I’m still surprised that even with our welfare state, and in this case child credit, that so many with either jobs or benefits can’t afford food for their children. I’d be curious to know how many also have non-essential items in their life like smart phones etc. Doesn’t make child poverty right and there’ll always be rare cases that aren’t accounted for, but surely these are in the minority in a state that pays so much into its welfare state already. We can’t bail every single person out to the point where they have no sense of or requirement for self responsibility.
Is a smart phone non-essential though? What if it their sole means of communication and they rely on it to talk and see family and friends? I see this argument made frequently, "they shouldn't have TV", "they shouldn't have any alcohol", etc.... What arbitrary level of depravity does someone have to attain before they are deemed worthy of salvation though? Does the mother and her kids need to be living in a box on the street, scraping amongst rat **** for food before enough is enough and she's allowed a few of your precious £?
If we're going to deny people things like smart phones, what kind of phone are they "allowed" as well? Should it be no better than a Nokia 3310? (amazing phone tbf though).... How do we police this policy too? Shall we have an army of enforcement officers from the council running random spot checks for us?
"you there! Yes you. Is that an iPhone 6 you have in your hands madam? I'm sorry, you're going to have to come with us!"
So long as those of us who have "paid their way" can be sure someone is truly in the gutter before they get their benefits, we're content yeah? Yeah!
I get your point though by the way. People should be educated better to manage their money and their life. It's a tough pill for some that they essentially see themselves bailing out other people's misfortunes or poor life choices... Or, more sadly, their inherent disadvantaged life.
