Benefit Swipe Cards, Good Idea Or Not?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9754188/120000-troubled-families-could-be-legally-banned-from-spending-benefits-on-alochol-and-tobacco.html

But if the idea took off, would it only effect certain families?

/// 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. ///

[sherrardk]

Not rude, just an observation. Maybe you should re-read some of your other posts?

[NOX]

Can someone tell me just when the government's 'divide and conquor' strategy worked? How the hell are people stupid enough to buy into the rhetoric that the unemployed, the sick, the disabled, the addicted, the fragile, the badly educated, the vulnerable are now somehow our enemies?
Get a grip people, benefits are not fun, not profitable, not an enjoyable experience, and yes Jane Doe the amounts people are expected to live on are 'piddling'.
Demeaning and demoralising people still further by issuing them with a swipe card just to make sure they stand out- (surprised no-one's considered branding them yet) is really not the way a civilised society should be helping those less fortunate.

[ELVIS68]

This is just another backlash of Tony Blair and the damage he caused letting all the freeloaders over here in the first place

[NOX]

Oh dear...

[Mamyalynne]

Elvis, no that is not what this is about - itregards the further degradation of when you are at rock bottom you are singled out as 'different' once more.

[dave50]

The more you have paid in during your working life, the more benefits you should receive if you fall on hard times. If you have never paid in at all then you should only get the bare minimum.

[sherrardk]

People on benefits already receive the bare minimum.

[cazzz1975]

will this include working families who claim tax credits and housing benefit?

[ludwig]

// People on benefits already receive the bare minimum. //

If that's the case, then they won't have anything spare for luxury items anyway, so the proposal shouldn't make any difference to them.

Actually though, I think the best solution would be a compromise - the majority on an 'essentials only' card with the rest in cash.

[New Judge]

"...is really not the way a civilised society should be helping those less fortunate. "

Quite so, NOX. And you will see in my earlier post that I differntiate between those less fortunate and those who have chosen to live a life free of the tiresome matter of work. A huge number of long-term unemployed (but not all of them) have never made any attempt to do any sort of work throughout their lives. And they never will whilst they are being kept in relative comfort by the taxpayer.

Those doling out the cash should be given the resources to identify such individuals and to scrutinise the lifestyles and finances. They should have no money for luxuries whatsoever. Nor should their benefits increase when the size of their family increases. There is no earthly reason why taxpayers (many of who have less disposable income than the "less fortunate" individuals they are supporting) should provide money for luxuries for them. Any idea that reduces the amount of cash they have to spend and restricts what they can spend it on would get my wholehearted support.

[JaneDoe2]

@newjudge Here! Here! i am sick to death of people moaning about how little they get on benefits. They should try living in any other country in the world and see how little people get in social handouts. Why do you think people come in hoards to the UK? Because our benefit system is generous and easy to abuse. I have FB friends who have left their husbands, now get everything paid for by the government and post they are having 'meet-ups' enjoying designer coffee in cafe's I can't afford to frequent and I work 45 hours a week! yes there are of course many many people who need benefits as a crutch to get them over hard times and these people will always eventually find work because they have a different mindset. One woman was being interviewed on our local TV last week in respect of the cuts in benefits and she actually said she was so hard up she could not afford to run a car so (poor her) she had to get taxis everywhere ...?????What The Funicular?

[daffy654]

JaneDoe... that should be 'hear, hear' not 'here,here'.

You really should get that enormous chip off your shoulder by the way. I hope that one day you are unemployed and unable to find work of any kind, maybe your attitude will change then.

[JaneDoe2]

and maybe daffy you should read one of my previous posts on the subject of me being made a widow at 36 and getting home repossessed and living on benefits...-I have no chip on my shoulder -what chip? that I think the benefits system is more than generous and open to abuse? That's an opinion not a 'chip'

[Charity]

My unemployed, 21 year old son receives £56 each week :0(

[JaneDoe2]

charity -does he live at home? if so £56 is quite ok for someone who has no bills -if he has his own place he will not only be getting £56 he will be getting housing benefit, council tax benefit, etc. I do not have £56 disposable income a week after I've paid all my bills and living expenses.

[cazzz1975]

why are you attacking everyone jane? how do you know what charity's sons outgoings are??, for goodness sake.

[NOX]

Jane you don't have a 'chip' on your shoulder you have a whole sack of spuds.
You are obviously entitled to your opinion but voicing it slightly less aggressively might alienate you less. We could all get super aggressive about our viewpoints- in fact I'd quite like to because I detest the smug self satisfied rubbish that some people spout about poverty, but I'll refrain. For now.

[Charity]

Jane, I worked in a Jobcentre until 2010 - it was heartbreaking at times.
Merry Christmas.

[JaneDoe2]

I may be a newbie on AB but I'm not putting up with these cyber bullying tactics. There are plenty of other people on this thread with the same opinions as me so go shout at them - or are you too frightened to upset the 'in crowd'. Nothing I've said is aggressive what-so-ever, neither have I targeted anyone in particular. I just have a different opinion to some on this thread, who find it hard to swallow that someone who is actually not that well off can have Conservative views on the benefit system. Rather than coming back with an informed valuable retort it is so much easier (and I suppose much more fun for some) to submit a character assassination laced with unfounded assumptions.
Cyber bullying.

[sherrardk]

Does being accused of having a chip on your shoulder constitute cyber bullying or is it that you feel put upon because more than one person has commented on the tone of your posts?