|
stellauk -> Welfare benefit scroungers - the evidence just doesn't add up. (12/2/2012 12:35:53 PM)
|
quote:
An army of benefit scroungers? The evidence just doesn't stack up
Our research into people on low incomes found little sign of the stereotype of the workshy claimant who doesn't deserve help
We've all heard it, whether from the media or friends; the benefit-scrounging narrative is a cliche. From young mums on the make to the disabled layabouts, the labels are harsh and anecdotal. This pains me, as a NatCen researcher – I don't see any evidence of such a group in the report we at have released today, Poverty in Perspective.
Sadly though, the narrative of undeserving benefit scroungers has been cemented in the public mind. Three-quarters of us think that parents with an addiction (ie drugs or alcohol) are a key cause of child poverty today. About two-thirds think child poverty is a result of parents unwilling to work. But these views simply don't reflect the statistical reality.
Our work with the thinktank Demos gives an accurate and detailed account of Britain's lived experienced of poverty by breaking down the low-income population into groups. From a 2010 dataset, we distilled five groups affected by child poverty: the grafters, vulnerable mothers, full house families, pressured parents and managing mothers.
Together these low-income groups made up about 30% of the UK population – hardly a hidden underclass, with the largest group being the grafters. As the name suggest, this group is a far cry from the stereotype. Some of them are the long-term working poor, while others are self-employed or have recently been made redundant. They own homes, have qualifications and are unlikely to be single parents. They don't conjure up an image of broken Britain, but they certainly are poor.
When you start to measure poverty in a holistic way – as we did – factoring in all the variables, it is very difficult find a group that deserves to be poor, and doesn't deserve help.
Take the vulnerable mother group, perhaps most comparable to the "mums on the make": typically single parents under 24 with young children who represent about 5% of the population as a whole. When you take into account that they are likely to be physically or mentally unwell and have the lowest skills of all the groups affected by child poverty, it is difficult to attach blame. And, importantly, they have aspirations beyond claiming benefits; they want to save money, but cannot afford to.
Or perhaps it's the full house families who are fleecing the taxpayers? Large households with multiple adults and young children, whose biggest problem is overcrowding. Again, on closer inspection, it seems unlikely. This group doesn't fall behind on bills, nor do they have mental health or money problems to the same extent as other groups.
What about the pressured parents group? Low-skilled and low rates of employment could suggest a bunch of scroungers looking to spend more time on the sofa. But they are also more likely to have a disabled child to care for or a child with a health condition, or to experience physical or mental health problems themselves.
And then there are the managing mothers. Qualification rates are good and they tend to think that they're getting by. Although half are out of work, most see unemployment as a temporary problem and have a strong work ethic.
With the government consultation on child poverty taking place, and the search for a new measure of poverty under way, it has never been more important to base our debate on evidence. The idea of the benefit scrounger clearly sticks in the collective British mind, but most of us still think that the government should be responsible for us when we fall on hard times.
Today's report sheds light on these hard times, describing and eliciting the challenges faced by those on low incomes. There are "types" of poverty and we can quantify and measure deprivation, but we cannot separate one group from another as being deserving or undeserving of benefits. Most importantly, these fact-based typologies offer little evidence of a scrounging section of the population.
source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/28/benefit-scroungers-child-poverty-parents
Personally I find it amazing what many people are prepared to believe nowadays on the basis of very little or no evidence.
The 'welfare benefit scrounger' or 'lazy undeserving welfare benefits dependent' is about as common as Scotch mist or a four leafed clover.. In fact I'd say that you've got far more chances of meeting a famous celebrity face to face than yo have of ever coming across a welfare freeloader.
The truth, while it is uncomfortable, is more the fact that the middle class 'f*ck you Jack I'm aright' types need to admit that they like to think the poor are poor because they are undeserving. This is because it means that those of us who are not as broke as they are must be more intelligent, more resourceful, more successful, more talented and in fact better than they are.
Just to prove it we accept and even support policies of the right wing and Cosnervatives which persecute and villify anyone on a lower income than us. We sneer at people who's only mistake was to be born into an environment of poverty where ambition and aspiration are things to which they don't have either access or opportunity. Even when they do get work, it is usually menial or of a 'disgusting' low order that they are still despised and villified by many in society and they are still blamed for not doing better, even when they are working 12 hours a day every day of the week.
Basically we are happy for millions of lives to be wrecked and futures to be destroyed just to satisfy our own desperate needs to feel worthwhile.
The losses from tax evasion are huge.. if tax evasion was a body of water it would be the entire Pacific Ocean. Losses from benefit misuse would be only be enough water to fill a teaspoon.
The teaspoon of water elicits self-righteous indignation and even fury from people right across society, and yet people are complacent in their acceptance of the vast ocean of tax evasion, many spending huge sums of money boosting the profits of corporations who dictate how much and even if they will pay any tax.
You can argue as much as you like for your right wing policies and your tax breaks for the rich and the free market economy.
But until we as a society overcome our idiotic feelings of personal inadequacy and start taking responsibility for our society - including finding ways for people to aspire and succeed beyond welfare - any economic recovery or reduction of deficits is just wishful thinking.
|
|
|
|
