at restaurants multiple times a week. I work 40 hours or more and can't do that. Where is justification in that? I'm not saying everyone is in this boat, but there are people who do it, and people who get away with doing it.

[cpjitservices]

I wish I could afford to do the simplest thing of own a Car... I have 2 kids it'd be great to take them out. I can't better my job because employers want a full driving license, I cant afford to do my driving test because I dont get paid enough, even If I did pass my test I couldn't afford to run a car anyway with the price of insurance etc.

 

I know of people on benefits with more than One car, and i'm not talking cheap cars either!!

Edited February 4, 2014 by cpjitservices

[tmcd35]

It's interesting that we seem to know so much about the life choices and sacrafices some people make to be able to afford a car or go to a resturant that we can so easilly blame them when our own life choices and sacrafices mean we can't afford such things...

[Garacesh]

Sorry, tldr;

 

Just had a read of the last paragraph - EEK!

 

Are you seriously suggesting I sit down with a government official and justify my personal spending decisions? And have to go back begging if I want to ever change the ratio's, even as a 1 off (I don't know - buy a birthday present or something)?

 

In a mature debate like this you probably shouldn't tl;dr anything that get said.

Honestly, yes, I am. If you want their money, you definitely should justify why, even if only loosely. I wouldn't give someone money without a justifiable reason because that's my money and they want it, of course I'd need a reason. Why shouldn't the jobcentre? The 'flat rate' for JSA is ridiculous anyway. Sometimes it's not enough for a person in certain circumstances, other times it's way too much.

Some of the JSA money would be unrestricted, as I mentioned earlier, so you'll have no trouble paying for that birthday present if you save up a little each month like everybody else does.

[cpjitservices]

It's interesting that we seem to know so much about the life choices and sacrafices some people make to be able to afford a car or go to a resturant that we can so easilly blame them when our own life choices and sacrafices mean we can't afford such things...

 

Sacrifices ?

 

What Can I sacrifice to own a car ? Not have any gas or electric ?... or not pay my water bill or my rent ?. I live basically as do my family... I dont have a massive TV or Sky, I have basic freeview. My PC is a Pentium 4 machine because I dont have the money to upgrade. I dont have laptops for each of us or tablets etc!!!

 

SO tell me.... What can I sacrifice to own a car ??????

 

The folk I know on benefits, have Massive TV's, they have the highest Sky Subscription, They eat better than I do, the kids have better stuff than mine..... This is all material as my kids want for nothing and know the true value of things but this takes the mick when My sister in-laws guy has NEVER and I do mean NEVER worked a day in his life, he's 33. Never had a job... If you saw his house, his car and the way he lives I'm not kidding you'd think he was wealthy. He Sacrifices nothing at all. This guy once asked me "Why do you work? YOu do know you can sit on your arse spend more time with your family at home and still get decent money"? - he gets more benefits a month than I get paid wages.

 

My sister in laws boyfriend, has 4 kids and gets income support because he suffers from migraines, all the time I've known him he's never had one, and has admitted to me that he blaggs it all the time, even to the doctor. He uses the 4 kids moneys to buy thinsg and gives his wife (yes his WIFE) £30 for shopping and house keeping and he pockets the rest.

 

Sacrifices ???

Edited February 4, 2014 by cpjitservices

[featured_spectre]

I was in the position where I had to make a choice, my medication or food on my daughters plate (I quite frankly couldn't afford both). Knew nothing about the prepayment certs for JSA/ESA etc, so struggled through. Rationed my medication.

 

Now I am in a paying job, so pay £10 a month for prepayment cert.

 

Thing is, different people have different priorities. If it werent for the fact I have a child (with a 2nd on the way) I would have easily chosen medication over food for myself. Some people don't see children as a priority (and frankly, those should be shot).

[tmcd35]

In a mature debate like this you probably shouldn't tl;dr anything that get said.

You are right, my apologies.

 

Honestly, yes, I am. If you want their money, you definitely should justify why, even if only loosely. I wouldn't give someone money without a justifiable reason because that's my money and they want it, of course I'd need a reason. Why shouldn't the jobcentre?

 

It's interesting that giving government officials that much power over your life doesn't bother you. How much can they dictate before they've gone to far? What of the companies who are not on the approved list? Do they go out of business when they loose custom?

[sted]

i honestly dont know how people can be on the dole as a "career" when i was out of uni and took my over a year to find a job and i was on dole it just drove me mad the fact that my days consisted of nothing i literally had no idea what to do with myself because apart from going to the jobcentre once a week (and the odd time they sent me on teambuilding courses yes while youre unemployed why not go to hatfield marnia and build a boat from oil drums and logs) i had no structure to my life and it was driving me up the wall

[cpjitservices]

To me having a job isn't the fact that I'm earning my money, I'm giving and showing my children a better future, leading by example. Having a job sets you free, fills you full of confidence and shows you how the real world works, dont get me wrong some people who are on benefits are on them for a reason and they arn't abusing it... but those who are - are just utter morons nothing less. Especially, when they think that going to work they loose out on time with there families and kids... which I can understand... but it's not a reason for not working.

[tmcd35]

SO tell me.... What can I sacrifice to own a car ??????

 

Honestly, haven't got the fogiest. But then it's not my place to tell you how you should live your life - and the government certainly shouldn't be allowed to wield that much power.

 

He Sacrifices nothing at all.

I doubt that's true. But then I don't know the guy - who am I to judge?

 

EDIT: re-read the last paragraph, although it appears he might not sacrafice personally - it looks like his wife and kids are. Maybe there is something else to be said/done there? again a social not a (monatory) welfare problem.

 

he gets more benefits a month than I get paid wages.

 

Now this I do believe. But then I never said the system wasn't broke. But then no system is perfect. Back in my first post I suggested we take the conversation away from the personal (knee-jerk Dailey Mailism) and on to dicussing the system itself. What are the alternatives, and what do they say about us as a society? Will the alternatives result in a country you'd like to live in?

 

A voucher system says thing about a society that isn't representive of where I want to live, personally.

Edited February 4, 2014 by tmcd35

[sted]

Especially, when they think that going to work they loose out on time with there families and kids... which I can understand... but it's not a reason for not working.

 

im not so sure even on that (granted im not and dont intend ever to be a parent)but i know for instance i enjoy spending more time with my sister/parents more now i see them less paradoxical as it may seem you can spend too much time with people

[Garacesh]

It's interesting that giving government officials that much power over your life doesn't bother you. How much can they dictate before they've gone to far? What of the companies who are not on the approved list? Do they go out of business when they loose custom?

They apply to be on the list.

I won't lie, there might be some complications, yes, and there will be a few corner shops accepting food cards for tobacco (but hopefully they get 'grassed up' and removed from the list, just the same way shops that serve alcohol to minors get reported)

 

Nowhere am I saying the government get to dictate my life, please stop exaggerating. They get to dictate what I do with the money they give me because they money they give me is outlined for a specific purpose. If I am not using that money for the purpose they outline, yes, they have the right to withdraw it. Housing Benefit is specifically for rent. You'd be taken off it if they found out you were spending it on other things.

 

This also brings up the argument: JSA is often spent on food, but it's intention is to aid you to find work. Food is not part of that. Food is a necessity of life.

 

The government gets to stop telling me where I can spend my 'food stamps' when I stop using them. The government would not be telling you 'how to live your life'. It would be telling you that they are giving you money for $SpecificPurpose and I think it's quite fair that it's regulated to make sure it's spent on $SpecificPurpose and not having your kids go hungry this month because you want a new telly