Since the dawn of baked beans on toast
in the UK; men, women and (secretly) squirrels have waged war with
other air-breathers to claim what is rightfully theirs.
Unfortunately, when it comes to actually deciding what is
“rightfully” your own thing, well... The lines do kind of blur
when it comes to those with 4-slice toasters, and those without.
Lines such as...
5: The rich are misled by media as to the
true amount of benefits claimed.
All the while, and
especially during recession, we constantly hear of the UK
Government's pleas to people to find work – As if everyone has a
role to fill within the UK, similar in vein to us all working for the
Galactic Empire – any work in fact; inclusive of much-touted
zero-hour contracts; which is about as much as work as claiming a
benefit itself.
Work.
Of course, it
doesn't always work out that way, due to differing reasons; You may
have terrible exam results and be out of school. You may even be
classed as disabled in some way, shape or form (I personally have mid
to long term depression, and have been out of work for over 2 years
now due to high stress and anxiety in public places).
If you are
unemployed in the UK, you can claim just over £70 a week for living
expenses. This includes bills, food and travel for job interviews.
You can also claim for additional benefits such as Disability,
Housing benefit to pay for rent and to a further extent, your
prescriptions are free.
Unfortunately,
everyone above the breadline within the UK seem to believe that
everyone on benefits is claiming a disproportionate amount due to
single parent, 5 child (and therefore up to 6 bedroom) homes that
would put the old lady who lived in a shoe to shame.
Some people quoted in the media can get around £39,000 a year.
To put
that into perspective, a “standard” user of benefits at around
£70 a week would get £3640 a year – one tenth of that sum (that
is also above the “average wage” in the UK).
Of course,
when the two classes take to the internet, a
flame war not seen since Jean Grey turned into the Phoenix surely
engulfs the comments sections:
More on the workhouses later.
At the best of times,
watching and reading various news sources in the UK can be more like
sitting on a fence watching two dogs barking at one another,
mindlessly spouting whatever random noises usually mean “I'm gonna
piss here!”.
But to go back to point; TV shows in the UK
show the people on benefits as being low-level water-feeders devoid
of any human emotion and content to sit back and wait for the cash to
roll in every fortnight whilst paying for their 50+ inch TV sets on
credit from wherever is stupid enough to give them credit, and drink
/ smoke themselves into levels of depravity that even your richer,
gin-smothered Grandmother would grimace at. My argument is everyone
needs
a vice – something to get them through the day or week, and if they
can still function relatively well and still work then so be it. The
people on TV shows are there to be poked and prodded, and to get the
stereotype now out of the way, are not “real” benefits claimants.
They are the cartoon villains who should be sanctioned, intimidated
and drove out to work.
Amazingly, not everyone is like this. I personally despise sitting
around trying to find something to do. The same four walls annoy me.
I'm sure I'm not the only unemployed person in the country who
actually wants a job, much as I'm sure in saying that people aren't
all as depicted in TV shows.
But the TV is king in this day
and age, and time after time, richer people in adequate-to-high paid
salary brackets think of these people “They're not on my street, so
it must be true”.
4: The poor are misled by the rich that they can be helped.
Being a benefit claimant for two
years now, I've lost count of the amount of “help programmes” or
“initiatives” supposedly set up by Government (read; contracted
by) so as the companies can
fill their pockets from the exploitation of the poor.
I have
been part of a work program for over a year now that promises to help
me into work, so long as I do my bit and be a nice boy. I'm sure if I
don't bite, I'd get a Scooby Snack or something, and if I don't poop
on their lawn, I'd get a good stroke; hopefully from Daphne.
She gives dogs
bones...
The downside of this is reading media. These companies have the right
to put you on zero-hour contracts, where you might not be paid a
penny until there is work to be done, whilst they can rake in a sum
of money for securing a contract for the person in question. Also,
whilst the success rates of the work program have gone up from
roughly 3 per cent to 13 per cent over 3 years; it is hard to surmise
the exact amount still in their job / is on zero hours and classed as
in work / moved onto disability benefit / found another job / left /
sacked / subsequently sanctioned for not looking for work etc.
Basically; no matter the Government in charge; it is an immense
clusterfuck that should not be.
It's a simple enough
scenario: The educated read these things and know their rights. The
uneducated stumble in blindly and sign everything going. The
difference is that the educated know one thing: Your most important
asset is your own signature. The other part of the end product is
that people don't need “brokers” (as they called themselves in my
first meeting) to find them work. There are plenty of ways to find
your own work.
Another fun fact: “Brokers” to poor people
sound like scum douchebags exploiting you for money, thanks to the
1980's; so invent a new word, or get ready for hate.
3: The rich believe poor people should go back to Victorian London
(Probably).
