Why don't they introduce foodstamps in the UK?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Mourinho<3
The logic is strong in the above. Not. Still trying to argue it isn't humiliating
such a troll. You assume people on benefits are all spending their cash living a great lifestyle on nights out and drugs. That isn't the case. Until you can separate the dossers and the genuine your system is a little ego boost for the more fortunate, nothing more. Not all on benefits are on it by choice. They will have worked and want to again. They will have to use their benefits for rent and to support their family. So assuming they all do what you suggest shows just how silly and bitter you really are. Some on benefits don't deserve them since they don't want to work-of course. But not seeing any difference between the decent people and the lazy is stupid. Good luck trying to convince people your approach of humiliating former taxpayers is a great idea. Get out and see the real world-it is humiliating. That you don't see how shows just how socially inept and unaware you must be.
such a troll. You assume people on benefits are all spending their cash living a great lifestyle on nights out and drugs. That isn't the case. Until you can separate the dossers and the genuine your system is a little ego boost for the more fortunate, nothing more. Not all on benefits are on it by choice. They will have worked and want to again. They will have to use their benefits for rent and to support their family. So assuming they all do what you suggest shows just how silly and bitter you really are. Some on benefits don't deserve them since they don't want to work-of course. But not seeing any difference between the decent people and the lazy is stupid. Good luck trying to convince people your approach of humiliating former taxpayers is a great idea. Get out and see the real world-it is humiliating. That you don't see how shows just how socially inept and unaware you must be.No, when I said "like you" it wasn't an insult, it was because you assumed that people will feel ashamed to use food stamps/show they're on benefits, whereas I think the people who truly need help won't mind. They will be happy to have food on their table.
The people that it would affect are like the ones who DO work, but earn £20k and live a £200k lifestyle, buying things they can't afford and putting it all on credit cards and going into huge amounts of debt.
If I was struggling and I only had food stamps I wouldn't think twice about using them, and I wouldn't look down on anyone else who was using them.
Original post by mikeyd85
Kinda bull**** though really isn't it? Food isn't the only thing people need when looking for work. What about transport? What about clothes for an interview? What about gas, electric and water bills? What about a TV licence, a telephone line, the internet? What about a mobile phone? What about financial commitments made in a time of prosperity?
Giving people food stamps instead of cash benefits would only serve to **** them even more and make it even harder for those who want to go back to work.
Giving people food stamps instead of cash benefits would only serve to **** them even more and make it even harder for those who want to go back to work.
I don't mean replace all benefits with food stamps, I mean some of it, so they get some money but also a percentage of it is food stamps that can only be used on food and drink.
Well, in America it's not even "stamps" any more, it's just a swipe card that they use
Original post by UniMastermindBOSS
I don't mean replace all benefits with food stamps, I mean some of it, so they get some money but also a percentage of it is food stamps that can only be used on food and drink.
Well, in America it's not even "stamps" any more, it's just a swipe card that they use
Well, in America it's not even "stamps" any more, it's just a swipe card that they use
I see where you're coming from with that.
Isn't it all a bit too nanny state though? I really don't see why the government should take the burden of responsibility for the budgeting of those on benefits, especially as in this example it takes away economic freedom from those who are on benefits in the short to medium term.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
Original post by UniMastermindBOSS
No, when I said "like you" it wasn't an insult, it was because you assumed that people will feel ashamed to use food stamps/show they're on benefits, whereas I think the people who truly need help won't mind. They will be happy to have food on their table.
The people that it would affect are like the ones who DO work, but earn £20k and live a £200k lifestyle, buying things they can't afford and putting it all on credit cards and going into huge amounts of debt.
If I was struggling and I only had food stamps I wouldn't think twice about using them, and I wouldn't look down on anyone else who was using them.
The people that it would affect are like the ones who DO work, but earn £20k and live a £200k lifestyle, buying things they can't afford and putting it all on credit cards and going into huge amounts of debt.
If I was struggling and I only had food stamps I wouldn't think twice about using them, and I wouldn't look down on anyone else who was using them.
