How we try to fix welfare here in B.C.?

[Al Czervic]

I am going to throw this out there intentionally to be flamed and disagreed with. And on that note, flame away....

First we accept that the current welfare system, as we administer it currently, has failed.

I believe one of the biggest problems most people face is poor money management skills and addiction. Addiction can mean many things. Addiction to drugs, cigarettes, alcohol, gambling, internet, tv watching, fast food and poor eating habits, obesity. Addictions are not cheap. Addictions cost money. Currently we spend the vast majority of our time and resources trying to deal with addiction. We are failing. I believe it is time that we deal with the other side of the equation, poor money management skills, because it is money that pays for the addiction and right now we make it just too easy.

To put it more plainly, if you are a drug addict and if the government gives you free money every two weeks you are going to buy drugs. So why are we then surprised when this process continues endlessly? My solution? Go after the money. Here are some of my ideas.

Rent should be payable directly to the landlord, this way it cannot be blown on other items. The Government already does this is some cases but not all.

Welfare clients should be given pre-loaded credit cards. Each month the balance they are entitled too can be re-loaded electronically . These credit cards cannot be used to purchase alcohol and cigarettes period. Licensed liquor vendors can be fined for breaking these rules. Same story for cigarette vendors. Welfare clients will have a special pin number to use their cards to prevent “theft” Further these cards cannot be used in ATM’s for cash withdrawals. Period. This pre-loaded credit card system can also eliminate the need for welfare clients to have a bank account and get hosed on bank service charges as well.

Secondly an earnings exemption MUST be put in place for all welfare recipients. Currently there is an exception for some classes of welfare clients but not all of them. Allow the employable class an exemption of $ 200 a month without being penalized with a reduction in your monthly welfare check. This way if they choose to smoke or drink (or whatever) at least they have the opportunity to earn some of their own money to pay to feed their own addictions. In other words use their addictions as a motivator to find some work.

Third offer ALL earners of welfare a chance to earn an extra $ 100 a month if they agree to monthly drug testing that shows they are clean from using drugs. Not a mandatory program but a voluntary one.

Final point is eliminate the past earnings requirement. Currently to qualify for welfare you have to prove that you paid into the system (i.e. paid taxes) for at least two years. In principal it sounds reasonable but if you are in a rut because of working under the table or being in jail or out of the country or whatever how do you get out of that rut ? You cannot.

As you can see most of my idea would be to try and get cash out of the hands of welfare users where it can be spent far too easily on drugs and whatever else. I realize that what I am prosing can still be abused (i.e. a welfare client could buy $ 100 worth of groceries at Save On and sell them for cash) but at least it makes it far more difficult to do. Currently hitting an ATM on welfare Wednesday and blowing your cash getting high is way too easy. I am proposing we do more to try and promote better money management by making it more difficult to spend money irresponsibly.

Disclaimer I have tried to research current welfare policy and I may have made some errors in quoting or describing current policy. Any errors were not done intentionally.

Comments ?

[GordonH]

Okay, here's an idea how about getting to them before it even gets to that point. Most of us were taught "money management skills" by our parents some were good at it, some not so good. I would like to see in our schools lets say grades 10 to 12 a "life skills course" for those who need little more than the parents are able to do. Yes, it would be elective. Just a thought.

[Al Czervic]

I would like to see in our schools lets say grades 10 to 12 a "life skills course" for those who need little more than the parents are able to do. Yes, it would be elective. Just a thought.

Excellent idea.

[nolanrh]

Okay, here's an idea how about getting to them before it even gets to that point. Most of us were taught "money management skills" by our parents some were good at it, some not so good. I would like to see in our schools lets say grades 10 to 12 a "life skills course" for those who need little more than the parents are able to do. Yes, it would be elective. Just a thought.

It exists. It was called Career and Personal Planning (CAPP) when I was in high school. It was mandatory in Gr 10 and 12 I think. I remember not caring about what they were teaching because it didn't seem relevant to me at the time.

[grumpydigger]

As the unemployment benefits slowly run out , for the population of the small communities in northern and central British Columbia because of the destruction of the logging industry, the welfare rates are going to skyrocket even higher....

These are not drug addicted, alcoholics that don't know how to work.....

The liberal elite like to stereotype people on welfare as lazy bums who are just looking for their next drug fix or bottle of booze..... by doing so they can dehumanize them as second-class citizens.......

