Open proposal for Social Welfare & Children's allowance

Prodigious

This is my opinion on an improved system for social welfare. Opinions are welcome.

Replacement of Dole

Food stamps.

It is well known that much dole money is wasted by people who don't need it.

Pros:
- Money is spent in Irish stores and goes back into circulation
- Money can be only spent on food (and clothes?), instead of alcohol, cigarettes etc.
- Non transferable, ID must be shown to match name on the stamps - Nobody can sell the stamps.
- Cannot be saved up - Expire after a month.
Cons:
- Effort of doing it (From the point of view of the government)

Childrens allowance

A similar system should be put in place, some sort of stamp/ticket which allows the purchase of a certain value of childrens goods such as clothing, formula food, and toys.

Mena

Can you show where this factual data comes from?

Prodigious

Mena wrote: »

Can you show where this factual data comes from?

What factual data? Its an idea for a system that could potentially be implemented.

smcgiff

Cards that cannot be used for alcohol/scratch cards/gambling would be a start. Possibly include smokes?

Yawns

Methememb wrote: »

This is my opinion on an improved system for social welfare.

It is a well known fact that many dole recipients head to the nearest off licence and spend the money on alcohol, or the nearest post office to post the money abroad. Not racism, fact.

So your opinion is a well known fact....

Just in case you didn't hear, the majority of people who claim job seeker's allowance have to go to the post office to collect it every week so that queue of people you see there aren't foreigners sending the money home.

Also can you show me a link to a report stating how many do send it home or how many do go straight to the off licence and spend it all on booze. Much appreciated if you can provide some concrete info. Your facts may just differ from actual facts.

Prodigious

smcgiff wrote: »

Cards that cannot be used for alcohol/scratch cards/gambling would be a start. Possibly include smokes?

Yeah, why not? It'd stop a serious amount of wastage.

Mena

You've claimed as fact that dole mostly gets spent on alcohol and child benefit sent to foreign countries.

Demonstrate this fact, otherwise you're manufacturing a problem in order to supply a solution.

Prodigious

Yawns wrote: »

So your opinion is a well known fact....

Just in case you didn't hear, the majority of people who claim job seeker's allowance have to go to the post office to collect it every week so that queue of people you see there aren't foreigners sending the money home.

Also can you show me a link to a report stating how many do send it home or how many do go straight to the off licence and spend it all on booze. Much appreciated if you can provide some concrete info. Your facts may just differ from actual facts.

Fair point... I see where you're coming from. I'll adjust the OP. At the same time, I stand by my point.

Mena wrote: »

You've claimed as fact that dole mostly gets spent on alcohol and child benefit sent to foreign countries.

Demonstrate this fact, otherwise you're manufacturing a problem in order to supply a solution.

The problem is there, but I take the point that there is no hard data to back it up. Post edited.

mikemac1

This will mean an end to special alcohol deals in Centra on child benefit day

Yawns

In my opinion, whilst I understand there is a number of people out there who get their money and go straight to off-licence / bookies / send some money via western union or w/e I certainly believe at this moment in time it's the minority of people who do this.

The time to be worrying about food stamps or cards for groceries was back in the 'boom period' when we had a high employment rate. As it currently stands, the vast majority claiming job seeker's allowance would be people who lost jobs over the last number of years and in those cases, most if not all of that money is already spent in the local economy on groceries to put food on the family table. The government should prioritize job creation before trying to kick a man when he's down.

The time to tackle dole scroungers was 5 years ago with the long term unemployed who were fit for work being targeted first back then.

Prodigious

Yawns wrote: »

In my opinion, whilst I understand there is a number of people out there who get their money and go straight to off-licence / bookies / send some money via western union or w/e I certainly believe at this moment in time it's the minority of people who do this.

The time to be worrying about food stamps or cards for groceries was back in the 'boom period' when we had a high employment rate. As it currently stands, the vast majority claiming job seeker's allowance would be people who lost jobs over the last number of years and in those cases, most if not all of that money is already spent in the local economy on groceries to put food on the family table. The government should prioritize job creation before trying to kick a man when he's down.

The time to tackle dole scroungers was 5 years ago with the long term unemployed who were fit for work being targeted first back then.

I disagree with you there. They're doing that as it is with the Household charge, increased USC, etc. By implementing the measures I've suggested they could cut out some other cuts to health/education or further increases in taxes.

