baldysblog.co.uk

This is perhaps the most interesting “question or problem” that will dominate the next decade of British Politics but perhaps, in order to ‘answer the question’, we need to spend a lot more time in determining exactly what the ‘question’ is that we are trying to resolve.

Most likely, the majority of UK citizens would accept that there should be a publicly funded “safety net” to catch people who through no fault of their own, fall on ‘hard times’, however…

The ‘Deserving Poor’…

Even in ‘Dickensian Britain’ the same applied, people who fell on hard times were dealt with by the “Local Parish” and ended up in the ‘Poor House’. However along with this came the concept of the “Deserving Poor” and therefore presumably, the ‘undeserving poor’ who one guesses between the drunks and ex-service disabled must have included a fair number of young lasses pregnant via the ‘young master’ and dismissed from ‘Service’.

In a particular sense, this is still how the world of the “economically inactive” is seen by the majority of British ‘taxpayers’ but in today’s world, I would suggest that this not only wrong factually, but also counter productive in terms of ‘solving the problem’. We live in different times and circumstances and need to understand both ‘then’ and ‘now’ before we express an opinion.

Then and Now

In the world of ‘then’ people who ‘Fell upon the charity of the Parish’ knew the people involved who would ‘pay’ and they in return, probably knew the individual involved personally in one way or another so that their “charity” was most likely reasonably well balanced in most cases between the needs of the individual and the views of ‘local society’.

In our ‘Now’ for good or bad, we don’t have that kind of personal touch, we have a system hedged around with ‘entitlements and rules’ which of course, if you get to grips with them, you can manipulate to your personal advantage. In a sense, people at the “bottom end of society” as some might see them, are no different to expensive Lawyers finding loopholes in the tax system for the benefit of their wealthy clients to reduce their taxation problems because, Taxation too is a system of rules and entitlements.

Perhaps in the world of ‘Today’ we need to try and find a balance between the two.

Two Problems

There are two separate problems to consider and the real ‘trick’ is by working on them individually, it may be possible eventually, to stream the solutions together and create a new ‘dynamic’, even a “virtuous circle’. But in order to illustrate the matter further, let’s take something similar as an example:

Education As The Example

Consider the fact that the totally daft ‘target’ of getting more 18 year old s into ‘Uni’ has resulted in more “working class/disadvantaged people” getting into Higher Education so one might think that a “good thing” but is it ? The probable answer on several levels and as much to do with the so-called Universities themselves, is NO it is a piss poor policy dreamt up by brainless idiots who don’t understand the “question” in the first place and therefore are incapable of delivering an appropriate “answer”.

It will come as no surprise to intelligent people to know that the “drop out rate” among these newly enfranchise working class students who will be saddled with the debt of a “Student Loan” in return for a totally indifferent degree, is far higher than among those from muddle class families. If you ask what this may mean because you don’t know, allow me to explain:

Young people need support and encouragement, given a choice in the matter, get born first, male is good but most importantly, to muddle class parents because they will instil “aspiration and success values” in you from the very moment you exit from the womb.

Back to Social Security

However labelled by sub-section, social security is an appropriate description, the overall cost to the taxpayer is huge but the benefit to the individual truly, not that great and only just ‘survivable’ by the majority. There are many different ‘sub-sections’ to consider as expressed by a number of different classifications such as ‘long term unemployed’ and so forth.

A good example would be “Single Mothers” where the image of feckless teenagers with several kids via different ‘Fathers’ comes to mind. However, this ‘image’ should also include middle class women who have gone through a divorce, things are not that conveniently so ‘cut and dried’.

Government policies cannot exist based upon the experiences of any one individual, they need to be based upon achievable themes and goals for the majority. In this respect it seems to me the focus is totally wrong, ‘bearing down’ on benefit payments won’t solve the basic problem. If we separate the problem into two parts, “motivation” and “mode” and leave the first to the individual, we may start to build a suitable ‘solution’.

If we start by thinking about “aspirations”, we might just be looking at a problem that inflicts very many. If you live on a ‘sink estate’ where 40% of the adults around you at the age of 40, have never had a day’s proper work and live off ‘Benefits’, this is not, I might suggest, an “empowering environment”.

The “Benefits Trap”

The basic problem is called the benefits or poverty “trap” which is akin to the “person on the flying trapeze” where letting go of what you have for something ‘uncertain’ is very difficult and I can illustrate that from personal experience.

Four years ago I left London to move to Somerset to look after my aged Parents who were well into their 80′s. Initially there was a lot of sorting out to be done and I supported myself with funds I already had. With a background in IT Project Management I thought that I could set up a local “IT Doctor Service for local small businesses, the web site still exists although I will convert it for other purposes shortly (www.itsbs.co.uk). In fact, by the time I put the site up, my Father’s health deteriorated drastically so no commercial activity took place.

However by this time I had “signed on” and was receiving “carers allowance” – not means tested but potentially taxable + a top up of means tested Income Support later to be come “Pension Credit” once I had passed 60 years of age. When I approached the Social Security people about doing a “transition” according to circumstances and income ‘arising’, no formal route exists and neither a suitable monitoring system if it did.

This is the real problem, this is the real failure and the reason people get caught in the “benefits trap” which for those who don’t know, earn £1, lose £1 of Benefit – fair enough in itself but without the potential to monitor that properly, the policy is nuts either you are “ON” or “OFF” the system, how very digital when people are analogue by definition.

Use the system as a “safety net” and encourage them to make the “transit” via open and honest means according to variable circumstances and 50% of the ‘problem’ will resolve itself in a 12 month. Given the excessive cost to the taxpayer and on the assumption that you don’t want to develop a “black economy”, the Benefits system needs to change radically even if it means moving the “band”so eg. A person on £150 a week could ‘earn’ £50 pw without losing benefits or even paying tax because it would be cheaper in the medium term.

Why ?

The above figure is not meant to be specific in numerical terms, it is a figure for illustration only. However the real point is that whilst providing citizens with a ‘safety net’ in terms of income, you also give them the incentive to move on and away from State Dependency. But at the same time you need to provide a plug in, plug out service so that someone could “try something” and it it doesn’t work out, for them to walk away knowing that they will continue to get ‘sustenance’ if not luxury. The point expressed another way might be to convert the ‘Benefits System’ from a platform into a Springboard.