Already justified why you are wrong in my previous two posts. This bit is new and I like it though (the bold). Yeah, so many people in the UK act like they are some footballer/popstar despite being on 20k
This comment only confirms what I already suspected-your view of the real world is warped beyond belief. Troll, get out from under your bridge and see the real world-a miniscule percentage of people live such extravagant lifestyles. Not even going to try and explain why-evidently you can't have seen much of the world with a statement like that.
Original post by UniMastermindBOSS
True, but I guess there's a lot of people on benefits probably don't have friends who work. They might go to the pub and sell £100 worth for £50 but at least that way they only get £50 of cigs/alcohol while someone who needs food (like students even) would get twice as much.
Well it wouldn't be 100% in food stamps
Well it wouldn't be 100% in food stamps
Do you think people on benefits form their own social circle, only surrounded by others on benefits? That's nonsense. There are plenty of people on benefits who have economically active friends (even if these friends are low paid and might supplement their income by ). Not to mention that middle class people can still claim benefits also, they aren't just for the underclass.
Do you know how many people actually stay on JSA for over 12 months? It's a tiny proportion. This alone suggests that many people on benefits do find work within a number of weeks or months, and presumably will have friends who are also economically active.
It would be far too complex a system. People still need money for household repairs, new goods, travel and s on. Not only that but it would only serve to stigmatise those on benefits even further.
The reality is only a very small minority of people on benefits are "scroungers" and spend extortionate amounts on booze and fags. Whatever system we have in place there will always be such people. They will always find ways to gain these things. For many such things are the only things that can give their life meaning, or provide some relief. Their only treats in life, for they don't have the money to travel often, or buy expensive goods.
Original post by Ace123
This is a very good idea give vouchers for things such as utilities bills, food, clothing, kids school material and make the person use identification so they cannot swap it with anyone as some people on the thread have suggested,
I also think the £26,000 limit which is the same as a £35,000 job is far too high. The average working wage in m area is £13-15,000 a year with some workers earning less benefits need to be brought down so they are less than what workers earn
I also think the £26,000 limit which is the same as a £35,000 job is far too high. The average working wage in m area is £13-15,000 a year with some workers earning less benefits need to be brought down so they are less than what workers earn
Or wages brought up.
Original post by Yi-Ge-Ningderen
Or wages brought up.
I agree something should be done about wages but with mass immigration that will never happen unfortunately wages on the whole will continue to be surpressed
Original post by Mourinho<3
The amount people can claim in benefits I completely agree should not be so high. It discourages people from accepting lower paid jobs.
However, picture a scene. You get a job for 3 years but lose it-your company is cutting back and it is a case of last one in, first one out. So you find yourself in need of benefits. You get given these vouchers. Would you not feel humiliated using them? Seriously?
Let us go back to school-we have all been there.
Let us just say you were in the school canteen and you are paying for lunch. Everyone else there pays with cash-you hand in a voucher in full view of the everyone there. Would you find it humiliating?
Another example-a school trip requires payment for those who can, for those who can't afford to it is free. So a register is called and one by one everyone gives their money except you, who just gives in a signed note from your parents saying you are exempt. Would you be humiliated?
I agree with you that benefits are too high for some and it discourages work-I will say it again. But humiliating people isn't the way forward UNLESS you can differentiate between the plain lazy and the unfortunate.
However, picture a scene. You get a job for 3 years but lose it-your company is cutting back and it is a case of last one in, first one out. So you find yourself in need of benefits. You get given these vouchers. Would you not feel humiliated using them? Seriously?
Let us go back to school-we have all been there.
Let us just say you were in the school canteen and you are paying for lunch. Everyone else there pays with cash-you hand in a voucher in full view of the everyone there. Would you find it humiliating?
Another example-a school trip requires payment for those who can, for those who can't afford to it is free. So a register is called and one by one everyone gives their money except you, who just gives in a signed note from your parents saying you are exempt. Would you be humiliated?