Does anyone notice that it's always the middle man being screwed? The man with children and a house has been hit the hardest by the last budget. Senseless stuff.

Another thing. Why not have a few hours community service done to earn social welfare?

Yawns

we'll just have to agree to disagree then. I think job creation should be a higher priority than a dole stamp / card scheme.

Nothing wrong with a requirement for a few hours community service. I wouldn't stop there with that idea either. It should be mandatory for people sent to prison for fines to do community service for x amount of time instead of sending them to prison for a few hours. Tho they have made headway with that regard.

Prodigious

Yawns wrote: »

we'll just have to agree to disagree then. I think job creation should be a higher priority than a dole stamp / card scheme.

Nothing wrong with a requirement for a few hours community service. I wouldn't stop there with that idea either. It should be mandatory for people sent to prison for fines to do community service for x amount of time instead of sending them to prison for a few hours. Tho they have made headway with that regard.

Of course Job creation is extremely important. However, this is something tangible and which they could theoretically begin with straight away. Where do they start with job creation?

Extinction

I can't see it working OP, food is not the only household expense. For example, if you replace the dole with food stamps then you also have to provide free electricity, gas etc.

Prodigious

Extinction wrote: »

I can't see it working OP, food is not the only household expense. For example, if you replace the dole with food stamps then you also have to provide free electricity, gas etc.

Point taken. Cash isn't the answer though.

Extinction

I think it makes sense to use cash for social welfare payments. Cash can be spent anywhere on any item, this spreads cash through a community. If food stamps were introduced you can be sure that there would be a limited amount of places that they could be used and the owners of these outlets would be the only ones to benefit.

Prodigious

Extinction wrote: »

I think it makes sense to use cash for social welfare payments. Cash can be spent anywhere on any item, this spreads cash through a community. If food stamps were introduced you can be sure that there would be a limited amount of places that they could be used and the owners of these outlets would be the only ones to benefit.

At the same time, cash can be sent abroad, spent on alcohol, cigarettes, drugs, gambled etc.

mikemac1

We can start by only paying child benefit at the rate of the country where the child is.

Extinction

I think it is irrelevant what it is spent on, you may not like that people spend it on alcohol or cigarettes but at the same time why limit what it can be spent on?

Let me explain it this way. I am one of many who are self employed sole traders. My customer base is now largely unemployed. If you were to limit the social welfare to food stamps then I would be joining the dole que and so would many others.

barrackali

Another ridiculous right wing proposal....so the OP wants to marginalise unemployed people, that's at the heart of this rubbish idea.

It won't work and it won't happen...smell the coffee!

Prodigious

barrackali wrote: »

Another ridiculous right wing proposal....so the OP wants to marginalise unemployed people, that's at the heart of this rubbish idea.

It won't work and it won't happen...smell the coffee!

Sorry, but what do you mean by "marginalise unemployed people?"

Extinction

There is also an argument that alcohol and cigarettes are the two items that the government need unemployed people to spend most of their money on, far more goes back to revenue in taxes from alcohol and cigarettes than does from food. I for one propose alcohol stamps.

barrackali

Methememb wrote: »

Sorry, but what do you mean by "marginalise unemployed people?"

I am in a very fortunate economic situation, but how would it make you feel to have to use food stamps / vouchers? Sorry, but your idea is a load of nonsense...thankfully this kind of proposal wouldn't last farting time in government.

Farmer Pudsey

This is a proposal that sounds good in theory however what would happen.

Johnny is unemployed and living at home Mum Nad dad take the vouchers and Johnny gets cash for them, mum and dad still feed and sub him

Tim and Mary have too many foods stamps they trade at store for other items.

Jim is an alcholic trades his stamps at a huge discount to a food stamp trader that either sells the food at a discount or trades for other goods at shops.

Tom starts to forge food stamps and sells on to other shoppers.

Due to forgeries Dept of SW start to take longer to pay so some shops stop taking Stamps.

Shops that accept Foods Stamps start to charge more as a handling fee or charge the Dept Of SW for the inconvience of handling stamps.


