Why the outrage over plans to restrict what benefit claimants can spend those benefits on?
If it is authoritarian to ring fence what people can spend welfare payments on then surely existing benefits such as housing benefits should also spark outrage- forcing the claimants to use the money for accomodation rather than fags even if they prefer the latter. Instead, most people accept that it is a good thing that money given over to provide housing is spent on housing.
The same is true of money provided for food and clothing.
Taxes are collected by force with the moral justification that they are redistributed for essential services, such as providing food and clothing to those in need, it is hardly excessive to ensure that this money is not spent down the bookies and off license.
The Economist: Celebrates 175 Years – with Steve Bannon
35 minutes ago