If you could vote on the future of benefits, how would you vote?

[L00b]

I think it should be spent on whatever those in receipt of it see fit.

I think it should be spent on whatever is required to get by (being fed, clothed, clean and warm), first and foremost. Anything leftover is indicative of too high a benefit level being paid out. And removes the incentive to go work that much further.

Treating adults like children is unnaceptable. Being out of work is undignified enough without being forced to shop where the government tells you to on items chosen by the government. That's demeaning and discriminatory and humiliating.

People on benefits who behave "like adults" do not make a case for the introduction of vouchers. But are they a majority? And how can that be assessed objectively(and apolitically)? (genuine questions)

would you like someone to tell you what you can and can't buy?

 

if people have paid their bills why shouldn't they have a drink and/or smoke?

If there is anything left after paying for their essentials, then too much benefit is being paid. See above.

 

That's not far or extreme right thinking, just common sense.

 

Benefits are meant to support, nothing more. Or have I misunderstood their primary objective?

[I1L2T3]

What, you mean bullying people and trying to push them around?

 

No, I mean making the benefit system more efficient, fairer and easier to understand.

[TheGuy]

Many people are receiving £500 + a week in various benefits, and yet those at "occupy London/Sheffield" reckon the system is flawed and is failing people!

 

work that out.

[Mr Gobby]

Benefits are here to stay for the duration, no amount of crying from Daily Fail readers will ever change that! It's a factual FACT!

 

Rich. I really think you have a problem with people who read the daily mail /or is it a fantasy of yours.

[HeadingNorth]

If there is anything left after paying for their essentials, then too much benefit is being paid. See above.

 

That's not far or extreme right thinking, just common sense.

 

Benefits are meant to support, nothing more. Or have I misunderstood their primary objective?

 

I think you've misunderstood what is required for a person to retain a stable mentality and be in any fit state to even look for work, let alone find any. Merely not starving or freezing to death, is not sufficient.

[Mr Gobby]

Nothing, but don't let that get in the way of them wanting to get people off those nasty benefits wot drain their precious taxes,,

 

Yes it is a thorn for THOSE that do pay taxes to support people who supposedly can't work .TBH the whole benefits system wants overhauling and anyone who can work even those with a disability should work.

[Rich]

Yes it is a thorn for THOSE that do pay taxes to support people who supposedly can't work .TBH the whole benefits system wants overhauling and anyone who can work even those with a disability should work.

 

I DO work though, only voluntary, but work's work.

[L00b]

I think you've misunderstood what is required for a person to retain a stable mentality and be in any fit state to even look for work, let alone find any.

 

Merely not starving or freezing to death, is not sufficient.

Oh?

 

Having been at that particular coalface (in this country), with bills, a mortgage, a newly-pregnant and newly-made-unemployed wife, newly-made-unemployed myself (in both cases abusively) and -surprise, surprise- both of us ineligible for any kind of benefit, unfortunately you'll find me much less than receptive to namby pamby -type arguments.

[Mr Gobby]

I DO work though, only voluntary, but work's work.

 

But you still scoff at people who pay taxes to keep you in benefits .

[TheGuy]

I think you've misunderstood what is required for a person to retain a stable mentality and be in any fit state to even look for work, let alone find any. Merely not starving or freezing to death, is not sufficient.

 

Is this the new official re-worded definition and purpose of welfare these days, or just your own?