And also if the government have not got the b#lls to cut social welfare the are definately not bring in food stamps

In reality why try to reinvent the circle what not reduce rate's of welfare

Chips Lovell

It won't work. Variations of this have been proposed before here, usually in the form of dole via a debit card that can only be spent on certain items. Problem is that if people want to spent their money on smokes, drugs or booze, they'll find a way to do it, most likely via unscrupulous retailers who, for example, might scan through €15 of groceries and provide €10 of cash in exchange.

RichardAnd

Methememb wrote: »

It is well known that much dole money is wasted by people who don't need it.

Says who exactly?

riclad

IT s well known people on low income spend their money on essentials ,food rent,esb ,gas etc in the local economy. a new voucher system would be just
cost more to run than the present system.
at some point the tax and welfare system will have a common data sharing system.
THAN what will happen is ,anyone over say 60k income , will lose their childrens allowance.
Theres pensioners who are on high incomes getting free phone, free electricty ,tv license etc
its seems to me the people on lower incomes spend more on cigarettes
than middle class people.

Fromthetrees

It's totally irrelevant what people spend their dole on.

Current cost of paying SW is x.

Under the new system it will cost x + the cost of administering the new way.
It will cost the state more money.

OP why in the name of god do you care what dole money is spent on provided it is being spent in Ireland. So you don't want dolies to smoke or drink, is buying a ticket to a match allowed, is having a steak twice a week unacceptable? It gets really messy with no tangible benefit to anyone. This type of approach will only give more power and stock to the black market, more and more goods are falling off the back of trucks, it'd be dangerous to fuel this market even more.

I think child benefit could be made a voucher type system if the cost wasn't too high to implement, it'd be nice to think evevry penny of child benefit is spent directly on the child.

Prodigious

Fromthetrees wrote: »

It's totally irrelevant what people spend their dole on.

Current cost of paying SW is x.

Under the new system it will cost x + the cost of administering the new way.
It will cost the state more money.

OP why in the name of god do you care what dole money is spent on provided it is being spent in Ireland. So you don't want dolies to smoke or drink, is buying a ticket to a match allowed, is having a steak twice a week unacceptable? It gets really messy with no tangible benefit to anyone. This type of approach will only give more power and stock to the black market, more and more goods are falling off the back of trucks, it'd be dangerous to fuel this market even more.

I think child benefit could be made a voucher type system if the cost wasn't too high to implement, it'd be nice to think evevry penny of child benefit is spent directly on the child.

Thats the point, not all of the money is being spent in Ireland.

Extinction

Methememb wrote: »

Thats the point, not all of the money is being spent in Ireland.

How much of it isn't being spent in Ireland? Do you also have a problem with Irish people (who get welfare) purchasing online from foreign business's or with them going to the European Championships last summer and spending their money in Poland? Perhaps it's not the dole your concerned about at all?

aN.Droid

Extinction wrote: »

How much of it isn't being spent in Ireland? Do you also have a problem with Irish people (who get welfare) purchasing online from foreign business's or with them going to the European Championships last summer and spending their money in Poland? Perhaps it's not the dole your concerned about at all?

\People claiming allowances are very important to the economy aswell as being a burden.

What about Joe down in the off license who will lose his job if the dole is cut for that area. Lets not stop there. What about Mary in the cinema?

You can see where I am coming from with this. The economy is a fragile ecosystem and social claimers do there bit to help aswell.

Prodigious

Extinction wrote: »

How much of it isn't being spent in Ireland? Do you also have a problem with Irish people (who get welfare) purchasing online from foreign business's or with them going to the European Championships last summer and spending their money in Poland? Perhaps it's not the dole your concerned about at all?

Well I believe the money that is being paid out by the state should be distributed in a manner so that it can only be spent within the Irish economy.

Extinction

Limericks wrote: »

\People claiming allowances are very important to the economy aswell as being a burden.

What about Joe down in the off license who will lose his job if the dole is cut for that area. Lets not stop there. What about Mary in the cinema?

You can see where I am coming from with this. The economy is a fragile ecosystem and social claimers do there bit to help aswell.

Thats exactly my point throughout the thread. I think food stamps would be harmful to the economy and I also don't see why anyone who is in the unfortunate position of having to claim welfare should be restricted in any way that they choose to spend that welfare.

Prodigious

Extinction wrote: »

Thats exactly my point throughout the thread. I think food stamps would be harmful to the economy and I also don't see why anyone who is in the unfortunate position of having to claim welfare should be restricted in any way that they choose to spend that welfare.