I agree with you that benefits are too high for some and it discourages work-I will say it again. But humiliating people isn't the way forward UNLESS you can differentiate between the plain lazy and the unfortunate.
I see your point but at the end of the day alot of people are abusing the system benefits are meant to help those in need for basic necessities not sky tv, booze, faqs etc
Original post by UniMastermindBOSS
To stop people on benefits buying cigs and alcohol with their money?
Such a scheme is probably being considered for the near future as we speak. Such stamps will be subject to market exchange for drugs and other things which cannot be obtained directly with them - this is what happens in the US. Another consequence might be a rise in home-made alcohol; with some orange juice, sugar, brewers yeast and a condom (or balloon) and the use of a freezer you can make your own high-strength hooch.
Original post by Ace123
I agree something should be done about wages but with mass immigration that will never happen unfortunately wages on the whole will continue to be surpressed
Yep, unfortunately that is what the government want. Nice cheap labourers for their business buddies and they can claim how the economy is growing (even though it is due to an increased population and falling living standards), the opposite to what normally happens during growth.
Original post by Ace123
I see your point but at the end of the day alot of people are abusing the system benefits are meant to help those in need for basic necessities not sky tv, booze, faqs etc
So the answer is to humiliate the decent as well?
So many on here complain about benefits-how many of them also complain about tax evasion? The media doesn't seem to want to produce a tax evasion street series but benefits street is great. The right doesn't seem to fussed about that.
There are too many abusing the system-yes. But not as many as the Daily Mail for example would have people believe. The fact is I am all for making the work-shy work but foodstamps won't do that.
What it will do is make people on benefits, INCLUDING THE GOOD, face humiliation. Hardly fair at all. A way to put others down to make ourselves feel better. To kid ourselves we have made a difference when in reality we really haven't.
It is egotistical for me. I know some people are small and hate it-5ft 5 to 5ft 7. To try and boost their own ego they massively over compensate, bullying those they feel they can get away with (so often the few even smaller than them). They do this in the hope their ego and people's view of them will benefit. It never does. All it does is make their flaws even more obvious.
It is the same thing here in that by trying to be overly hard on others will for the OP give the impression some kind of justice has been done. That the world is a better place for bullying those who are weak. I don't think I will ever need benefits, along with many others. However, that does't mean I enjoy the concept of bullying others to make myself feel more noble and feel I contribute more to society.
So for me, the OP's view and ridiculous attempt to claim it isn't a humiliating proposal just smacks of the short guy whose own ego is hurt so wishes to try and put down others in an attempt to make themselves feel better. By seeing others humiliated feel better. By poking fun and bullying others, ostracising them, with divisive measures such as food stamps.
People so often criticise the quote attributed to Thatcher "there is no such thing as society". In this case this divisive measure is doing the same thing. Like it or not we DO live in a society and if bullying others is the way to go then I am speechless.
Original post by Ace123
This is a very good idea give vouchers for things such as utilities bills, food, clothing, kids school material and make the person use identification so they cannot swap it with anyone as some people on the thread have suggested,
I also think the £26,000 limit which is the same as a £35,000 job is far too high. The average working wage in m area is £13-15,000 a year with some workers earning less benefits need to be brought down so they are less than what workers earn
I also think the £26,000 limit which is the same as a £35,000 job is far too high. The average working wage in m area is £13-15,000 a year with some workers earning less benefits need to be brought down so they are less than what workers earn
That is incredibly low, considering I think the national average salary is (or was) around 22k. Don't forget that two people earning a salary as low as 15k may well still have a higher household income than a household claiming benefits. Joint benefit claims aren't particularly generous and, if one partner works, then this will reduce the amount of income related benefits they can claim.
Just because a limit is set at 26k does not mean that the average person will receive anywhere close to 26k. It's a limit.
Jobseekers Allowance is around £75 a week (or £4,000 a year) for a typical over 25. Around £50 for under-25s. Even with Housing and Council Tax benefit, which not all claimants will qualify or even claim for, you're still looking at well below 15k.
