Party Vibe

Register

Welcome To

UK : East : 200 alcoholics costing Suffolk £4 million in benefits..

Forums Drugs Alcohol UK : East : 200 alcoholics costing Suffolk £4 million in benefits..

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • From todays local rag:

    its worrying, as if this is how little responsibility/self-control people treat a legal drug with, what hope do we have for more liberal solutions?

    Quote:
    MORE than 200 Suffolk alcoholics are today claiming benefits totalling millions of pounds a year because they are unable to work.

    In a sobering snapshot of today’s drinking culture it is estimated claims for people who can not work due to their booze addiction could total as much as £4 million a year in allowances.

    Quote:
    “The age of people presenting (symptoms) to doctors is getting younger. There’s nothing to suggest to us that changing at the moment.

    http://www.eveningstar.co.uk/content/eveningstar/news/story.aspx?brand=ESTOnline&category=News&tBrand=ESTOnline&tCategory=news&itemid=IPED05%20Jul%202007%2008%3A47%3A23%3A547

    And I find a real irritaing thing is –
    because alcohol is legal –

    there can be a real hierachy between alcoholics and ‘users’.

    i.e : well I’m not as bad as ‘X’ because I only drink ‘£10 bottles of wine’,

    atleast I’m not a ‘digger’ etc

    Sad….. :hopeless:

    IMHO they’re both addictions – whether legal or not doesnt enter into it …

    You trust the usual bullshit from the Evening Star GL, tsk, tsk!

    mudstomper wrote:
    You trust the usual bullshit from the Evening Star GL, tsk, tsk!

    The 4 million is obviously an estimated figure that Archant’s lot calculated (obviously a worst case scenario, assuming that all the alcoholics have lots of kids and adding the child benefit), but the 220 claimants came from the DWP themselves and seems reasonable.

    I was a Civil Servant for 3.5 years working in public sector finance before moving here, and have seen the process for dealing with various Freedom of Information requests from the inside.

    TBH the figures the Govt give are fairly accurate, but if anything the Government is more likely to play down the problem than anything..

    Ok lets take a more realistic figure (starting at a base of 220 claimants), assume half of these had kids (probably an understimate)

    Using some slightly outdated JSA figures from 2002, assume they get £52 pw for single people and £123pw for those with kids

    110 * £123 * 52 = £703 560
    110 * £52 * 52 = £297 440

    OK not £4 million but in total a million quid of public money spent on people with what is a self-inflicted condtion.

    I like a drink too and can easily drink quite large amounts when I put my mind to it but I don’t see it or any drug use as a long-term excuse for not getting a job and contributing to society.

    Incidentally there is a history of alcoholism on the Malaysian Indian side of my family too, but even some of my relatives who did go down this route at least managed to hold down some sort of job and provide for their families (until they died). You don’t get handouts for being a pisshead in a conservative Islamic nation!

    OTOH I know people only just over half my age round here who definitely seem to be at least psychologically dependent on alcohol and other substances… it does worry me as its a young age to get into that state…

    because the NHS and the nanny state end up picking up the pieces they feel justified in limiting our freedom and we all lose in the end…

    Tank Girl wrote:
    And I find a real irritaing thing is –
    because alcohol is legal –

    there can be a real hierachy between alcoholics and ‘users’.

    IMHO they’re both addictions – whether legal or not doesnt enter into it …

    Very true

    I’m currently on Incapacity for a variety of mental issues, mainly manic and schizo affective, I’ve work on and off for as long as I’ve been able to, I don’t plan to stay on benefits for any longer than necessary but, and it’s a big one, initially I was judged to be an alcoholic because of my intake of booze and a user because of intake of weed and pills and that was given forward as my “main” condition by the medical services, I’ve been told by both Norfolk and West Suffolk mental health teams that the help I need is not funded and the best I can do is find my own treatment or, use Thorazine which I’m prescribed currently and only use when I really need as it fucks me up the day after more than K, but I’m still listed as an alcoholic, so maybe these statistics are not as truthful as they seem if there are more people like me out there.

    mudstomper wrote:
    I’m currently on Incapacity for a variety of mental issues, mainly manic and schizo affective, I’ve work on and off for as long as I’ve been able to, I don’t plan to stay on benefits for any longer than necessary but, and it’s a big one, initially I was judged to be an alcoholic because of my intake of booze and a user because of intake of weed and pills and that was given forward as my “main” condition by the medical services, I’ve been told by both Norfolk and West Suffolk mental health teams that the help I need is not funded and the best I can do is find my own treatment or, use Thorazine which I’m prescribed currently and only use when I really need as it fucks me up the day after more than K, but I’m still listed as an alcoholic, so maybe these statistics are not as truthful as they seem if there are more people like me out there.

    sorry to hear about this and I hope that you can eventually get back on track. Thorazine is nasty stuff, I thought it was rarely used nowadays :yakk:

    I see what you mean as there are a lot of people with underlying problems/issues who self-medicate to an extent with recreational drugs and alcohol – until recently I was a fairly heavy user of amfetamines and occasionally K to combat ADHD (undiagnosed since childhood!) and occasional bouts of depression, as well as just for fun/partying but found that they could on occasions make the condition worse (mood swings etc).

