'Should we starve the jobless back to work?' poll discussion
Options
Comments
-
It shouldn't be about starving people to make them work, it should be that people on benefits are never better off than those that work.
Whether this be achieved by tax credits, benefit vouchers or whatever, it should never be that someone on benefits needs a job of over £20,000 to match their benefits.
It should always be worthwhile working.
Of course the downside is that those who can't find a job for a variety of reasons will truly have a subsidence lifestyle through no choice of their own.
Sou0 -
As someone currently in receipt of jobseekers' allowance who struggles to find the money to eat, let alone have any luxuries (I am a teetotal, non smoker who hates fast food by the way), please do not tar us all with the same brush.
I have been applying for anything and everything I can to get some self respect back as I hate walking down the street knowing that every working person I pass is paying for me.
There are not many jobs available in my region, and so I am looking as far as the next big city althoughI admit that in order to work there, I could not accept a minimum wage job as it would cost about £30 a day to commute.
However, I know someone who has been unemployed for 9 years and is proud of it; she does nothing to find work and has turned down jobs the jobcentre has offered her and to be honest I think her benefits should be stopped.
In answer to your question:
My rent of a single room in a shared flat is £52.50 a week.
I receive £50.95 a week JSA and it's not enough.
I'd say £150 (to include rent) would be more manageable.
The fact that the poor are marginalised and penalised by being forced to use meters for utilities pushes the cost of living still further upwards...0 -
Everyone has a meter for their gas and electricity? Unless there is some "rich exemption" that I'm not aware of?Flickering_Ember wrote: »The fact that the poor are marginalised and penalised by being forced to use meters for utilities pushes the cost of living still further upwards...
0 -
Flickering_Ember wrote: »As someone currently in receipt of jobseekers' allowance who struggles to find the money to eat, let alone have any luxuries (I am a teetotal, non smoker who hates fast food by the way), please do not tar us all with the same brush.
I have been applying for anything and everything I can to get some self respect back as I hate walking down the street knowing that every working person I pass is paying for me.
There are not many jobs available in my region, and so I am looking as far as the next big city althoughI admit that in order to work there, I could not accept a minimum wage job as it would cost about £30 a day to commute.
However, I know someone who has been unemployed for 9 years and is proud of it; she does nothing to find work and has turned down jobs the jobcentre has offered her and to be honest I think her benefits should be stopped.
In answer to your question:
My rent of a single room in a shared flat is £52.50 a week.
I receive £50.95 a week JSA and it's not enough.
I'd say £150 (to include rent) would be more manageable.
The fact that the poor are marginalised and penalised by being forced to use meters for utilities pushes the cost of living still further upwards...
I agree with this. Although if you are on contribution based JSA then no-one is paying for you, its your own money back.
I once had a 4 month period where i was unemployed and with rent at £50, gas, water, electric total £15 per week. Plus you might have contract you cannot get out of such a mobile phone or telephone like. There simply isn't enough to eat properly.0 -
I replied £10,000 pa, this works out less than working full-time on National Minimum wages. Out of that I would make them pay for everything themselves, rent, dentistry, opticians etc.
I believe that you should get more for working full-time on a National Minimum Wage job than you should get in benefits.
I would raise the £10k to say £12.5k if you have children, but that's it. Again, what's the point in going out to work at a McJob if you can stay at home, have another kid and get paid money for it.
I know that those getting huge houses paid for by LHA and those receiving £40k on benefits are the minority, but even if it is it really shouldn't happen.
All the time benefits pay more than NMW people how can't be bothered to work won't and those that want to but are trapped due to the loss of money will take the hard decision to stay on the dole.
As for those saying "Where are the jobs?" if the government had to pay less in benefits, maybe they could make jobs by repairing roads, building new schools etc.