[kgcayenne]

Al, you may get a number of comments citing that your proposed model is too much like a nanny state. Not from me. I agree that there have to be some strict controls put in place. More importantly though, is that life mismanagement, more so than fiscal mismanagement, is the culprit. Fiscal irresponsibility is merely a symptom. Life mismanagement is a composite symptom of a lot of other things like mental illness, trauma (PST), sucky parenting, and the demoralization of society as a whole.


Education is empowering. Living up to higher expectations is easier than overcoming low ones. Saying:

“Ohhh I am sorry you didn’t pass that test kiddo, try harder next time, you can do it, I know you can.”

is ten times better than saying:

“Ohhh I am sorry you didn’t pass that test kiddo, but you showed up to your classes, so off you go to the next level.”


Translations:
“I know this is tough, but you have to make the grade.”

Is ten times better than saying:

“You won’t make it, our condolences on being sub-par just carry on so you don’t waste our time.”


Under the current model, there’s no incentive, no carrot, no golden ring.

A runner never says “Whew, that 3km run is tough; I don’t think I’ll push for the 5km even though the marathon is coming up.” Why do I think that’s a good comparison? Because life is the marathon and education is the training. Without pushing during training, the marathon is a guaranteed failure. The brain is the same.

In times past, those with mental illness or learning disabilities enjoyed programs that made them feel a part of something, there were facilities and jobs for them under government programs… government programs that were cut or eliminated altogether. We stopped giving people something to reach for, we stopped giving them hope by teaching that laziness will get you by too.

One system-milking welfare mom said to her kids: “You don’t have to work, someone will always look after you.” Both kids are hopeless as adults.


Having been through suddenly being on my own with a child, I had opportunity to see the system in action… or lack thereof. I didn’t need/want to quit my job, I just needed $300/mo to cover the daycare costs that subsidy wasn’t (retail hours = $700-800/mo in childcare). I met with a social worker on my lunch break, and had I picked up the phone that day and quit on the spot, I’d have walked out with my first $900 cheque. I rejected that offer because it was insulting. I refused to be sucked into the vortex of “There there, you can’t do any better than this.”

People need to be told they can achieve sustainability, they need to be both comforted and given hope without being enabled. Top-ups will do more than taking people out of the workforce. How would you incorporate top-ups & education into your model Al? Really, one or two courses of life skills training in high school is woefully inadequate, it’s all about conditioning. A course mandatory for graduation doesn’t erase the kind of conditioning that whatisupcastanet pointed out.

[Al Czervic]

As the unemployment benefits slowly run out , for the population of the small communities in northern and central British Columbia because of the destruction of the logging industry, the welfare rates are going to skyrocket even higher....

These are not drug addicted, alcoholics that don't know how to work.....

The liberal elite like to stereotype people on welfare as lazy bums who are just looking for their next drug fix or bottle of booze..... by doing so they can dehumanize them as second-class citizens.......

Obviously I am not talking about a career logger who is currently running out of EI...I am looking at changes in the system to help the most marginal of people. I should have made that more clear as I had forgotten that someone with a single digit IQ might not have been able to figure that out. Present company excluded of course.

[GordonH]

Okay, here's an idea how about getting to them before it even gets to that point. Most of us were taught "money management skills" by our parents some were good at it, some not so good. I would like to see in our schools lets say grades 10 to 12 a "life skills course" for those who need little more than the parents are able to do. Yes, it would be elective. Just a thought.

It exists. It was called Career and Personal Planning (CAPP) when I was in high school. It was mandatory in Gr 10 and 12 I think. I remember not caring about what they were teaching because it didn't seem relevant to me at the time.

If that is the case then something needs to change either the way it is taught or what is being taught. How a person manages their finances will give them personal (job well done feeling). No matter if it's $16,000 per/year or $100,000+. That is my 2¢, off to work for me.

[grumpydigger]

I should have made that more clear as I had forgotten that someone with a single digit IQ might not have been able to figure that out. Present company excluded of course.

very funny your little hidden insult but most people that consider themselves morally superior and intelligent group all people that happen to find themselves on welfare the same........

Trying to backtrack on your comments, then calling people stupid that don't understand them does not look good on you................

[Al Czervic]

We stopped giving people something to reach for, we stopped giving them hope by teaching that laziness will get you by too.

