The Student Room Group

Does the welfare system cause you "huge resentment" ?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20
It does when you can't afford a TV licence and then walk down a council estate full of satellite dishes and widescreen TV's. We should provide the bare essentials and nothing more.
Reply 21
Original post by LionKingLover94
No, actually it allows me to have free health care, help when I need it and an education.


Public services aren't really the same as welfare system. Welfare system would be benefits.
Reply 22
Am I the only one who thinks there should be some kind of card they're given and it shows what they have bought with the benefits? Like if say they spent the money on a flat screen tv and stuff like that then they would get a warning and if done again it would end up with the benefits being stopped because they are not being spent on the stuff they're given for. I mean fair enough if they need a TV but like they do not need to spent £6000 on a tv when they're given to feed and clothe the kids


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
Welfare fraud is a problem but I don't think Cameron has much of a role to play in fixing it, especially since the privileged little **** has never suffered a days financial hardship in his life and his answers seem to involve a return to Victorian era attitudes towards employment and the less well off.

Welfare needs an overhaul so it supports the needy and punishes the fraudsters, not a system which makes it all but a criminal and moral offence to be unlucky and poor.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by _Shmiley
Am I the only one who thinks there should be some kind of card they're given and it shows what they have bought with the benefits? Like if say they spent the money on a flat screen tv and stuff like that then they would get a warning and if done again it would end up with the benefits being stopped because they are not being spent on the stuff they're given for. I mean fair enough if they need a TV but like they do not need to spent £6000 on a tv when they're given to feed and clothe the kids


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App


How demoralising. And what about those of us who live with our parents? I give my parents money every 2 weeks.

How about upping the minimum wage, to actually make it more worthwhile for people to ditch the benefits and find a job? That might help!


This would be more cost effective. As would scrapping tax credits and upping the tax allowance. Those on a low income would just get a top up. Isn't that what used to happen? You had your basic tax allowance and were then given allowances for having children.
I remember a similar topic about this a few months ago. One of the things that flabbergasted me was that people believed the money they received from the government was, infact, THEIR money. It is not the tax payer's money, no, it is THEIR money, to spend as they wish. I personally can't find a justification for this. If you were a parent and you gave your son or daughter monthly supplements to get themselves into work but pissed it up the wall, how would that make you feel? So, pray tell, why is it any different when the money just comes in the envelope of H&M Work and Pensions of which is essentially the tax payers money, in which they have paid their taxes to the best of their knowledge, for people to use the safety net that is the welfare system, to get back into employment?
Reply 26
Simple answer is no. I know a lot of people have said this already but where the problem lies is with the people who abuse it and how easy it is for them to abuse it. Obviously if a family who are consistently on benefits has a collection of TV's and laptops when working (and possibly still claiming benefits) families are struggling to eat and pay the bills then somethings going wrong.

Why can't there be some way of keeping tabs on what people are spending their money on, specifically long term, jobless benefit claimers?
Original post by Studentus-anonymous
Welfare fraud is a problem


It's not as much of a problem as they're making out.
No I don't resent people in need and I'm not brainwashed by Murdoch.
Original post by _Shmiley
Am I the only one who thinks there should be some kind of card they're given and it shows what they have bought with the benefits? Like if say they spent the money on a flat screen tv and stuff like that then they would get a warning and if done again it would end up with the benefits being stopped because they are not being spent on the stuff they're given for. I mean fair enough if they need a TV but like they do not need to spent £6000 on a tv when they're given to feed and clothe the kids


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App


What purpose would that serve exactly? It'll cost more money to implement it in the first place with admin and the less luxuries people buy the less VAT they pay the less money goes back into the system.
Original post by ForKicks
It does when you can't afford a TV licence and then walk down a council estate full of satellite dishes and widescreen TV's. We should provide the bare essentials and nothing more.

Not everyone in a council property is on benefits and some places have unused satellite dishes. I haven't had sky in over a year (don't watch much tv anymore) but the dish is still there.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 31
Original post by OU Student
How demoralising. And what about those of us who live with our parents? I give my parents money every 2 weeks. .


If you're using it in the correct way I don't see a problem with it, it just stops people using it to buy stuff that we can't afford in a full time job. It stops people trying to fraud the system and then people who need it can be free to use it.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
Yes it does cause me "huge resentment" - and I'm someone who grew up dependent on it so that should say something!

It is vital that we have a safety net in place so no-one starves and no-one goes without a home (that is the one area I think needs drastic improvement - homelessness (as in living on the streets) is a national embarrassment) but I'm growing sick to death of the entitlement people show to get huge piles of free money nowadays.

