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

Generali

PasturesNew wrote: »

I have a single friend in the US, when he was in his 40s he was laid off after 14 years in the same job (paying about £14k/year). He had 6 months of benefits, then nothing. He had to cash in his 401k (pension) - and pay back the tax-free portion of that to the Govt - and he was then expected to live on the remains of his 401k. Then the 401k ran out, he had no job, he just had enough money in his bank to cover his rent and he was about to commit suicide once that ran out.

Luckily he got some temp work, then a permanent job, then got laid off from that, then he got more temp work ... but now every week he is telling me how many more people they laid off at his job that week. He's quite worried, no savings again. No 401k this time.

I feel sorry for your friend but then at the same time it's not right that families live on The Dole for generations by virtue of being serial single mothers. It's hard (impossible?) to find a middle route.

olly300

ceridwen wrote: »

- the refusal to pay for children born after benefit claim started (presumably they mean ones "conceived" - rather than actually "born") - but I guess, even if they dont, then I would imagine most of us have some sort of inkling at least 9 months before our job goes that it might do so in the future.

That wouldn't work that well in the UK.

The only people I've met who have been given long notice of redundancy have been given 6 months.

Most are given the minimum notice possible and in the case of some of the employers, my friends, family and myself have worked for they state they are making people redundant when in fact they can get cheaper workers to do the same job so give no notice.

ceridwen

mewbie wrote: »

If we're going to have one of these threads every time an MSEer gets laid off it could be a long summer.

..but then...its just as well for us to have "one of these threads" as you put it....because the alternative is unthinkable (ie the Government thinking they could get away with cutting benefit levels to single/childless people even more.........:eek: ) - but then maybe they dont want us literally sitting there physically starving to death on the doorstep of 10 Downing Street.....

So - I think threads like this will hopefully make them realise that that is precisely what they WILL get if they try and cut our benefit any further...

ceridwen

PasturesNew wrote: »

I have a single friend in the US, when he was in his 40s he was laid off after 14 years in the same job (paying about £14k/year). He had 6 months of benefits, then nothing. He had to cash in his 401k (pension) - and pay back the tax-free portion of that to the Govt - and he was then expected to live on the remains of his 401k. Then the 401k ran out, he had no job, he just had enough money in his bank to cover his rent and he was about to commit suicide once that ran out.

Luckily he got some temp work, then a permanent job, then got laid off from that, then he got more temp work ... but now every week he is telling me how many more people they laid off at his job that week. He's quite worried, no savings again. No 401k this time.

Then...I wouldnt want to live in such a heartless nation. They must know very well surely that some people have suicide as their "back-up plan" if the income runs out......well..what other choice is there? Given the choice between crime and suicide - what do they honestly think that the average honest person will do? Correct - some of them will stick to their principles and go down the suicide route.....and the Americans should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves for pushing people into having to do that against their will...:mad:. Personally - I would leave instructions for whoever to sue the Government for having committed murder......as pushing people into having no other option BUT suicide is murder not to put too fine a point upon it...and I think its appalling.

The only time someone should feel it apt to consider suicide as an option is for purely "personal" reasons - eg incurable ill health. If they are being made to consider it to solve their Government's unwillingness to fulfil their responsibilities to make sure they can have a liveable income whatever happens to their job - then that is DISGUSTING.

i8change

Originally Posted by ceridwen

Originally Posted by i8change
Benefits are temporary in some countries, this is from a Spanish forum (friends over there have said the same) You rely on family after that!:-

http://www.seg-social.es/Internet_6/...0935/index.htm
.



I'm afraid I still cant judge - as, on clicking the link, it was only available in Catalan - which I dont speak.

So - I see the point - but I'm still not clear as to whether those benefits were only temporary to your friend because he isnt a "national". It may be that the Spanish themselves get benefits for however long they need to. Its perfectly fair enough for any country (hint - Britain - hint!)to not hand over benefits automatically to anyone entering the country - we shouldnt either...unless they can prove they are a "genuine" political refugee - and not an economic migrant.

