And now lie detectors!

Benefit claimants will be subjected to lie detector tests to discover if they are cheating the system in a widespread Government crackdown.

Sigh.

Lie detectors don\’t actually work. The reason they don\’t work is that they provide just as many (if not more) false positives as they do true positives.

Typical of this government to just go for the shiny shiny technology option without bothering to find out whether it works or not, isn\’t it?

12 comments on “And now lie detectors!

  1. Typical of certain types of right-winger to jib at the logical extension of their demands for a crack-down on welfare fraud .

  2. Kat Tie – maybe so, but how long before the word gets around the great world of chavdom of how easy they are to bluff?

    Complete waste of time and money.

  3. Mr Reed: us rabid right-wingers see ever increasing Sovietisation of the benefit system as a silly way of reducing the malign effect of the benefit culture on both society and government spending. Far better to reduce the incentives for people to sit on Income Support for the rest of their lives 🙂

  4. The welfare state was created to provide a safety-net and help the needy. Now, becoming a benefit claimant means you are signing up to live in 1970s East Germany. For 20% of our population the Berlin Wall never fell.

  5. Now, becoming a benefit claimant means you are signing up to live in 1970s East Germany.

    I thought the latest right-wing talking point was that we were *all* living in 1970s East Germany?

  6. I thought the latest right-wing talking point was that we were *all* living in 1970s East Germany?

    The left-wing wish we were.

  7. “They do if the victim believes they do.”

    That doesn’t have any bearing on false positives. And I’m not quite sure it’s right anyway.

  8. “DBC Reed // Dec 3, 2008 at 11:08 am

    Typical of certain types of right-winger to jib at the logical extension of their demands for a crack-down on welfare fraud .”

    How is using something that doesn’t work a logical extension of any proposal?

  9. Kit:

    It’s not just “the latest right-wing talking point,” rather, it’s the FACT; the entire world is moving leftward. To some, the trend is inexorable and to some, even welcome.

    There is scientific regularity in the phenomenon, which means that some definite predictions can be made (I’ll get back to that facet).

    And, though I might certainly be characterized as being “right-wing,” in that I am in favor of personal liberty and free markets, I do not blame the overwhelmingly left-trending majority for anything more sinister than simple ignorance, generally of economics and, more particularly of praxeology (the more generalized science of human action of which the most known subdivision is economics).

    The scientific observation was made by Mises in the ’20s, later included in HUMAN ACTION, and forms the essential rationale for Hayek’s THE ROAD TO SERFDOM. It’s actually simple:
    every authoritarian meddling with the market (and other human action), in failing to achieve
    its desired goal (in the estimation of its promoters) or in bringing about even worse conditions (again, in the opinion of the same) demands either abandonment (a step toward freedom) or intensification—stengthened or even entirely new, additional interferences. Recognition of this (praxeological law) explains entirely the failure (and impossibility) of all “third way” and “middle of the road” economic arrangements.

    I do not for a moment believe that even any significant proportion of “liberals” or of those similarly-persuaded among “conservatives” actually desire or believe their efforts are directed to all-round regimentation or tyranny of any sort whatever. It’s even a stretch of the term to call them “dupes.” Even the body of busy propagandists among the intellectual elite are, by and large, entirely convinced of the nobility of their motives and of the benefits of the realization of their programs, to the extent that the melioration they hope to achieve well
    justifies, even dignifies, the need, on occasion to resort to historical revisionism, outright lying, and a judicious application of force in some instances.

    Alliances shift frequently. But ignorance is always the principal enemy.

  10. “That doesn’t have any bearing on false positives. And I’m not quite sure it’s right anyway.”

    What I meant was that lie detectors work as well as TV detector vans: people believe they work / exist so don’t try it on.

    Of course, it’s all futile. Better to completely replace the system so that there’s no incentive to not get a job.

  11. “The welfare state was created to provide a safety-net and help the needy.” You mean the 1911 welfare state, I assume, not the 1945 welfare state?

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.