Universal Credit

[L00b]

It would have to be an extremely steep slippery slope for it to get close to what happened behind those gates.

That it might, yet the base philosophy (absent the component of racial/xenophobic dogma) was essentially the same: that motto was not the invention and sole preserve of the Nazi regime, nor was it restricted to extermination camps, you know.

[Mister M]

A workhouse was the provision of accommodation, food, education and medical care, in return for work.

 

So if we through in entertainment then it wouldn’t be a workhouse it would be something different and better.

 

A workhouse with television and a pool table? Sounds like a prison to me.

 

Really? Take a look at nearly every privatised institution; prisons, care homes, etc. The price per head is exorbitant.

 

Nobody is saying that work isn't good for people, but the jobs aren't there, and working for Bed and board in an institution is going to undercut those businesses on the outside, just as the old workhouses did.

 

I can't believe I'm actually discussing this, it's a ridiculous notion.

 

And not just the private sector. The Salvation Army charge the council a fortune for letting the destitute stay in one of their rooms.

[MrSmith]

It would have to be run for profit if this government are in charge, it's what they do...

Not applicable because it’s not this government making the suggestion, the current system makes profits for private landlords and it shouldn't.

 

History proves that people who work for nothing undercut outsiders. It's one of the problems with prisons,

They wouldn't be working for nothing and wouldn't be doing work that is already done.

 

 

You cannot institutionalise people for the 'crime' of being unemployed or simply poor - what is the difference between this and prison? There is far more than just money involved, and it will undoubtedly create more problems than it solves.

No one as suggested we should, I don't understand why you are opposed to providing accommodation, food and work for people in need, it's something we already do in a very inefficient way, gives profits to private companies and alows the unemployed to undercut the employed, everything you appear to oppose is already happening, my way would stop it happening.

 

Do you really want to live in a country where super rich are receiving silly money (- Chris Huhne's brief was earning 20K a day,) and the poor punished for being poor... I can't think of a better way to start a revolution. Or do you want to legislate against that - Oh good, now we have a police state as well.

 

See what I mean?

 

No one as suggested punishing the poor, I'm suggesting we help then in the most efficient way; the system we have now has clearly failed, and is abused on massive scale.

 

---------- Post added 13-03-2013 at 15:40 ----------

 

A workhouse with television and a pool table? Sounds like a prison to me.

 

People can't choose to walk in and out of prisons, or go away for the weekend.

 

Sounds more like the type of accommodation our armed forces use, well kept clean accommodation with the free movement of people in and out, with food and entertainment thrown in. Young people would be queuing at the door to get in.

[stressconsul]

The problem will be with the IT. No government has yet managed this successfully. Look at the problems with the Child Support Agency - they never got them sorted out after year upon year of trying. Within six months Universal Credit will be managed on pencil written index cards and a lot of people will be going hungry.

[kidneystone]

I think that Mr Smith would be quite happy to put all benefit claiments into a getto and feed them once a day on bread and water. I think he doesn't live in the real world

[MrSmith]

I think that Mr Smith would be quite happy to put all benefit claiments into a getto and feed them once a day on bread and water. I think he doesn't live in the real world

 

If that’s the impression you get from my posts then your brain is clearly very small.

[Anna B]

Not applicable because it’s not this government making the suggestion, the current system makes profits for private landlords and it shouldn't.

 

They wouldn't be working for nothing and wouldn't be doing work that is already done.

 

 

 

No one as suggested we should, I don't understand why you are opposed to providing accommodation, food and work for people in need, it's something we already do in a very inefficient way, gives profits to private companies and alows the unemployed to undercut the employed, everything you appear to oppose is already happening, my way would stop it happening.

 

 

 

No one as suggested punishing the poor, I'm suggesting we help then in the most efficient way; the system we have now has clearly failed, and is abused on massive scale.

 

---------- Post added 13-03-2013 at 15:40 ----------

 

 

People can't choose to walk in and out of prisons, or go away for the weekend.

 

Sounds more like the type of accommodation our armed forces use, well kept clean accommodation with the free movement of people in and out, with food and entertainment thrown in. Young people would be queuing at the door to get in.

 

If you put people in institutions they become institutionalised, that is, they cannot function outside the institution. I worked for a short while at the old Middlewood Hospital trying to get the inmates (who were perfectly sane but had been in the hospital for years) ready to face the outside world. Most were terrified, and needed years of support. Many just couldn't cope and came back. Same applies to people in prison.

 

A lot of the people we're talking about struggle to survive, but they must keep on trying, with our help. Put them in one of your places, no matter how well intentioned and the chances are they will never come out and be an even bigger drain on society.

 

But if we want these benefit claimants to make a go of it, we have to give them the best chance of success, and that means not driving their self-esteem into the dirt with for example, name calling, and draconian rules. They have to at least be allowed to retain their self respect.

 

For some it is already too late. That is our failure, not theirs. They are condemned to a fairly pathetic life, no matter how much the Daily Mail wants you to think otherwise.

 

Ask them if they'd like to swap places with some family man with a good job, nice house and car in a respectable suburb, with a wife and a couple of nice decent kids and he'd probably snatch your hand off. It's because he knows he'll never have those things that he takes his revenge on society.

[MrSmith]

If you put people in institutions they become institutionalised, that is, they cannot function outside the institution. I worked for a short while at the old Middlewood Hospital trying to get the inmates (who were perfectly sane but had been in the hospital for years) ready to face the outside world. Most were terrified, and needed years of support. Many just couldn't cope and came back. Same applies to people in prison.

 

You appear to keep falling back on your own preconceived ideas about workhouses instead of reading what I type. I am simply proposing providing affordable accommodation, food and work for people that need it, they won't be locked up, they will be able to come and go as they please, not much different to giving someone a council house with perks.

 

 

A lot of the people we're talking about struggle to survive, but they must keep on trying, with our help. Put them in one of your places, no matter how well intentioned and the chances are they will never come out and be an even bigger drain on society.

People in the armed forces leave all the time and cope quite well once they have to do things for themselves. There will always be people that will never cope on their own and providing them with everything they need in life isn’t a bad thing. Giving them a few hundred quid each week and telling them to get on with life will never help them. They will just use the money for booze, drugs and destroy any hope of a fulfilling life.

 

 

But if we want these benefit claimants to make a go of it, we have to give them the best chance of success, and that means not driving their self-esteem into the dirt with for example, name calling, and draconian rules. They have to at least be allowed to retain their self respect.

The system so far as clearly failed, many benefits claimant simply squander the money they are given on booze and drugs, but then chucking money at people will never solve their problems.

 

 

 

For some it is already too late. That is our failure, not theirs. They are condemned to a fairly pathetic life, no matter how much the Daily Mail wants you to think otherwise.

I agree which is why the system needs changing to provide them with more help and give them a sense of purpose.

 

Ask them if they'd like to swap places with some family man with a good job, nice house and car in a respectable suburb, with a wife and a couple of nice decent kids and he'd probably snatch your hand off. It's because he knows he'll never have those things that he takes his revenge on society.

 

We can't supply those things but we can give them something to do and a sense of pride.

[kidneystone]

Mr Smith cannot see anybody else's point of view except his own and if you disagree with him he just insults you.

He would make a great conservative prime minister

[MrSmith]

Mr Smith cannot see anybody else's point of view except his own and if you disagree with him he just insults you.

He would make a great conservative prime minister

 

You haven't given a point of view or tried to take part in the discussion, you just came on to have personal dig at me.