One who "has to claim welfare" surely needs it for necessities such as food and bills? In other words, they do not need it for alcohol and cigarettes? Or am I missing something?

aN.Droid

Extinction wrote: »

Thats exactly my point throughout the thread. I think food stamps would be harmful to the economy and I also don't see why anyone who is in the unfortunate position of having to claim welfare should be restricted in any way that they choose to spend that welfare.

Sorry, didn't meant to quote your post!

Methememb wrote: »

One who "has to claim welfare" surely needs it for necessities such as food and bills? In other words, they do not need it for alcohol and cigarettes? Or am I missing something?

Yes you are missing allot. Your view and "facts" don't take into account thousands of variables including protecting the jobs of people in the shops and the jobs down the line including the delivery drivers, the manufacturers, the accountant working for them, the lawyers working for them etc etc the list is a mile long.

Your suggestion is just not feasible.

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

Methememb wrote: »

Well I believe the money that is being paid out by the state should be distributed in a manner so that it can only be spent within the Irish economy.

Nice idea but impossible to implement. I also think things get balanced out due to the amount of Irish who currently work abroad.
I know of 2 lads I worked with, electricians, one in Canada, one in Australia, who send money home to their parents to help with the mortgage. Im sure their not the only ones.

Extinction

Methememb wrote: »

One who "has to claim welfare" surely needs it for necessities such as food and bills? In other words, they do not need it for alcohol and cigarettes? Or am I missing something?

Ok, so lets bring in food stamps, how do we calculate how much a family needs, maybe means test them by number of adults and children. Next we need electricty stamps, solid fuel or heating oil stamps. Transport stamps so people can get from A to B for job interviews. Stamps for paper and ink so they can write CV's to apply for jobs. We will also need to increase the rent allowance because people will no longer have cash to pay the minimum amount they have to at present. Then there's all the other stuff like a telephone allowance and broadband allowance so you can access job sites and send CV's. Sure I could go on and on about all the different stamps you'd need to create, isn't it much simpler to tackle the abuse of the social welfare system by the few that are abusing it rather than view every recipient with suspicion?

Halloween Jack

There were butter vouchers in Ireland, many moons ago, they were rarely used to exchange for butter.

The retailers knew they were gettin paid for the voucher, regardless of what item it was used for.

Smokes were the main substitute. The scheme was discontinued because of this kind of stuff.

Extinction

Halloween Jack wrote: »

There were butter vouchers in Ireland, many moons ago, they were rarely used to exchange for butter.

The retailers knew they were gettin paid for the voucher, regardless of what item it was used for.

Smokes were the main substitute. The scheme was discontinued because of this kind of stuff.

Indeed I remember that well, thankfully that was the last time I was in receipt of social welfare and I remember saving them up to get smokes and even to get alcohol at christmas time. I don't know anyone who actually got butter with them.

the groutch

food stamps or other controlling of how welfare benefits are spent are a waste imo, people will always find a way around it.
there needs to be more focus imo on the detection of welfare fraud, and the means testing of benefits, especially children's allowance.

Farmer Pudsey

the groutch wrote: »

food stamps or other controlling of how welfare benefits are spent are a waste imo, people will always find a way around it.
there needs to be more focus imo on the detection of welfare fraud, and the means testing of benefits, especially children's allowance.

Means testing of CA is another red herring. At what level would it be set 100K or 130K or 70K. Take at 100K again how do you police it PAYE workers in general would lose it while self employed would work the system to remain within the means test. Look at the present 3rd level grants system you have the situtation where a a buisness owner can access the grant while his workers cannot. Also if you set the test too low it is a discentive to work. The same with taxing CA. If it is considered too high reduce it accross the board.

However when you look at it at present because there is no tax allowance associated with childern or childcare it is at or around the norm accross Europe for working family's while it is above the norm for welfare recipents. We have a big issue with the so called ''vulnerable'' in Ireland. The reality is that with the welfare sysyem we have there is little or no reason for poverty however it is the choices people make when spending there money that is the issue. If you decide to spend 70/week on cigerettes(pack a day) or alachol (16 pints in a pub or a sh#tload in a supermarket) or going to a resturant then complain about having no money you can harly complain about being hard done by.