    It was a vicious circle in my youth as my family initially did not approve of my lifestyle – and then I dropped out of uni (drugs wholly fuck over your attention span) which made things worse for a few years,

    At least I was lucky during the IT boom to nearly always have a job and contribute to my family (when I lived with my parents) and that smoothed over the cracks.

    The only thing that “sorted me out” was actually the discipline of “employment” (not always normal “work” but even just sorting out stuff in squats/communal spaces), but I agree that in a ruthlessly competitive world its not always easy to get this.

    And you are a skilled person who has previously been in employment in a professional trade, so it hits harder when you become unemployed.

    There are people like us who go through bad stages in our lives but want to sort ourselves out, I think by a combination of supportive family and hard work I’ve done OK as I’ve now got a decent job I enjoy more than previous ones, and own my own house.

    The problem in EA though is though (it was explained to me by MissMushed who posts here occasionally) is there are lots of unrepentant drug abusers who are playing the system and becomeing as dependant on welfare benefit as they are on drugs, long-term. Many of them are 10 or 15 years our junior, some started taking drugs at middle school age(!) and many don’t care and take handouts until the Establishment gives them a kick up the arse.

    I’m not saying we should go to a market-based approach like other countries and remove benefits, but these issues shouldn’t be brushed under the carpet..

    I hear ya, but, give us a situation where mental and social problems and their solutions are catered for maybe that will give no excuse not to abuse drugs and maybe the first problem will be sorted.

    But there’s always slackers in society and there needs to be an allowance for them.

    mudstomper wrote:
    But there’s always slackers in society and there needs to be an allowance for them.

    sorry but I don’t actually think people should be able to leach off others – that doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be a safety net from the welfare state but eventually people need to put something back.

    Doesn’t mean they have to work in an office, but some form of positive contribution to society is IMO vital…

    If you in fact mean what is called “downshifting” rather than just “slacking” (which to me implies doing no work and expecting a handout) then I’m fine with that

    compared to London and Reading where I previously lived there is plenty of slack time and slow time and time to think in Suffolk, life actually seems to move at a slower pace anyway..

    I don’t agree that the heart of financial life should earn 7 figures in comparison with people that work a 50 hour week, that, I call leaching, I don’t sgree that the bastions of Eco campaigning i.e. Greenpeace should earn 6 figures, that I call taking the fucking piss!

    And, if anyone has work going on locally or within a reasonable distance, computer based or building work I will quite happily take it on, paid (for exchange) or not, in fact, I beg of it.

    mudstomper wrote:
    I don’t agree that the heart of financial life should earn 7 figures in comparison with people that work a 50 hour week, that, I call leaching, I don’t sgree that the bastions of Eco campaigning i.e. Greenpeace should earn 6 figures, that I call taking the fucking piss!

    thats also a fair enough statement – and why I am very suspicious of charities. As for eco/activist stuff, TBH any stuff I do is at street level rather than via orgainsations – used to help people set up squats / social centres / info shop type places (but no one here seems up for it, and many younger people don’t even know these places existed!)

    A lot of the inequality IMO is caused by the artificial concept of stocks and shares creating “capital” which doesn’t even exist (as opposed to actual assets of businesses..)

    I am all for workers co-operatives and social enterprises though.. (a good example of one can be found in every town/village round here :groucho:)

    Also too many people are willing to feed the machine.

    If I wanted to I could easily get double my salary if I gave up raving tomorrow, got an accountancy qualification (could get first stage within a year by studying at weekends ) and worked in “dirty old Londonistan”, but fuck commuting two hours and worrying about being stabbed for my laptop in Stratford when I can do the same job here out in the countryside in much nicer surroundings,

    But so many people here just “think of the money”, I’ve noticed Ipswich increasinly turning into a dormitory town of North/East London. and I’ve only been here a year….:you_crazy

    I am so tempted to go “baaa” at the people exiting Ipswich station at 18-00-19:00 when I cycle back to town, but I’d probably get an ASBO :laugh_at:

    If that figure is anyway near close to the alcoholics that claim benefits, what about all the ones that are so calle “sick” through the mental health teams, addicts, depressives and such like’

    The figure must be enourmous.

    How many of them do you think claim DLA because of so called substance abuse and being treated for depressions and anxieties’

    The figure stated is actually laughable in comparison to the truth’

    Blessings’

    Motamba’

    General Lighting wrote:
    thats also a fair enough statement – and why I am very suspicious of charities. As for eco/activist stuff, TBH any stuff I do is at street level rather than via orgainsations – used to help people set up squats / social centres / info shop type places (but no one here seems up for it, and many younger people don’t even know these places existed!)

    we’re in the process of setting up a youth cafe in the second biggest town in Devon, where there is virtually no youth provision. it’s not squatted, but all resources will be for free.

    i find it odd that you are so suspicious of the charity sector; it’s more heavily regulated than the private sector (which you work in) and far more transparent than informal activist groups. you’ve said on here many times how you’ve seen squats and activist groups turn bad due to internal politics and egos (the other difficulty is sustainability… all that effort goes to waste when the authorities put a stop on) whereas every decision made by a charity board has to be minuted and made available to the charity commission for 6 years (even after a charity has disbanded). the trustees are held personally accountable for any wrong-doing

    as far as the report … these figures get presented every now and then. in this case, is that direct benefits received, do you know?

0

Voices

15

Replies

Tags

This topic has no tags

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Forums Drugs Alcohol UK : East : 200 alcoholics costing Suffolk £4 million in benefits..