I think the only time its okay is for a situation like Gothchick mentioned, where it would protect the person from abuse/bullying and then only by request. I think its a very slippery slope otherwise and would really increase the societal divide.
But I would also be happy to see taxes increase slightly and for the govt to provide school supplies to all children. No child should miss out when it comes to school.
I'm gonna step out on a limb here (how unusual for me ...!) and say that I totally support the use of food / grocery vouchers for at least half of child-related welfare benefits.
The way I see it, taxpayers (us) are providing these payments to assist families, particularly children, in order to ensure that they have the basics.
What's more basic than food, clothing, nappies, formula, fuel etc? I would be absolutely fine with the money I receive in benefits being paid in kind. I didn't "earn" it, as such. I see it as being given in trust for my kids to make sure they're okay.
If I want luxuries, I buy them with the money I earn (or that DH does). We get to have absolute control over that.
I don't see this as a poor / rich anyone "bashing" debate. Everyone has food and grocery bills. What's the prob with designating a certain proportion of govt handouts specifically to them?
Can it be used at the pet store to buy laying pellets for the chooks we get eggs from?
Can we use it for seeds in the garden to grow carrots?
Can it be used at specialty stores?
How would it work in favour of kids if it can only be used (like now) at certain supermarkets?
Not everyone has the same expenses and debts. I have worked hard to be debt free and think my family deserves a few luxuries after going without for so long.
Would everyone be happy if one group started telling another group what type of car they were 'allowed' to drive...because one group pays the taxes for the roads that those cars are driven on!?
I agree children being cared for is of HIGH importance, but limiting, punishing and dictating to the minority isn't going to be of benefit.
Education and support is.
I was thinking about this thread when I went for a walk earlier and thought that the idea was similar to the precommittment scheme for gambling - yes it's bigger govt but the idea is to protect those who can't protect themselves ie children that are left to struggle at home because their carer can't control themselves
I just read someone post, and though how demoralising it would be for someone to show up to Coles with the voucher, a couple of kids in tow and collect their food with their government issued budget.
If it were me, I would feel humiliated that the money I am entitled to (FTA/B/parenting payment) needs to be budgeted for me.
I also really dislike when people say that benefit receipts get "tax payers money" as if every Tom, Deck and Harry is personally giving handouts to these lazy SAHM's, because the thing is that the majority of the people who collect the tax payers money for parenting payments worked before they had kids, and will probably work for many years after they had kids. IMO raising their kids (furture tax payers) is just as an important contribution to society, as paying a their tax each week.
I need to be clear though, in case my previous posts aren't read, my concerns are for extreme cases with children or other vulnerable parties not for general application to everyone.
Though would be nice to see some more money spent on education in general so we can have more resources
Sorry OP went slightly off topic a little
Pregnant for the first-time?
Not sure where to start? We can help!
Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!