Welfare Benefits - would this be wrong?

[Countdown]

Publishing names & benefit amounts paid to people in your town ?

My view is that this would cut down on benefit fraud as well as act as an incentive for people to come off benefits.

However I am feeling a little more bitter and envious than usual this morning

[Jasandjules]

Would it be wrong? Well, yes. In the same way it would be wrong to publish everyone's income etc...

[steveo3002]

i think it needs to be a voucher system that entitles them to the basics range of foods and clothing , not usable on drink /fags/sky tv/argos jewelry/fighting dogs

[Vytalis]

Ah but how would you know who they were when they were out and about?

Far better to have 'doley scum' tattooed on their forehead, otherwise how would your chauffeur know who to throw cans of red bull at when you are driving around?

[davido140]

steveo3002 said:

i think it needs to be a voucher system that entitles them to the basics range of foods and clothing , not usable on drink /fags/sky tv/argos jewelry/fighting dogs

Wouldnt work, There would be a black market in the vouchers swapped for cash or contraband goodies like fags and booze. Which would mean an ID system would need to be in place so only the voucher owner could spend their own vouchers, which would mean joe bloggs couldnt go shopping for his grannie or genuinley incapacitated brother who is on vouchers.

Long story short, it would be prohibitively expensive to run and pretty much unworkable.

Which is a shame as i actually think its a good idea, it pissed me off to see some scumbag living the life of an alcoholic on my dollar!

[Countdown]

Jasandjules said:

Would it be wrong? Well, yes. In the same way it would be wrong to publish everyone's income etc...

IIRC salaries for senior public sector incomes already have to be published. That aside, the people who pay my wages know how much I'm paid. I'd like to know who my taxes go to

[anonymous-user]

sos. Against this one. We are now claiming a benefit for the first time ever as the o/h is terminallly ill. She doesn't want people to know about her illness & is continuing to work presently. We have been told to look at it as the pension she will not get & spend it on things & places she wants to go while she is still able.
We would swap all the benefit and everything else for health if possible.

[Du1point8]

davido140 said:

steveo3002 said:

i think it needs to be a voucher system that entitles them to the basics range of foods and clothing , not usable on drink /fags/sky tv/argos jewelry/fighting dogs

Wouldnt work, There would be a black market in the vouchers swapped for cash or contraband goodies like fags and booze. Which would mean an ID system would need to be in place so only the voucher owner could spend their own vouchers, which would mean joe bloggs couldnt go shopping for his grannie or genuinley incapacitated brother who is on vouchers.

Long story short, it would be prohibitively expensive to run and pretty much unworkable.

Which is a shame as i actually think its a good idea, it pissed me off to see some scumbag living the life of an alcoholic on my dollar!

Not voucher but a credit card type of system that way they can be tracked easily and only allow it for fresh food... non of this value crap and then booze and fags..

[Countdown]

Vytalis said:

Ah but how would you know who they were when they were out and about?

Far better to have 'doley scum' tattooed on their forehead, otherwise how would your chauffeur know who to throw cans of red bull at when you are driving around?

I know what you're saying and the "nice" half of me agrees with you, why should the less fortunate be stigmatised through potentially no fault of their own?

However the "nasty" half makes me wonder whether the lack of stigma has encouraged people to think that life on benefits is acceptable?

[sleep envy]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

what about making them wear a yellow star?

[anonymous-user]

Countdown said:

My view is that this would act as an incentive for people to come off benefits.

Which is a bit of a slur aginst those of us who are unfortunate enough to be victims of the recession,twice. Not everyone claiming is bucking the system, or a chav with no intention of working, however, whilst i disagree with the method you suggest, the idea isnt necessarily a bad one.

[steveo3002]

davido140 said:

Wouldnt work, There would be a black market in the vouchers swapped for cash or contraband goodies like fags and booze. Which would mean an ID system would need to be in place so only the voucher owner could spend their own vouchers, which would mean joe bloggs couldnt go shopping for his grannie or genuinley incapacitated brother who is on vouchers.

Long story short, it would be prohibitively expensive to run and pretty much unworkable.