Everything seems to point to Temporary benefits over there (National and non-National). They don't translate for everyone like we do.
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/10/7/29729431.PDF

2.4 Benefit duration
The total duration (including the first period where the replacement rate is 70 per cent)
increases with contribution record. There is no waiting period; the benefit is paid 7 days per week.
Contribution record
(in months)
Duration of benefit
(in months)
12-18 4
19-24 6
25-30 8
31-36 10
37-42 12
43-48 14
49-54 16
55-60 18
61-66 20
67-72 22
72+ 24

http://www.expatica.com/es/essentials_moving_to/essentials/guide-to-the-spanish-social-security-system-1915_10952.html?ppager=1

You retain the right to unemployment benefits for a maximum period of two years, provided that you have worked during six years before becoming unemployed.

With 17%+ unemployment over there if this recession lasts more than 2-3 years there will be a lot of Spanish people living in penury!

bo_drinker

Generali wrote: »

I feel sorry for your friend but then at the same time it's not right that families live on The Dole for generations by virtue of being serial single mothers. It's hard (impossible?) to find a middle route.

And until there is a middle route things will get worse. The shameless society/chavs are breading like wild fire and running down the dole office cap in hand and then timing it for the next kid and so on they go.
Mp's taking it on the one hand and the scum on the other, both as bad as each other:mad:

PS, is it the same in Aus ??

Max_Headroom_3

ceridwen wrote: »

Then...I wouldnt want to live in such a heartless nation. They must know very well surely that some people have suicide as their "back-up plan" if the income runs out......well..what other choice is there? Given the choice between crime and suicide - what do they honestly think that the average honest person will do? Correct - some of them will stick to their principles and go down the suicide route.....and the Americans should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves for pushing people into having to do that against their will...:mad:. Personally - I would leave instructions for whoever to sue the Government for having committed murder......as pushing people into having no other option BUT suicide is murder not to put too fine a point upon it...and I think its appalling.

The only time someone should feel it apt to consider suicide as an option is for purely "personal" reasons - eg incurable ill health. If they are being made to consider it to solve their Government's unwillingness to fulfil their responsibilities to make sure they can have a liveable income whatever happens to their job - then that is DISGUSTING.

But is it so different from the benefit system in this country that doesn't provide enough to exist on? If I don't get a job before my savings run out then I may well be forced to consider where the next meal is going to come from (given that the benefits, such as they are, only just cover monthly bills).

Rest assured though, I shall turn to stealing long before I consider suicide! Hey, you get fed in prison, right?

PasturesNew

Max_Headroom wrote: »

But is it so different from the benefit system in this country that doesn't provide enough to exist on? If I don't get a job before my savings run out then I may well be forced to consider where the next meal is going to come from (given that the benefits, such as they are, only just cover monthly bills).

Rest assured though, I shall turn to stealing long before I consider suicide! Hey, you get fed in prison, right?

To be fair, unless something majorly goes wrong with the house, you can survive on £60/week. I had a big house I couldn't afford, no benefits, fluctuating low income/out of work/self-employed but not paid in the end etc. I simply stayed in one room, without heating and ate a lot of 10p noodles and beans on toast. Even had the boiler pack up (quoted £200 at first) so I did without hot water and heating a whole winter ... until some other bloke quoted me £30 and fixed it.

It's doable, just not nice. And of course you can't leave the house because outside all you see are people having fun, people buying things, things you can't afford .. so it's best not to see that.

Max_Headroom_3

Honestly PN, have you seen the price of Caviar these days? JSA doesn't go far I can assure you!

Just done the maths, and with Council Tax taken care of, looking at the costs of gas, electric, water, TV licence (can you disconnect the aerial and get away without this I wonder? Only £12/month though), and insurance paid on DD (because I wouldn't be able to just pay it when the bill came in like I have been doing) I'm left with £16-15/week.

So yes, assuming I walk to the shop I've got £16/week to feed myself on which must (I suppose) be doable.

Have to say I shall be looking to take any job I can get before I reach that stage though. What's minimum wage now?

lostinrates

Max_Headroom wrote: »

So yes, assuming I walk to the shop I've got £16/week to feed myself on which must (I suppose) be doable.

It is doable: its a bit harder work to make it doable in a nutritionally balanced way, but its still possible.

Any luck with jobs Max?