Yesterday I read someone's rant about how it's unfair to cut benefits because "there are no jobs around" and it took them 2 years to find one. When someone pointed out that there are always jobs on the farms etc. around here (and I do really mean always) they replied that because they aren't "passionate" about that work, they shouldn't have to do it and so should be able to claim JSA. Over 2 years, that's almost £6000 the taxpayers have had to hand over just because they couldn't be bothered to work on a farm (which yes, is very hard work for very little money - hence why lot's of immigrants do it - but if you are unemployed, you have no right to be picky).
I have some interesting personal experiences with this I would love to share, but there's no anonymous feature to use in this forum.

But, yes, I would say the system does cause resentment. I'm not particularly knowledgeable about the true state of the welfare system but the image it has as portrayed by the media - particularly right-wing/Tory newspapers - does increase resentment for those on benefits, particularly in the education system where special dispensation can be earned even for having a poor background.
Original post by _Shmiley
Am I the only one who thinks there should be some kind of card they're given and it shows what they have bought with the benefits? Like if say they spent the money on a flat screen tv and stuff like that then they would get a warning and if done again it would end up with the benefits being stopped because they are not being spent on the stuff they're given for. I mean fair enough if they need a TV but like they do not need to spent £6000 on a tv when they're given to feed and clothe the kids


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App


That's actually quite a good idea! :smile:
I still think that all benefits should be given in the form of coupons in a rationbook. A set amount for food with categories such as veg, fruit and frozen goods, plus a set amount for any bills/housing etc and then NOTHING for alchohol, cigarettes or luxury electronics.

If you want a TV, you should have to apply to the council for one, and same with a computer, and neither should cost more than £100 each, and if you are addicted to cigarettes, you are entitled to free nicotine patches to wean you off for a period of 3 months only. End of.

That would be a simple system, albeit not perfect, I'm sure some feckless idiots would start up a black market, but at least it might stop others from blowing it all on booze, fags and flat screens. And believe me, it happens a lot more than some middle class dreamers care to imagine it does.
(edited 11 years ago)
It doesn't bother me at the moment because I am still in education but it does cause resentment. Labour will probably say its the rich people not in the 'real world' who resent it but I think ordinary working people resent it just as much as the rich do. I can understand the rich people paying the 50p tax rate thinking it is ridiculous but although my parents pay an insignificant amount of tax in comparison, they go off and do their 12 hour shift to pay the rent and then come home to see the family round the corner living in the same house but paid by the social. At least rich people are loads better off than people on benefits. Ordinary people can't say 'I am paying for all that stuff' like the rich can but 'why should they get that for free when I have to graft for it?' causes a lot of resentment to.
Reply 37
Original post by Squidgyness
I still think that all benefits should be given in the form of coupons in a rationbook. A set amount for food, a set amount for bills/housing and NOTHING for alchohol, cigarettes or luxury electronics. If you want a TV, you should have to apply to the council for one, and same with a computer, and neither should cost more than £100 each. End of.

That would be a simple system, though I'm sure some feckless idiots would start up a black market, at least it might stop others from blowing it all on booze, fags and flat screens.


THANK YOU! Someone else that thinks it should be spend on the things its meant to!!


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
Original post by Beebumble
No I don't resent people in need and I'm not brainwashed by Murdoch.


You really think "I have one opinion, anyone else has been brainwashed" is a valid statement?

And what on earth does this have to do with Murdoch? Have you just caught on the news that he isn't very popular any more so shoved a reference in there? I find it incredibly unlikely that many people are anti-welfare because of him - if anything it's the Daily Mail/Express...

Very few people resent "people in need" - they resent the people who DON'T need welfare but claim it anyway.

Original post by OU Student
It's not as much of a problem as they're making out.


Welfare fraud is costing the country at least £3bn a year. That IS a serious problem (if the government announced a £3bn budget cut to the NHS there would be outrage...) - and doesn't even include the billions that are paid out every year to people who aren't acting fraudulantly but don't actually need the money.
Shmiley's view is a popular one, but the fundamental rule of economics is that people respond to incentives. If the Government says to people, "If you're in X situation, you can have some money!" then I just can't bring myself to blame people for taking that money, even if they don't need it. And worse, people who aren't quite in X situation then have an incentive to get themselves into it so they're eligible for the money.

It's the Government's fault; they need to make sure that the system is set up so only those who need support get it, and people are correctly incentivised to work. A tough ask, but that's what we pay them so much for...

Quick Reply

Latest