The recession, benefits, the safety net, and the learning curve

PasturesNew

Dithering_Dad wrote: »

Glad to hear that your state pension is all paid up - did you get that from the Pension forecast I advised you go apply for?

I hope you don't mind me discussing the above, but as I've said in the past, I do worry about you PN, dear.

Yeah, it was on the official letter... which is around here somewhere ... keep meaning to dig it out for the figures.

I'm all right. I'm a survivor.

Oldernotwiser

JayScottGreenspan wrote: »

There are many other ways it could be done. The current UK system is not the only possible system.

Do you think the current system has got the balance pretty much right?
Do you think it provides adequately for Max?
Do you think it encourages a culture of dependency amongst certain sections of the community?

Personally I think it fails to help most honest people, whilst simultaneously propagating a demographic creep that is generating a few too many rather unpleasant young people.

1. I certainly don't think the UK system is perfect but I don't think it's as flawed as many people here seem to think.
2. Yes, I think it provides adequately for Max if he's prepared to make adjustments.
3.Yes, I do think it encourages a culture of dependency amongst some people but I generally think that's a small price to pay for living in a country where we don't have people dying in the streets.

gfplux

Hello max and others looking for work.
I am retired now but many years ago my position required me to hire and fire people.
I have been in the position of a prospective employer in times of recession. You can not believe the numbers of CV's that would come through the post in those times.
An example to give the general idea.
Advert appears Sunday.
Monday 5 replies - all read in detail
Tuesday 30 replies - most read
Wednesday 115 replies - some read
Thursday 240 replies - none read
Friday etc etc etc.
I know, I know "you are playing with peoples lives" Yes but I had a job to do as well as recruiting staff.
My tip, get your CV on the desk as soon as possible.
Post your letter at the head post office, not in a post box. Reply not more than a couple of hours after you have seen the advert. If the address is local hand deliver it. If you are looking in the local evening paper, get the first edition and post your reply last post that evening.
I believe the same is true for email applications.
This may be common knowledge , if so forgive me.
Good Luck

JayScottGreenspan

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

3.Yes, I do think it encourages a culture of dependency amongst some people but I generally think that's a small price to pay for living in a country where we don't have people dying in the streets.

But a large price to pay if the only thing preventing improved policy is the egos of politicians.

pipkin71

Max_Headroom wrote: »

The state should allow me to survive. Scrape by. That's less than many who are "career benefit claimants" are getting but I'm not getting it.

The thing is Max, those who are getting more than you have different circumstances to you.

If you take a single unemployed male, who has made a 'career' of claiming benefits, he will be receiving exactly the same as you are now with regards JSA.

Those you describe as serial claimants, would be those who have child after child perhaps, but then they would get extra money because they are responsible for more than just themselves.

I understand your frustration.

I agree with you that the system could do with a shake-up. I've long held the believe that it shouldn't be profitable to have child after child whilst on benefits.

I think though that you are looking at two different scenarios, and whilst you think it unfair that the 'serial claimants' get more than you, it still remains they are most likely to be in a different situation to you as they have children.

lostinrates

pipkin71 wrote: »

I think though that you are looking at two different scenarios, and whilst you think it unfair that the 'serial claimants' get more than you, it still remains they are most likely to be in a different situation to you as they have children.

I've told this story before, but here goes.

Me: at the time a solicitor's clerk, earning around £200-250 a week.
Barrister: baby barrister, desperate for work, getting only a little work...that day I was paid £50 she was paid £46.50 I think.
Client:serial young offender, now young adult offender, all minor charges, no custodial that I recall.

Fillingin his forms barrsiter and I answer his query about ''why we watsin'his time with this paper pushing'' with why didn't he get a real job and stop ending up in court.

He said, its alright for you both, you got proper jobs.

Filling out his forms it became very, very clear, this young man, (under 21) was bringing in more in benefits,entitlements and had free housing, than either the barister or I were earning at that time.

Pobby

geoffky wrote: »

Can you tell me when this was because i can tell you she was not entitled to it and would not of got it..you only get emergency grants for things now days.. In the 80s you could get a beding grant and all other things for the house...but those days are long gone unless you find a charity that repairs furnature and gives you some for a small charge...;)

It was about 1999. Mind you it was probably a lot of hot air.

Oldernotwiser

JayScottGreenspan wrote: »

But a large price to pay if the only thing preventing improved policy is the egos of politicians.

That doesn't follow in any logical way whatsoever!

Francesanne

PasturesNew wrote: »

That is what they want you to believe, but it's not like that.

There seem to be a limited variety of courses:
- basic reading/writing/using a PC.
- why don't you go to University and get a degree.
- for those 16-24 there is a rumour of apprenticeships.

To actually do a course in something needs:
- you to know what you want to do
- there to be a reasonable chance that at the end of it any job would exist, exist in your area, that you would stand a chance of getting one at your age/stage in life, that the wages were worth the retraining
- the course has to exist
- the course has to exist in your area
- the course has to be actually about to start now

When you weigh up all that lot, against a backdrop of "I am an earner and I need to earn a living soonest, so I need to find a job - and I don't want to commit to something that I might not be able to do because ... well, I'm sure a job might come up in the next 1-2 months" it's not really doable.

Also, if you are on a course, as a "normal person/worker" then they stop your dole.

Courses are only of use to people whose financial support is assured. Those who won't lose out financially, or who are geographically well placed, those who have no learning/experience are are starting out. It's a whole different ballgame if you're self-supporting, alone ... and not sure what to do or if it would be worthwhile to take that time out... and, of course, if the course is actually available.

Doesn't it also depend on the your local council? might be wrong on that but thought it might vary from council to council.

Oldernotwiser

Francesanne wrote: »

She was horrified to discover that she would only get Jobseekers Allowance for 6 months and after that she would be on her own. Seems only the last 2 years employment are taken into account despite the fact she's been working for 37 years non stop.

JSA isn't limited to only 6 months, it just becomes means tested at that point. Presumably your friend had substantial savings or she would have still been able to receive means tested JSA.