I can potentially receive £160 in JSA a week (with premiums added), £50 in Housing Benefit, £10 in Council Tax Benefit, and £75 in Disability Living Allowance. So we're talking £300 a week, or around 15k a year. I would also receive DLA even in work, so you can probably bring that down to about 12k. I must stress that due to the DLA and living alone (which would greatly increase JSA I'm entitled to) I would receive far more than the average person my age, without children, would receive.
This still makes me around £90 a week better off if I take a 20 hours a week job on minimum wage. Even better off if it's 30 or 40 hours.
Original post by Mourinho<3
The amount people can claim in benefits I completely agree should not be so high. It discourages people from accepting lower paid jobs.
That's a bit of a myth. It's unlikely that someone won't be better off by taking a minimium wage job, especially if it's 40 hours and with Working Tax Credits. See my previous paragraph above. I wager most who do claim benefits and use this excuse are making excuses as they're just lazy. They might not be a great deal better off, but certainly unlikely to be worse off.
What people are discouraged from doing is taking jobs that are under 16 hours a week, as this does not get them off JSA and most of what they earn will just be deducted from their benefit. Then there's travel costs to add to this.
A person can only earn £5 (or, for some groups £20) a week before their benefit is deducted pound for pound.
(edited 10 years ago)
And, again, vouchers/stamps only stigmatise those claiming benefits further. People need money to spend in emergencies or cover expenses that would be too complex to be covered by vouchers, and being able to make and stick to a household budget is an important life skill.
I also don't understand why those claiming benefits should be as badly off, or worse off, than those in minimum wage jobs. People should receive as much as they need to have a basic standard of living. Don't forget that someone who is claiming JSA or is in the Work Related group of ESA has costs such as travelling to interviews. The Jobcentre fund for this is discretionary, and a number of Work Programme providers don't cover these costs.
And just because people are in work, but warning a low salary, doesn't mean they still don't claim benefits such as Working Tax Credit and Council/Housing Benefit.
I also don't understand why those claiming benefits should be as badly off, or worse off, than those in minimum wage jobs. People should receive as much as they need to have a basic standard of living. Don't forget that someone who is claiming JSA or is in the Work Related group of ESA has costs such as travelling to interviews. The Jobcentre fund for this is discretionary, and a number of Work Programme providers don't cover these costs.
And just because people are in work, but warning a low salary, doesn't mean they still don't claim benefits such as Working Tax Credit and Council/Housing Benefit.
Original post by UniMastermindBOSS
To stop people on benefits buying cigs and alcohol with their money?
If you only give them foodstamps, how will they get their cigs, alcohol and drugs? By committing crime of course
Original post by mikeyd85
Kinda bull**** though really isn't it? Food isn't the only thing people need when looking for work. What about transport? What about clothes for an interview? What about gas, electric and water bills? What about a TV licence, a telephone line, the internet? What about a mobile phone? What about financial commitments made in a time of prosperity?
Giving people food stamps instead of cash benefits would only serve to **** them even more and make it even harder for those who want to go back to work.
Giving people food stamps instead of cash benefits would only serve to **** them even more and make it even harder for those who want to go back to work.
The suggestion is obviously that part of benefits are food stamps, not all. If people wish to spend over and above the basics, ir food (provided in stamps) and other basic living costs, gas/water/electrics, transport etc as you mentioned, then surely such a system will provide them with more incentive to find work.
Original post by River85
x
I agree the amount given in benefits isn't that much-but if someone is workshy then they should be forced to work. Really don't see why they should get a penny. Just my view really-others shouldn't support you.
Those who are seeking a job, sending in decent CV's to appropiate level jobs I don't have any problem getting benefits that is around the minimum wage; in fact any less and it would be difficult for them to manage their costs. For these people I don't have a problem recieving much larger benefits-if they didn't the very people the system (a system that improves the country massively) wouldn't be helped.