Go to any shop by a school at around 9 in the morning and see the parents that buy snacks, drinks or fatty foods for there kids these are usually the same that are ''vulnerable''.

Halloween Jack

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Means testing of CA is another red herring. At what level would it be set 100K or 130K or 70K. Take at 100K again how do you police it PAYE workers in general would lose it while self employed would work the system to remain within the means test. Look at the present 3rd level grants system you have the situtation where a a buisness owner can access the grant while his workers cannot. Also if you set the test too low it is a discentive to work. The same with taxing CA. If it is considered too high reduce it accross the board.

However when you look at it at present because there is no tax allowance associated with childern or childcare it is at or around the norm accross Europe for working family's while it is above the norm for welfare recipents. We have a big issue with the so called ''vulnerable'' in Ireland. The reality is that with the welfare sysyem we have there is little or no reason for poverty however it is the choices people make when spending there money that is the issue. If you decide to spend 70/week on cigerettes(pack a day) or alachol (16 pints in a pub or a sh#tload in a supermarket) or going to a resturant then complain about having no money you can harly complain about being hard done by.

Go to any shop by a school at around 9 in the morning and see the parents that by snacks, drinks or fatty foods for there kids these are usually the same that are ''vulnerable''.

This is one of the better posts Ive read on this issue round here.

Farmer Pudsey

I see Joan Bruton is out to help the vulnerable again by taxing CA. According to her calculations a High earner will lose 45% and a low earner will lose 11%. Yet when you look at PRSI and USC this will be 52-55% for middle/high earners and 30% for low earners while the vulnerable pocket the whole lot.

So for a family's on low/mid income it will mean a loss of 40-75 euro's/child/month. Another reason to jack the job and retire early. Also another incentive if you are self employed to reduce your income and pay less tax. Why go to work and pay childminding fees when you would be as well off at home.

Tea drinker

Limericks wrote: »

\People claiming allowances are very important to the economy aswell as being a burden.

What about Joe down in the off license who will lose his job if the dole is cut for that area. Lets not stop there. What about Mary in the cinema?

You can see where I am coming from with this. The economy is a fragile ecosystem and social claimers do there bit to help aswell.

You think taxpayers will do nothing with the money they assumedly do not get taxed as a result of decreasing allowances? The same argument has been used to defend PS pay. An allowance system is for bare necessities, I don't want to pay for cinema etc. I've got my own people to think about and plenty of deserving charities out there. Maybe I can be trusted with my little spare cash to stimulate the economy.

Extinction

I doubt lower taxes would follow a drop in social welfare payments and even if it did a lot of that extra income would probably just end up in bank savings accounts. Money in savings won't stimulate the economy. A person in receipt of a social welfare payment is likely to spend all of it every single week in their local economy.

If people could be trusted with their little spare cash to help stimulate the economy then they would be out spending now, instead those who do have savings are not spending.

sean200

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

I see Joan Bruton is out to help the vulnerable again by taxing CA. According to her calculations a High earner will lose 45% and a low earner will lose 11%. Yet when you look at PRSI and USC this will be 52-55% for middle/high earners and 30% for low earners while the vulnerable pocket the whole lot.

So for a family's on low/mid income it will mean a loss of 40-75 euro's/child/month. Another reason to jack the job and retire early. Also another incentive if you are self employed to reduce your income and pay less tax. Why go to work and pay childminding fees when you would be as well off at home.

If either FG or labour do this then not one working person with kids will vote for them
I am looking forward to the local elections in 2014 so I can watch them being wiped out

barrackali

If you are a high earner you don't need the money...that's the way I see it! My old man didn't touch our children's allowance for all the years we got it ffs.

The money needs to be targeted at those who need it, and that includes those who are working yet finding it hard to get by.

Farmer Pudsey

barrackali wrote: »

If you are a high earner you don't need the money...that's the way I see it! My old man didn't touch our children's allowance for all the years we got it ffs.

The money needs to be targeted at those who need it, and that includes those who are working yet finding it hard to get by.

Define a high earner
This bugs me if only so called high earners were hit then well and good everybody forgets that workers hit the high rate of tax faster than most other countries. So if taxing goes ahead just like colledge grants the coping class will be hit hard. For the government to save money these people will have to be hit.

But that is alright people can sit at home and be vulnerable.