Remember this:
?
Back to the point however; the workhouses were
originally started around 1400, but are perhaps best remembered (due
to our education system) to be prevalent around the mid 1800's
onwards. They were sometimes sponsored by the government, or indeed
local wealth-mongers so as they could take in impoverished people,
and sleep, feed, and clothe people in exchange for work. Of course,
to someone earning say a full-time wage, this is perfect sense in the
modern age (citation / lobotomy needed).
The downside of
course was more of a debauched Darwinism... People were worked to the
bone more often than Hugh Grant circa 1995; sometimes doing 60 hours
a week just for those privileges. In a less comedic undertone, they
also died.
So whilst the argument is indeed there for mass
industrial scale labour; I would have to ask one question – Would
they be so happy if they lost everything to find themselves in that
circumstance?
2: The poor are under so much scrutiny they can in
fact be worked to death (Or killed during examination).
Back to those darned little-rascal-like contractors for
the Government! This time: Health and Well-being programs for
“Means-Tested” benefits.
Pictured: Real people who understand.
In a nice follow-on
from Workhouses and death supported by ill-gotten gains, we come to
perhaps the worst of them all: ATOS. These really are the
honest-to-God lowest of the low for real people with real problems,
whilst also the thorn in the side of people that genuinely want to
screw up our systems just for free money.
The basis of ATOS
was summed up for me, by one simple meme:
Tru
Dat.
In the UK, “disability”
(sickness) benefits are given on a means-tested basis, and ATOS is
the company that is contracted by the Government (again) to help come
to a conclusion as to if you are in fact sick enough not to work.
Now,
I'm not saying they get it wrong all the time. Just sometimes...
'Nuff said.
I must admit however – for the sake of balance - that
my two attendances (once for me whilst ill, and once for my
half-brother, whilst I was so-so); they seemed relatively sane in
their questioning and the way the “
Patient Review Specialists” (I refuse to call them Doctors, as the
assessment is not by them, but by someone in an office generally
speaking) conducted themselves, they were more than professional than
the gynaecologist that works down the road behind the local chippy.
All of these reasons are all good and well; but I
personally feel in my God-like mind that I've saved the best couple
of reason for last... Thingy's like...
Q: Who put that there?! A: Me (Ed)
1:
The rich feel that the poor will do anything
for dairylea (Nicht: Alcohol).
Due to the recession in
the UK (and probably elsewhere; I haven't watched much news since
Storage Wars was exported to our green and pleasant land), We are
constantly on the receiving end of the unemployed or those lacking
finances whilst in employment being targeted for not working hard
enough. Some people deserve this type of judgement, and others
don't... I can't say much, either way as I claim benefits and I could
just as easily be lambasted for not working.
On the counter side;
despite not feeling well and not needing to, I do look at least
weekly for part-time work. The one thing I can say of this is I can
still claim up to
100% of my benefits whilst working for £95 a week. I also only rent
a room, and share the rest of the house with the person I live with;
do not claim housing benefit, and still write Star Wars Episode 9 for
J.J. Abrams, which is actually what your reading now; so be honoured,
Bitches!
What I of course meant
to say was that we constantly have this rammed down our throats in TV
shows, and the over-inflated rubbish that is Benefits Street on
Channel Four in recent weeks, and the rampage of seemingly sinister
articles by both the Daily Mail and Telegraph, amongst other
publications and networks has become the nations' Hot Potato.
Hello,
baby.
Some of the major
problems with sensationalism like this is obvious – it's not just
sensationalism, it's propaganda,
and it's the usual snowball. By the time the Nation finally wakes up
and realises just what in the Hilda Ogden everyone is on about, no
one can say anything about the other side because they were never
given a voice to begin with.
The major problem is
that it creates a false image upon people. A program such as Benefits
Street only shows one singular area, and perhaps the worst of the
bunch, complete with robbers, shop lifters, drug users, alcoholics,
single parents and people who simply aren't white (Which I have no
problem with, but you know what? I pander to the masses for the sake
of argument); that will do anything for food (Shock!), alcohol,
cigarettes, or any other addictive substance that people may require
just to liven up their increasingly bleak and miserable lives...
Which ironically probably started by taking the same substance, but
you know. C'est la-de-da-clucking-vie.
If they were to film me
all the time, they'd see me reading a book or news articles until
three or four AM, struggling to sleep, drinking every four days or
so, taking prescription painkillers and getting up just in time for
Bargain Hunt or the One O'Clock News (of all of these, many of which
would give some producers a heart attack for the distinct lack of
anti-social behaviour of a benefits slob).
And if any of them were to read
this; which I believe is a reasonably-balanced, sometimes funny and
slightly educated 2,126 word perspective, I hope they do.