M_o_30 -
i don't think we should 'starve' the unemployed back to work - there are many reasons why someone may be out of work - not all unemployed people are happily sitting around claiming benefits cos they can't be bothered to get a job. i and many of my friends have been temporarily unemployed in the past, when leaving uni, and when i finally finished my training and was looking for a job in london, i was pathetically grateful for my unemployment benefit, as i really would have starved without it.
however, i do think the benefits system needs looking at. when i was training (ie a student) in london, and living with my now-husband, he was temporarily unemployed, having left his job in our university town to be with me (aaah!!)
as we were 'living together as if married' according to the benefits people, i was classed as his dependent (as i could not work,as in full-time education), and although we were poor, our benefits covered our rent, council tax and medical and dental care (i took the opportunity to get my wisdom teeth done for free!!). when my husband got a job a few months later, we were dismayed to find that we would actually be a lot worse off, as his pay was rather measly, yet we lost all our benefits, ie had to pay own rent, council tax etc. this surely can't be right - that people are financially penalised for getting a job?
to add insult to injury, my husband worked in the job centre, signing people on who turned up in flash cars, with designer watches, while we could barely afford to eat....0 -
Yes to a benefit system however it should not be free or easy!
Those on them should give something back to the community they live in by working for local charities and projects. Fail to do this and all benefits should stopped.
I believe those made unemployed who normally had a job and became unemployed by no fault of there own should be given a salary based on the minimum wage which decreases after 18 months, unless they are willing to retrain and attend college/ training beyond this deadline for a further 24 months maximum.
Anyone leaving education at 18 who cannot obtain work should be supported by the family, with £50 a week IF they conduct voluntary work in the community or enter further adult education.This benefit should last until the 20th birthday to be cut to £35 lasting until the 21st birthday. Failing to attend further education or conduct community work following the cut or at any point gets a big fat NOTHING!
Anyone who has been on benefits never having a job in the past 2 years and is 21 and over should have benefits stopped! UNLESS THEY ARE IN THE PREVIOSLY EMPLOYED CATEGORY when benefits last from date of unemployment as stated above.
The old saying Beggars cant be choosers is so true!
I also believe that unless you have worked and have a baby whilst unemployed then there should be no state help other than for baby vouchers to be exchanged at participating chemists for baby food. I believe once again the onus should be put on to family's to carry the burden and not the tax payer!0 -
glider3560 wrote: »Everyone has a meter for their gas and electricity? Unless there is some "rich exemption" that I'm not aware of?
I think this refers to a pre-payment meter. I had one once, when I moved into a rented property - it had a weekly standing charge of £1, compared to the weekly standing charge of ~65p when I switched to a standard meter. Plus, the electricity would get switched off if I didn't have a stack of cards ready, so you need more capital for them.
I did a lot of temp work previously, as my wife's job took us around the country every couple of years. This also meant time on unemployment benefits, and it's not nice. The benefit system doesn't account for temp working. Last time I was unemployed (after splitting up from my wife) I was getting £65 a week JSA. I also was applying for temp jobs. One that came up was for two day's work filling in for a receptionist. That was 16 hours work at the minimum wage, I think £5.50/hour. So that's £88 earnt. But then I was taxed as if I earnt that every week of the year - losing about 20%, so I got £70.40. And I spent £8 to get out to work and back (it was 7 miles away, couldn't walk it). Already I'm £3 down! And when I contacted the Job Centre at 9am the next day to sign on again, I found out you lose a day - the claim starts from the *next* day, after the first day of unemployment. So that's another £13 lost. So next time the temp agency came up with a 16 hour a week job for me, I had to turn it down.
It was soul destroying to be unemployed and not be able to afford to work, but I can see why people choose not to. Why work if you can get more money without doing anything? We need to overhaul the system. I do agree that we need more jobs in the country though. Cut the minimum wage so companies can hire more staff. Get rid of automated check-outs. Don't let in so many foreign workers. Use labour instead of machines (street-cleaning machines instead of a man with a broom and spade!?). Bring manufacturing back. Some people will be outraged to be told they have to work. Some genuine cases will inevitably lose out. But overall it will be better.0 -
In an ideal world there would be jobs for everyone, in an ideal world you could get free (useful) training after 3 months out of work, in an ideal world you wouldn't need to do 2 jobs to get a decent income, in an ideal world all employers would let you know the outcome of interviews..............
in an ideal world people would leave JSA alone instead of thinking all who claim do not want to work
average applications for a full time permanant job in my area is 120 apparently0 -
The word starve is too harsh, but disincentivise a non working lifestyle, yes please. No politician will be brave enough to make the changes though...Who made hogs and dogs and frogs?
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards