[koksik202]

Being a father of two and seeing how much money and decisions goes into buying baby stuff and thinking how struggling family might find it inaccessible it makes me cry to read “give all children in Finland, no matter what background they're from, an equal start in life.” Other countries give welfare benefits in form of money but that can be spent on things like addictions, in this case giving the set of necessary care items is much better

[Crosseye_Jack]

> Other countries give welfare benefits in form of money but that can be spent on things like addictions

Why is it that when discussing welfare benefits the topic of them being spent on addictions is often brought up.

If an addiction is a problem, treat the addiction instead of treating welfare recipients as children. How pissed would you be if your employer dictated how you spent your wages because certain activities went against their beliefs. No donating to your local church because they believe religion is silly and their employees shouldn’t be wasting money on such things. People would be pissed. An extreme example I know but helps get the point across, but same could also be said about any vice we partake in.

Coming from a shitty childhood myself such things were often brought up and implemented poorly which tbh actually hurt us as kids growing up.

Yeah a few will exploit what ever system that’s put into place, you have only got to look at most tax systems to see that, but you don’t punish the many just because of the few.

But just a bit further down the article

> Mothers have a choice between taking the box, or a cash grant, currently set at 140 euros, but 95% opt for the box as it's worth much more.

Bulk ordering and a fairly consistent birth rate will mean the government are not paying retail for these items so the box can be worth more than straight cash even if the cost of the government per box is close to the cash grant but gives an incentive to parents take higher value to them option.

Sorry for the rant, it just pisses me off having been though it. EDIT: Also lack of coffee, I'm grumpy without coffee :-P

[randunel]

Your opinion is different than others', and that's fine. I'll vote for MPs and governments which limit the welfare to goods and services, and you're free to vote for MPs which hand out cash, no questions asked. And that's fine, because we are the taxpayers, and we contribute to these decisions through our votes.

[otrahuevada]

In some countries, government support networks grow out of christian charity schemes where a powerful person will discretionarily share a tiny portion of their time and wealth with the destitute of their choosing and gets to be enthusiastically cheered on for this sacrifice.

This often does not translate well to actual country-scale structural problems. Especially if in some of those countries' individuals also happen to consider paying taxes as a way in to government-scale decision making.

[palijer]

> How pissed would you be if your employer dictated how you spent your wages because certain activities went against their beliefs.

A drug addiction is a disease, not a belief. Spending money that should be used for necessities on drugs is not a belief, it is a symptom of a disease and should be regarded as such.

[op00to]

It’s a belief that one is “more moral” than the “addict” so more deserving of government help.

[mannykannot]

There is a very pragmatic, judgement-free reason: giving money in such circumstances is counter-productive, while providing services is helpful - which brings us right back to GGP's comment, to which GP objected in a way that is unhelpful.

[divbzero]

I would appreciate this baby box even as a parent fortunate enough to afford the material goods it contains. A large part of its value lies in the time and effort saved and the psychological comfort in knowing I haven’t forgotten anything essential.