Welfare baby solution: Family Cap. ( Archived) (411)

venere08: sorry, but I don't believe you asked this question. I can't possibly bring myself to reply.

jac379: Where did the cash come from with respect to the tenants you had who were in receipt of welfare?

leigh2154: This sounds so simple when you say it, but if they lack the maturity to raise children, I imagine they lack the maturity to use the free birth control...

jac379: I'm sorry, I haven't read all this thread, or all your comments.

I've just dipped in, but the bits I've highlighted was the response that I expected.

I have read newspaper reports and have seen TV documentaries regarding the benefits system, too and there has been conflicting information and perspectives.

I think it is absolutely to do with viewer ratings because that's what keeps the cash rolling in. Are "Sun" readers going to carry on buying the paper if it suddenly starts in depth reporting regarding the politics, sociopsychology and economics of lone parents and immigrants into the UK? Unlikely, particularly given the vocabulary of this paper is set at a limit of about 300 words.

Are people going to continue paying their TV licence and respect that great British institution, the BBC, if they start airing documentaries with false information about immigrants, or lone parents?

Each section of media coverage has their target audience and will bias reports accordingly.

I also suspect that their may be other agendas that effect the overall media reporting the UK.

Yes, some people commit benefit fraud and manipulations, just as some people commit tax fraud and manipulations, but why are benefits the subject that seems to be most highlighted, when the probable loss of revenue is greater for tax?

I think it serves a purpose.

I suspect to follow up tax fraud and provide an effective system for getting people back into work would be a very expensive business.

We already have a failing economy. It strikes me, its very easy to put the focus on benefit fraud and manipulations as a red herring. It detracts attention from inadequacies and needless expenses made by each of our successive governments. I suspect that if we knew what our governments were up to, we would quickly lose all faith in that system. When scandals come out, the poo hits the fan, but scandals not coming out doesn't mean they're not happening.

Knowing that you have a system that fails the most vulnerable people through lack of financial and well thought out input, means that you can attack the groups of people who simply don't have the resources to fight back.

The whole thing feeds on the hierarchical system that we have and the need for a helluva lot of people to look down on others to make themselves feel better.

There is a whole complex area of psychology here that runs parallel to the complex economics and the complex politics. Is it right that human rights should be denied some people on this basis?

jvaski: Actually you're right Fud .....( did I really say that ? )

With exception of many of us who are employees of our own corporation ...where you're still technically correct. ( Did I say that again ? )

My point was that a lot of money has been paid into the unemployment system on behalf of most employees over their years of employment. Unemployment is not a "benefit" it is "unemployment insurance" and should be considered payable to anyone unemployed who paid in if their employment was lost.
It's no different than insurance paying you if you accidently smashed your car up ....it's "insurance " !!