You made many excellent comments KC and this one in particular I have zeroed in on. Because you are right of course. Basically as I see it today we simply give people a check each month where they run off to the local money mart and get victimized cashing that cheques (or fleeced in ATM fees) where they next run off to the local drug dealer or whoever else where they promptly blow all of their cash. We just make it way to simple.

Giving cash to an addict is really no different than giving the drugs. We may as well give the drugs and at least cut out the criminal element.

Your other question and a very good one is how do we instill an education component? I believe that comes secondary. Until people can get some basic life management skills (I agree with you on that point as well) I believe they are doomed to fail. I believe if we focus on trying to force more responsible spending habits hopefully this can result in a more responsible lifestyle. Education requires responsibility and commitment. Hopefully if one can find that first in their own lives they will be better prepared to do in future educational endeavours.

I just firmly believe we need to change direction because at the moment I see us enabling and basically almost promoting the very cycles of poverty we are supposedly trying to prevent. Welfare is supposed to be a hand up and not a hand out. I submit at the moment it is basically an ongoing monthly cop out because we are not prepared to do what it really takes to create change. If we are not willing to make the changes that need to be made to the system how can we expect those on the system to change ? This is what I believe needs to change.

[dirtybiker]

I like the card idea...I'm sure there are flaws that would need to be worked out..
but overall seems a legit idea to me.....so far...further delving could change that.....

[Al Czervic]

I should have made that more clear as I had forgotten that someone with a single digit IQ might not have been able to figure that out. Present company excluded of course.

very funny your little hidden insult but most people that consider themselves morally superior and intelligent group all people that happen to find themselves on welfare the same........

Trying to backtrack on your comments, then calling people stupid that don't understand them does not look good on you................

I never actually used the word “stupid” once in my comments addressed to you. Interesting that you would think that such a term would apply to you. At any rate my intent in this thread was not to ponder the vast depths of your intellectual capacity but rather to discuss how we can better meet the needs of societies most vulnerable.

[grumpydigger]

you may not have said it, but you most certainly implied it........much the same way you try to imply things about people that are on welfare........

You say you want to better meet the needs of societies most vulnerable....But what I see is someone trying to set up a system that makes it much easier to control the part of the society that you deem completely incompetent.....

The Gordon Campbell government has the highest rate of child poverty, people on welfare, and the lowest minimum wage pretty much all across Canada, so I find it hard to believe that one of his liberal elite really gives a damn about people on welfare..........

[Al Czervic]

You say you want to better meet the needs of societies most vulnerable....But what I see is someone trying to set up a system that makes it much easier to control the part of the society that you deem completely incompetent.....

..........

And that is certainly a legitimate criticism and what I am looking for in this thread. Thank you for that. And yes, you are correct. There is no question that what I am proposing would at least attempt to place far more control on those who receive welfare.

For example neither cigarettes or alcohol are illegal and I am basically proposing that if you are on welfare you would NOT be able to purchase those substances with your welfare funds. That is pretty radical. Basically I am proposing a system that would by design attempt to try and prevent welfare clients from having the ability to obtain “cash” from their welfare money to try and prevent that cash being spent on illegal drugs or other items. However I am also prosing that welfare clients have an income exemption of $ 200 so if they find some odds job work they can use that money in any way they choose without being penalized on their monthly welfare amount.

Why I raised this issue is because I recently read an article in the Province newspaper where they talked about the proliferation of ATM’s in the downtown eastside since the government started directly depositing welfare cheques into clients accounts. Basically line ups start forming at all of these ATM’s before midnight and the streets are crawling with drug dealers. We are naive to think this situation does not occur elsewhere in B.C. In the article drug dealers and fast food restaurants in the area mentioned it was their best time of the month and many addicts talked about blowing their whole amount of money with a 24-72 hour time frame.

This just seems wrong to me. And if we know this is going on should we not try at least to do something about it ? I think we should and have given some thought to coming up with ideas to try and solve this problem. But I am curious to hear what others have to say on this topic. And yes, you are right I am proposing a system that does, if successful, attempt to promote more control over whether or not welfare clients can buy things like drugs and booze as easily as they can right now. I just don’t see the current system helping or working, unless you happen to be a drug dealer.

[animal lover1]

Great Original Post Al-you have some fantastic ideas-that just might work.