So I agree with you benefits aren't as high as some make out (e.g the 26k limit very few reach). I also agree that genuine people don't get too much in benefits by any means. My only problem is with the workshy who still manage to get by with no job. I'm not basing this on some "Benefits street" TV programme-in Wolverhampton and Birmingham you see and know of streets where many are like this. Not a majority in the grand scheme of things, but too many for my liking.
Original post by Yi-Ge-Ningderen
For example, if I am on benefits (food stamps), I will speak to my friend who works and receives normal wages and buy her food whilst she buys my cigarettes and alcohol.
Simple.
Simple.
Apparently the favoured method is to buy large amounts of coca-cola and sell it on. It's discounted at about 50% however, so it's not quite as good as the same amount of cash.
Original post by UniMastermindBOSS
To stop people on benefits buying cigs and alcohol with their money?
Do you really think disabled people spend their money on fags and booze?
That guy on benefit street who received ESA-WRAG was a recovering heroin addict. Not exactly someone who was born with their disability.
Original post by joker12345
The suggestion is obviously that part of benefits are food stamps, not all. If people wish to spend over and above the basics, ir food (provided in stamps) and other basic living costs, gas/water/electrics, transport etc as you mentioned, then surely such a system will provide them with more incentive to find work.
This was addressed in my second post in this thread.
Original post by Mourinho<3
The demonisation of those on benefits is now complete. This won't separate the scroungers from the genuine hard working but going through tough times. All will have these stamps.
So what you are saying is someone who has worked before and wants to now MUST SUFFER THE HUMILIATION of publically shopping with these stamps? Ridiculous in my view-surprised no-one has mentioned this up to now (if I have missed it apologies).
Seriously-not all on benefits are lazy and deserve to be scorned upon by society. If there was a way to separate the "Benefits Street" type people from the genuine by all means I agree. But for all people on benefits to get this is just wrong. A society that demonises people in this way is not one I want to see. I mean good people being humiliated in public-I thought those days of public humiliation were for the 18th century and even then regarded for criminals in stocks etc.
I honestly can't believe the insensitivity some have. I hope those for it lose their jobs and face this public humiliation. Then they may learn that villifing the vulnerable in society for your own ego is wrong.
So what you are saying is someone who has worked before and wants to now MUST SUFFER THE HUMILIATION of publically shopping with these stamps? Ridiculous in my view-surprised no-one has mentioned this up to now (if I have missed it apologies).
Seriously-not all on benefits are lazy and deserve to be scorned upon by society. If there was a way to separate the "Benefits Street" type people from the genuine by all means I agree. But for all people on benefits to get this is just wrong. A society that demonises people in this way is not one I want to see. I mean good people being humiliated in public-I thought those days of public humiliation were for the 18th century and even then regarded for criminals in stocks etc.
I honestly can't believe the insensitivity some have. I hope those for it lose their jobs and face this public humiliation. Then they may learn that villifing the vulnerable in society for your own ego is wrong.
Its all about kicking disabled people in the shins and seeing economic growth!
That is the long term plan of the conservative party.
And when there is no disabled people on benefits left they can then will pick a new scapegoat.
Who shall it be? Gingers? Probably not. They're as rare as Prince Harry in a Nazi uniform.
The working class! Yes they'll bring in the poll tax again.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- OCR GCSE Geography A Paper 1 (J383/01) - 22nd May 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Lack of inclusivity for mixed races (diversity)
- Work experience
- 2020 - 5 wasted years, what could have been?
- EPQ
- Is it time to rethink our criminal justice system and 'do things differently'?
- friend troubles
- uk education system
- intercalated MBA or later in working life?
- DWP Induction
- Exciting Opportunity: OTA Live | Google Competition for University students
- Official University of Essex freshers 2023 chat
- Aqa sociology paper 1
- Official University of Leicester freshers 2023 chat
- I have no interest in any module choices
- What is it like studying medicine in Ireland?
- Sentencing Council to make changes for pregnant women / new mothers
- What is it like living in England as a Muslim?
- anyone getting really scared about the future?
- Top universities ‘will turn away more UK students’
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 1 week ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 1 week ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?
