Social Security

[SoulKiss]

To avoid derailing other threads, just how SHOULD we support those who have hit hard times or sickness/illness.

Not a poll, a place for discussion on what should be done.

My thoughts are that a life on the dole should not be one of comfort, there should be few if any luxuries to act as an incentive to Improve.

The whole thing should become cash-less, I mean why are there advertising campaigns to encourage people on housing benefit to pay their rent on time?

Why is this not paid directly to the landlord, so avoiding any chance of it being spent elsewhere?

Why not do a deal with Tesco and get Jamie Oliver to come up with a bunch of Meal Plans/Recipes and have food parcels delivered, each containing healthy balanced food and the instructions to prepare it, again this being paid directly.

It would also address obesity issues etc.

Clothing would also be provided likewise.

As a condition of getting these benefits (and any others) all women and if/when the technology is available are to be put on contraceptive treatments - implanted if possible.

It is my view that we ARE responsible to ensure that each and every member of out society has somewhere safe to stay, food on their plates, clothes on their backs and shoes on their feet.

Bit harsh in my view.

There's a difference between those who want to work/pay their way and genuinely can't (for whatever reason....ability/sickness) and those who can't be bothered to make the effort or think that it's okay to sponge off the state.

I have every sympathy with the former.

[SoulKiss]

Originally Posted by Jabba

Bit harsh in my view.

There's a difference between those who want to work/pay their way and genuinely can't (for whatever reason....ability/sickness) and those who can't be bothered to make the effort or think that it's okay to sponge off the state.

I have every sympathy with the former.

I have to agree, but its the fact that we are onto a 2nd generation who have never worked and have all the loopholes to more money pointed out to them that we need to be harsh.

If life unemployed ISNT a bit crap, what incentive to change things?

There would still be sickness benefits etc for those with genuine problems, that would end up with something like the National Minimum Income type idea.

[timwilky]

OK

My missus has paid into the system all her working life, at age 46 she developed breast cancer and as a result of post operative complications she took about 18 months to return to work.

During this time she has been getting about £70/week from state. She had a job, but was incapable of working. Monthly she had to attend an interview at the job centre to ascertain what she could do, and what they could do to get her back into work etc.

Daft as for the first 12 months she could hardly walk as a result of nerve damage to her feet/hands from chemotherapy. she now has breathing difficulties as the radiotherapy has damaged her lungs. She now takes a massive amount of steroid trying to recover her lungs.

But she has gone back this week. She is not capable of doing her old job and has been redeployed and is on a 4 week trial to ensure she is capable of doing the job.

she had to have an examination by a DHSS doctor to make sure she was genuinely incapable of doing any work. a 50+ page form asking how high she could lift a book etc. How long she could sit at a desk etc. Stupid as she already had a job. she was not unemployed but incapacitated by illness.

She would gladly given up the £70/week to have her breasts back, to have had 6 months of not feeling **** every day. To be able to walk up the stairs without having to stop and catch her breath etc.

Nobody wants to go "on the sick", for those that are there they would much rather be able to return to work.

If there is a problem, it is that for the past 10 years government has been encouraging long term unemployed onto the sick as they then see unemployment rates drop. suddenly we are in the stupid position that unemployment had dropped by over 1 million under new labour, but the sickness claimants had increased by over 3 million.

I don't understand why they make it so difficult for people like Tim's wife who have worked all their lives but yet will hand out money to people who don't deserve it and have never worked a day in the lives willynilly.

[SoulKiss]

Originally Posted by timwilky

OK

My missus has paid into the system all her working life, at age 46 she developed breast cancer and as a result of post operative complications she took about 18 months to return to work.

During this time she has been getting about £70/week from state. She had a job, but was incapable of working. Monthly she had to attend an interview at the job centre to ascertain what she could do, and what they could do to get her back into work etc.

Daft as for the first 12 months she could hardly walk as a result of nerve damage to her feet/hands from chemotherapy. she now has breathing difficulties as the radiotherapy has damaged her lungs. She now takes a massive amount of steroid trying to recover her lungs.

But she has gone back this week. She is not capable of doing her old job and has been redeployed and is on a 4 week trial to ensure she is capable of doing the job.

she had to have an examination by a DHSS doctor to make sure she was genuinely incapable of doing any work. a 50+ page form asking how high she could lift a book etc. How long she could sit at a desk etc. Stupid as she already had a job. she was not unemployed but incapcitated by illness.

