How is that fair if a married woman's husband leaves her? She could have 2 under the age of 5 and pregnant, close to delivery. Hubby sods off with his Secretary and leaves her with no income.
Under your draconian rules how does she feed, clothe and house herself and children?
Seriously, all good to have this ideas but you need to consider the various situations people end up in through no fault of their own.
Let me know your real name so that I do not ever vote for you. Under your reign crime would go through the roof as desperate people do what they have to so they can feed themselves and their families.
Yes this happens, and in FAIR system there would be help in a situation like this.
In my 4 little rules I made a GENERALISATION. Of course there would be cases where people that this happens to would need support. I would be happy to give support for those who are REALLY in need.
These are not the people that are the issue.
I even said the same in post #103
In my previous post I could of spent a day typing out many different exclusions and allowances for many different situations and for many people that do need extended help.
But it was far easier to express my general opinion.
I didn't think that I would have the write a several hundred page set of guide lines on a car forum to explain the full ins and outs of what I would propose in full.
But if you would like me to do so I am quite happy to do it, as long as some one pays for my time LOL.
You also need to look at the crap job the system does about cases like this where the father of children walk away from the family and does not continue to support the children that he is responsible for.
Fix this area and the amount of support needed to be supplied from the government would drop considerably.
Lets just say at the beginning of 2013 they did pass an act to say from the 01/01/2013 that they would abolish the single mothers payments for any more than 1 child.
Not giving extenuating circumstances, like the example that you gave and others of course. Just generalising here.
How would this affect the crime rate?
People have been warned well in advance that there will be no more support, so one would think that if there is no support a lot of people may choose their actions with a little more thought process.
If your actions have no consequences, then you will never change your actions.
In the example you gave, these are not the career stay at home bludgers.
If you had read all my posts you would clearly see that it is the ones that sit back and mooch of the rest of the workers, that I have an issue with.
It does not matter what gets implemented, it is always going to upset some one.
Whats with the constant "wont some one think of the crime".
With the current system of punishment that we have, we already have a massive crime rate happening.
If we had a system that actually punished criminals for crimes committed then the crime rate may actually start to drop.
But when you can take an another's life and be out of jail in under 5 years (if you get a good mouth piece) then there is already a system in place where there is no real great deterrent for people not commit crimes.
Criminals now have more mod cons in jail than some struggling families have at home.
Is that fair? Is it fair that after you commit a crime that you have FOXTEL, DVD players, PLASMA TV's and access to computers and the Internet. Hell you can even do a Degree whilst in prison.
Yet families on struggle street are flat out having the resources to provide a good education for their kids.