Which is a shame as i actually think its a good idea, it pissed me off to see some scumbag living the life of an alcoholic on my dollar!

gov should make it work , have a limited number of shops where you can spend , photo id card for the user or nominated helper and just the basics range avail to em , deffo needs to stop being cash handouts

if they dont like it get a job

[sleep envy]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

so did I for 12 months due to redudancy, I hated going down to the JC and only did so to prove I was not working in order to claim my mortgage insurance

would I have worn the wrist bad? like fk would I

[Countdown]

sleep envy said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

so did I for 12 months due to redudancy, I hated going down to the JC and only did so to prove I was not working in order to claim my mortgage insurance

would I have worn the wrist bad? like fk would I

Were you actually claiming benefit though (or just on your insurance)? If not you wouldn't be "named".

[davido140]

steveo3002 said:

davido140 said:

Wouldnt work, There would be a black market in the vouchers swapped for cash or contraband goodies like fags and booze. Which would mean an ID system would need to be in place so only the voucher owner could spend their own vouchers, which would mean joe bloggs couldnt go shopping for his grannie or genuinley incapacitated brother who is on vouchers.

Long story short, it would be prohibitively expensive to run and pretty much unworkable.

Which is a shame as i actually think its a good idea, it pissed me off to see some scumbag living the life of an alcoholic on my dollar!

gov should make it work , have a limited number of shops where you can spend , photo id card for the user or nominated helper and just the basics range avail to em , deffo needs to stop being cash handouts

if they dont like it get a job

Again, I completely agree, but can you imagine this headline in your lifetime "Government makes slightly complex admin and IT system work, on time and to budget"

rather than "Slightly complex IT and admin system binned, 4 years late and 1.5 billion over budget"



I'm clearly lacking any faith in the public sector and civil service today!

[sleep envy]

Countdown said:

Were you actually claiming benefit though (or just on your insurance)? If not you wouldn't be "named".

I couldn't just sign on and not take the JSA

[smileymikey]

Jesus Christ....The Daily Mail really should be banned!... "them" can become me, in the blink of an eye for hard working decent people. Stop believing everything you read.

1. Illegal immigrants do not on the whole get 3 million pound house's in Fulham at tax payers expenses...despite what the Daily Mail would have you believe.

2. Ethnic minorities aren't going to come around and rape your wife...lets face it she's a bit cuddly...you don't fancy it anymore..why would anyone else....despite what the Daily Mail would have you believe.

3. Most teenagers aren't crack addicted hoody wearing psychos that will knife you for the price of three litres of Scrumpy Jack cider...they are actually o.k slightly younger versions of us, that work hard at school and enjoy being young...despite what the Daily Mail would have you believe.

So OP do you read the Daily Mail...or the Telegraph?

[thinfourth2]

davido140 said:

Wouldnt work, There would be a black market in the vouchers swapped for cash or contraband goodies like fags and booze.

And the problem with this is?

Chav gets a voucher to buy a tenners worth of food

Chav sells it to me for a fiver

He spends his fiver on beer and fags

I get cheap food

Chav payes double for beer and fags


I really don't see a downside

[Justayellowbadge]

sleep envy said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

what about making them wear a yellow star?

I think that every employed person should be given the right to break down the door of any benefit claimant and demand evidence of their eligibilty for said benefit and proof that they are not working.

If not adequately forthcoming they would then be taken out into the street and ritually slaughtered in front of their no-good, multi-coloured, dolescum family and all their possessions would be forfeited to the mob.

The survivors would then have to politely thank the assembled crowd before being shipped to a workhouse where they would assemble cheap consumer goods until such a time as they have paid off the debt their criminal anti-social actions have built up.

If, however, they turn out to be legitimate claimants then obviously just a light birching to teach them not to look suspicious in future.

[anonymous-user]

The problem lies in the way the system works. If i am on the dole for two years or more,i have to prove what i m doing to find work, but joe drunkard, or joe druggie doesnt, and the 'refugees' that our great and glorious leader Tony saved, can be unemployed as long as they like. Also,if i get caught defrauding the benefits system, i'll do time, but joe drunkard and joe druggie wont, and the refugees?? The powers that be turn blind eye. Sort out the system, o drunks and druggies have to go to rehab and find work, and the refugees have to prove what they are doing to find work