She would gladly given up the £70/week to have her breasts back, to have had 6 months of not feeling **** every day. To be able to walk up the stairs without having to stop and catch her breath etc.

Nobody wants to go "on the sick", for those that are there they would much rather be able to return to work.

If there is a problem, it is that for the past 10 years government has been encouraging long term unemployed onto the sick as they then see unemployment rates drop. suddenly we are in the stupid position that unemployment had dropped by over 1 million under new labour, but the sickness claimants had increased by over 3 million.

I see most of what your wife went through as pointless bureacracy.

In my view, there should have been a contribution to the rent/mortage on your home equal to the percentage that her income was of the household income.

This would also apply to electricity/gas/water etc, but would have to be handled by a rebate system - you get the bill, you take a copy of it to the SS office, they have the %age she is entitled to available, they arrange a payment there and then using the payment details on the bill, you then go to the post office/bank and pay the rest.

That secures the roof over her head.

Food and clothing could still be dealt with as above - do it online and then add the items for you and only pay for your meals while hers are free - ie the final amount on the bill would be about half.

Ok so the household income would be reduced, but food, warmth, clothing and a roof over her head would all be taken care of - and would be more than the £70.

As for the duration of payment, well it would start from when declared sick, until certified by a doctor that you are fit to return to work, with the ongoing medical checkups forming the continuing case.

[gruntygiggles]

Tim, it is stories like yours and your wifes that can ometimes make me sick to the stomach at the state of this country. I have no aspirations to go into politics, but I do have many views and opinions on topics like this.

See my post on another similar thread:-

http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.php?t=126854&page=6

I do not like the generalisation surrounding benefits and the people that claim them, but it's easy to see why people find it so easy to fall into the trap of grouping all people together.

Your wife Tim, and I'm very glad she is gradually doing better and better, is a perfect example of just why the current system is so wrong. £70 a week does not even begin to cover the costs associated with dealing with serious illness, let alone the loss to your monthly income and associated mortgage, bills etc.

I don't think we can go as far as to dictate to people what they eat or drink, but I do think that at present, the worst of the categorisation comes from the government itslef. What we need to do is have a system of assessment that allows us to separate the few individuals and families that manipulate and take advantage of the system from the many many genuine claims for support.

Those people do need, in my opinion to be put into a programme that gives them a roof over their heads, an acceptable standard of living (not on the pverty line), food and clothing. The children in these ouseholds though need to be the priority and so the state should have more control of the childrens access to well fitting clothes and shoes and a good diet. The parents and adults should not be allowed to have lifes luxuries when they are perfectly able, but unwilling to work and pay for these themselves.

For everyone else that has a genuine claim, more needs to be done to offer better financial support and far greater supplementary support.

Gotta dash, but I'm sure I'll have more to say later.

We should just not be so quick to judge and spend more time trying to understand and empathise.

[timwilky]

All I can say, is thank god there is a system that awards some benifits to the unemployed/ sick. Of course it is not generous. It is not designed to be.

My son was laid off in October, his response was to go out and work on minimum rate, this did not even meet his mortgage payment. However if he had signed on, he would have got about £40/week, strange though that if he was 3 years older would get about £50/week. He would of course had got his mortgage interest, and council tax paid. So essentially £40/week fag&beer money. except out of that he would have gas/electric/food to pay for etc. Instead he would work 80/week on min rate until he was able to get a new job and he now only works 60/week to pay his commitments.

Try living as a single bloke/couple on the benefits system. It will soon drive you back to work.


I still think the tax credit system is wrong. It is essentially a means test on benefits. everybody in the same circumstances should be entitled to the same. A flat rate per dependant person in the houshold

Food parcels? Forced chemical alteration of natural state of being just because of a period of unemployment

Seriously?

Why not suggest a swift kick in the ribs in on the bargain, whilst down

Crikey, did an unemployed person spill your pint last night or something?

[SoulKiss]

Originally Posted by eviltwin

Food parcels? Forced chemical alteration of natural state of being just because of a period of unemployment

Seriously?

Why not suggest a swift kick in the ribs in on the bargain, whilst down

Crikey, did an unemployed person spill your pint last night or something?

When long-term unemployed people have a better standard of living than I do then yes, someone needs a kicking.

And why should they be able to produce another drain on society when they cannot support themselves, as it is to many of them a baby is just a further income.

Oh and why should an unemployed person be in the pub in the 1st place?